Posted on 05/03/2007 1:02:01 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani today marked the 24th anniversary of the landmark Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision with a luncheon address before the New York chapter of the National Abortion Rights and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) at the Harvard Club. In the address, he reiterated his support for abortion rights for women and denounced the recent wave of abortion clinic bombings as an example of "dangerous extremism."
Also in attendance at the luncheon were Deputy Mayor Fran Reiter, Council Members Andrew Eristoff and John Ravitz, former Congressman William Green, NARAL Executive Director Kelly Conlin and Irwin Schneiderman, Chair of the NARAL Board of Directors.
"It was 24 years ago today that the Supreme Court ruled in a majority decision that a woman's constitutional right to privacy extended to choosing whether or not to have an abortion," Mayor Giuliani said. "The decision has proven vital to the health, safety and well-being of millions of women who are faced with unexpected pregnancies."
"The controversy over the decision continues in a landscape often marred by irrational behavior, lawlessness and dangerous extremism," the Mayor continued. "Within the last month alone, a doctor in New Orleans was brutally stabbed and abortion clinics in Tulsa, Oklahoma and Atlanta, Georgia were targets of bombings. This kind of violence and terrorism is unacceptable and will not be tolerated."
In his speech, the Mayor outlined the actions that have been implemented by the New York City Police Department to protect patients and staff members at abortion clinics throughout the five boroughs and highlighted provisions of the City's "Clinic Access Bill" which he signed into law in 1994.
The Mayor said, "Over the past three years, the Police Department has made a concerted effort to increase the level of communication and trust with the clinics in our communities. As a result , we have been able to institute more effective policies that safeguard women's access to these facilities. We've increased police presence at clinics on Saturdays and instituted special training for police officers on the fine points of what constitutes free speech and what can be considered harassment."
According to the Mayor, the Clinic Access Law "protects the constitutionally guaranteed right to obtain reproductive health services for those who choose them" and at the same time "does not interfere with the lawful expression of one's views in peaceful protest."
“The decision has proven vital to the health, safety and well-being of millions of women who are faced with unexpected pregnancies.”~Rudy Toot
The decision has proven fatal to the life of millions of children who are faced with a horrible death at the abortionist’s hands.~Me
Jim, I noticed your posts that clearly indicate that you are not a Rudy fan. However, I haven’t been following your comments.
At the end of the day, if it is between Rudy and Hitlery, do you think Rudy is truly worse for the US than her royal heinous?
I will vote Republican in the GE regardless of who wins the nomination.
However, Guiliani will be my last choice of all the Republicans running.
I’d like to see McCain or Thompson win. I really want someone who I can trust on SC appointments. And being pro-life is issue #1 for me.
Well, yeah. It’s his recorded record.
Chill out. It’s still primary season.
And he was still regurgitating this unconstitutional anti-second amendment liberal gun control crap as late as Feb 6, 2007:
Rudy on gun control: “You’ve got to REGULATE consistent with the Second Amendment”
FOX News | Feb 6, 2007 | Hanity and Colmes
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250497,00.html
HANNITY: Let me move on. And the issue of guns has come up a lot. When people talk about Mayor Giuliani, New York City had some of the toughest gun laws in the entire country. Do you support the right of people to carry handguns?
GIULIANI: I understand the Second Amendment. I support it. People have the right to bear arms. When I was mayor of New York, I took over at a very, very difficult time. We were averaging about 2,000 murders a year, 10,000...
HANNITY: You inherited those laws, the gun laws in New York?
GIULIANI: Yes, and I used them. I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide, I think, by 65-70 percent. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City.
So if you’re talking about a city like New York, a densely populated area like New York, I think it’s appropriate. You might have different laws other places, and maybe a lot of this gets resolved based on different states, different communities making decisions. After all, we do have a federal system of government in which you have the ability to accomplish that.
HANNITY: So you would support the state’s rights to choose on specific gun laws?
GIULIANI: Yes, I mean, a place like New York that is densely populated, or maybe a place that is experiencing a serious crime problem, like a few cities are now, kind of coming back, thank goodness not New York, but some other cities, maybe you have one solution there and in another place, more rural, more suburban, other issues, you have a different set of rules.
