Replies

"insisting that it is a "settled issue" that he, as governor, will have no power over."

Simon's right - it's a federal law and as Governor, he has no control over the FEDERAL LAWS - whether he agrees with them or not.

and

"That means that he supports the status quo, and the status quo is pro-abortion."

To say - because he won't discuss the issue means he supports it - is the liberal way out. You're insinuating he supports it because he's tried to make it a NON-issue.

and

"there are plenty of things a governor could do to discourage abortion and create cultural change. But Simon is apparently not interested"

If you're so sure there are things he can do as GOVERNOR, that's fine - BUT HE'S NOT GOVERNOR NOW!! And ... NOW, it's a NON-issue. That doesn't mean that Simon has no intention of making it an issue ONCE HE IS ELECTED. And ... do you know for a fact that he will or will not make it an issue?? NO, YOU DON'T - AND YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO STIR UP STUFF BY SAYING SIMON IS SUPPORTING ABORTION - WHEN HE'S CLEARLY NOT!!! You are doing people a disservice by being so narrow minded on this issue.

These are probably the same people who attacked GWB on 'his pro-abortion' stance. They raced into hiding a month or two back when GWB came out with his strong support of an anti-abortion issie of some kind (I forget just what it was because I don't follow that issue too close).

Stymied by their iability to tear down the President, they now are casting about to see which other Republican they can smear.

Evil show its face in many ways, helmsman was just showing one of those ways.

Simon's right - it's a federal law and as Governor, he has no control over the FEDERAL LAWS - whether he agrees with them or not.

There are a couple of Supreme Court decisions that mandate abortion's legality, of course, but even those allow for restrictions and other regulations on the practice. The Casey decision, for example, allows for parental notice and informed consent regulations. The least Simon could do is commit to aggressively pursuing these popular policies. But he runs.

To say - because he won't discuss the issue means he supports it - is the liberal way out. You're insinuating he supports it because he's tried to make it a NON-issue.

Same thing. If he won't work to change the status quo, and he won't, then he may as well support it.

And ... do you know for a fact that he will or will not make it an issue?? NO, YOU DON'T

YES I DO!!! I was not born yesterday, CyberAnt. If he is now assuring the "moderates" that he will do nothing about abortion as the governor of that state, then he will do just that. He will not tackle the abortion issue for one of two reasons. Either he does not care about the issue, or he is a coward who does not wish to take the political risk. Either way, he is useless to those of us who want to stop abortion. And there are plenty of non-restrictive policies that could be put in place right now, by either the state or federal governments, that would break the back of the abortion culture. That's all I ever ask for. I'm not asking for a total abortion ban tomorrow, I simply want the government actively and aggressively discouraging abortion for now. That's all. If that makes me an unreasonable extremist, then it's time for me to run naked through my neighborhood screaming at the top of my lungs.

Respectfully,
The Evil One