Posted on 11/04/2007 1:38:41 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
Fred Thompson told Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday that he DOES NOT support a Human Life amendment. That position is part of the GOP platform. Here’s what the 2004 GOP platform says:
"We must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions." Here’s what Thompson said about it lifted from today’s Meet The Press transcript:
MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about an issue very important in your party’s primary process, and that’s abortion.
MR. THOMPSON: Mm-hmm.
MR. RUSSERT: This is the 2004 Republican Party platform, and here it is: “We say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution,” “we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions.” Could you run as a candidate on that platform, promising a human life amendment banning all abortions?
MR. THOMPSON: No.
MR. RUSSERT: You would not?
--snip--
(Excerpt) Read more at cbn.com ...
--snip--
FRED is still Pro-Life...despite the twisted position the headline puts him in!
Fred has a “nuanced” view of certain things....
Samuel Alito reassured lawmakers that he would respect legal precedent on abortion rights and put his personal views aside.
John Roberts said that the landmark 1973 ruling legalizing abortion was “settled as a precedent of the court”.
So, how is this supposed to get better?
Listen to the whole interview. Fred firmly believes now, since the birth of his little daughter, that life begins at conception. He admits this is very tricky to deal with politically, and needs to be on the state and local level once Roe v. Wade is overturned. Making young girls, families, and doctors criminals is a tricky thing. I also raised the question of how enforceable a federal law would even be. We have to be realistic about it.
Choices are good, right?
Believing in the Constitution is "nuanced," eh?
The federal government has enumerated powers explicitly stated in the Constitution. All other powers belong to the states or the individual.
Which do you want? Limited, Constitutional government, or government by a "living" Constitution that can be transmogrified to mean whatever the party in power wants it to mean?
Like hell it is.
Ted Kennedy’s view is that abortion should be on a State by State basis? Where in the world did you ever get that from?
It's only tricky if you're more concerned with getting votes.
I also raised the question of how enforceable a federal law would even be. We have to be realistic about it.
I've heard the same excuse in the immigration debate. Doesn't work either place.
An overly federalistic approach is a Pontius Pilate approach - washing your hands of responsibility while allowing evil to spread unchecked.
The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” ~~~ Thomas Jefferson
If he will pledge to take power (and money) away from the Federal government, and give it back to the States (along with the money) that would be a gigantic step in the right direction.
As for leaving abortion as an issue to be ruled on 50 different ways, I see a lot of problems getting that done.
Interesting, I thought the libatious liberal was the furthest thing you can get from pro-life. Do tell.
Fred has a “nuanced” view of certain things.... Please explain to me what that means.
SteveMcKing wrote: “Fred has a “nuanced” view of certain things....”
I’m not sure whether that’s intended to be a compliment or an insult, but I think Fred’s view is both pragmatic and moral. I know the platform calls for a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, but how exactly would something like that be written? Even if one was written, how would it ever make it through 3/4 (2/3?) of the states?
Fred’s nuanced view is exactly what we need to actually fix the problem, which is federal encroachment into states-rights issues. Abortion is a very complex issue, and it doesn’t belong in the federal courts in the first place. This is clearly one of those things the states should be deciding, and conservatives won’t fix the problem by giving more power to the burgeoning federal government.
With our diverse beliefs, Federalism is the best means of saving the union. These political battles can then be fought where they were intended to be fought...in the states.
Yep. Federalism apparently trumps the constittional rights of the unborn. This will sink Freddy.
airborne wrote: “As for leaving abortion as an issue to be ruled on 50 different ways, I see a lot of problems getting that done.”
Except that’s exactly how it was handled for nearly 200 years of our nation’s history before Roe v Wade.
Can you explain how someone who believes abortion should be legal is pro-life?
But he {Thompson} also told the Eagle Forum in a 1994 questionnaire, “I do not believe abortion should be criminalized. This battle will be won in the hearts and souls of the American people.”
In a candidate survey the same year for The Tennessean newspaper, Thompson said that states should have the right to impose “reasonable restrictions on abortions such as parental notification.” But he said, “The ultimate decision on abortion should be left with the woman and not the government.” http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289422,00.html
Documents The Tennessean located in Thompson’s Senate archive at the University of Tennessee show:
• On a 1996 Christian Coalition survey, he checked “opposed” to an amendment to the U.S. Constitution “protecting the sanctity of human life.”
• He included a handwritten clarification: “I do not believe abortion should be criminalized. This battle will be won in the hearts and souls of the American people.”
• In 1996, asked by the Memphis group FLARE (Family, Life, America, Responsible Education Under God Inc.) if human life begins at conception, Thompson circled “N/A.”
Ted Kennedy wants Roe v Wade overturned?
I don’t know his position, bu I find that hard to believe.
Do you have anything to support that?
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.