Fred Thompson is Not Pro-Life
ABC News has found that former Senator Fred Thompson's old campaign files had two position papers on abortion. One paper was labeled "Pro-Life" in the upper right-hand corner and the second was labeled "Pro-Choice". Here is a PDF file of the two documents.
Even in the "Pro-Life" position paper, Thompson does not take much of a "pro-life" position outside of his vote to ban the barbaric procedure known as "partial birth abortion". The rest of his record is about limiting but not eliminating the circumstances under which you and I should be taxed in order to pay for abortions. Thompson's position is that you and I should be taxed to pay for abortions in the cases of "rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger".
Is that really a "pro-life" position? Why would a "pro-life" candidate be in favor of taxing you and I to pay for the abortion of any innocent child? We are not even talking about under which circumstances it should be legal to terminate the life of an unborn child, we are talking about circumstances under which Fred Thompson thinks we taxpayers should ante up for it.
There is no mention of overturning Roe, and in fact Thompson outright says that he does not believe that early term abortions should be criminalized. Should murder be against the law or not? What about child abuse? Thompson expresses support for moderate state restrictions on abortion such as parental notification and 48 hour waiting periods.
Taken on the whole, this is an attempt at fence-riding on an issue with no middle ground. Either you believe human life is sacred, or you don't. No honest person can claim that limiting the circumstances under which I am forced by the government to pay for ripping up innocent babies is a "pro-life" position.
Intervention time again for my conservative friends who are in entrenched denial about Fred Thompson. A lot of Thompson supporters out there also consider yourselves pro-life. You can't be both, and if you think you are, it is willful delusion. His position papers are right there to see. Fred Thompson shows no interest in supporting laws that would ban abortion, and wants nothing to do with the issue. Voting for him is voting for the massacre of the innocents to continue.
Even in the "Pro-Life" position paper, Thompson does not take much of a "pro-life" position outside of his vote to ban the barbaric procedure known as "partial birth abortion". The rest of his record is about limiting but not eliminating the circumstances under which you and I should be taxed in order to pay for abortions. Thompson's position is that you and I should be taxed to pay for abortions in the cases of "rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger".
Is that really a "pro-life" position? Why would a "pro-life" candidate be in favor of taxing you and I to pay for the abortion of any innocent child? We are not even talking about under which circumstances it should be legal to terminate the life of an unborn child, we are talking about circumstances under which Fred Thompson thinks we taxpayers should ante up for it.
There is no mention of overturning Roe, and in fact Thompson outright says that he does not believe that early term abortions should be criminalized. Should murder be against the law or not? What about child abuse? Thompson expresses support for moderate state restrictions on abortion such as parental notification and 48 hour waiting periods.
Taken on the whole, this is an attempt at fence-riding on an issue with no middle ground. Either you believe human life is sacred, or you don't. No honest person can claim that limiting the circumstances under which I am forced by the government to pay for ripping up innocent babies is a "pro-life" position.
Intervention time again for my conservative friends who are in entrenched denial about Fred Thompson. A lot of Thompson supporters out there also consider yourselves pro-life. You can't be both, and if you think you are, it is willful delusion. His position papers are right there to see. Fred Thompson shows no interest in supporting laws that would ban abortion, and wants nothing to do with the issue. Voting for him is voting for the massacre of the innocents to continue.
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Thursday, August 16, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home