HANNITY: But generally speaking, do you think it’s acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It’s not only — I mean, it’s part of the Constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then the restrictions of it have to be reasonable and sensible. You can’t just remove that right. You’ve got to regulate, consistent with the Second Amendment.
HANNITY: How do you feel about the Brady bill and assault ban?
GIULIANI: I was in favor of that as part of the crime bill. I was in favor of it because I thought that it was necessary both to get the crime bill passed and also necessary with the 2,000 murders or so that we were looking at, 1,800, 1,900, to 2,000 murders, that I could use that in a tactical way to reduce crime. And I did.
Free Republic thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1780940/posts
At the start of the day, please explain the differences between Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton in the following areas:
The first amendment, McCain-Feingold, thought crimes
The second amendment, gun control
The unalienable right to life, abortion, partial birth abortion, federal funding for abortion
The gay agenda, family, marriage, thought crimes
Illegal aliens, sanctuary cities, amnesty, the rule of law
Respect for the constitution
And follow that up with a discussion on which liberal candidate Rudy or Hillary would be more likely as president with a liberally controlled House and Senate to do the most damage in the short and long terms to the conservative movement, the right to life movement, the right to keep and bear arms movement, the traditional values movement, our border security movement, etc. Would a Republican and RINO minority fight as hard against a liberal Republican president as they would against a liberal democrat?
Wouldn’t the conservative GOP look pretty much like a joke after having fought so hard against abortion, the gay agenda, gun control, etc. for all these years and decades and now suddenly elect a liberal? Besides the conservative movement being killed off, wouldn’t the GOP have lost ALL of its credibility and wouldn’t it be pretty much dead forever after?
And finally, why does it have to be Rudy vs Hillary at this point in time? Isn't there any possiblity that it could be the Liberal Hillary (or some other liberal moonbat Democrat) against a conservative Republican?
Have you no confidence in your own convictions?
I know you haven't really thought all this through yet, so I'm just asking.
>>At the end of the day, if it is between Rudy and Hitlery, do you think Rudy is truly worse for the US than her royal heinous?<<
I’d bet my car that Jim won’t vote for Hillary.
But I would ask “why is this the question of the day for conservatives?” We have not even had the first primary and Rudy is not leading in either Iowa of Massachusetts - back to back early losses could leave him vulnerable for conservatives to pick their guy on mega-Tuesday (or whatever they are calling it).
Has any war ever been won by assuming defeat and worrying about who we would prefer to be conquered by?
True, but Jim wrote pretty prescient things in 1999.
The second amendment, gun control
Rudy supports restrictions that would lead to a slippery slope. Hillary is a downhill skier.
The unalienable right to life, abortion, partial birth abortion, federal funding for abortion
Rudy supports these things, Hillary is one of the few people I wish had been aborted.
The gay agenda, family, marriage, thought crimes
For Hillary it takes a village. For Rudy those villages are Sodom and Gomorrah.
Illegal aliens, sanctuary cities, amnesty, the rule of law
No difference on the first three. Hilary thinks she is the law. On this one, I will give Rudy the benefit of the doubt as a prosecutor.
Respect for the constitution
Other than 2nd Amendment(addressed above), I haven't seen anything truly disturbing about Rudy on this one.
Wouldn't’t the conservative GOP look pretty much like a joke after having fought so hard against abortion, the gay agenda, gun control, etc. for all these years and decades and now suddenly elect a liberal? Besides the conservative movement being killed off, wouldn’t the GOP have lost ALL of its credibility and wouldn’t it be pretty much dead forever after?
I don't care about the GOP, I care about what America is and stands for. Of course they would be a joke, but only to a degree slightly greater than at present.
It might kill the conservative movement, but what doesn't kill it, would make it stronger in the long-run. The movement can rescue America, but only if there is enough left to rescue.
Would a Republican and RINO minority fight as hard against a liberal Republican president as they would against a liberal democrat?
Jim, this is the fundamental question. It would not be so scary to sacrifice 4 years for principles if we were talking about another Jimmy Carter. Economic damage can be repaired and as much of a loser as he was/is, I don't actually think he was EVIL, just a fool. But with the WOT and Hillary at the helm well . . . .
At the end of the day, the main goal is to get an acceptable, electable Republican on the ticket. Rudy is certainly not my candidate in the Primary.
This guy is a liberal with the Republican brand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.