Hillary Watch
Senator Hillary "Robb'em" Clinton Promotes 'Common Ground' on Abortion.
The New York Times reports on Hillary addressing a group of pro-abortion supporters talking of her support for the Roe v. Wade ruling but quickly called for a coming together on "common ground to reduce the number of 'unwanted pregnancies' and ultimately abortions, which she called a 'sad, even tragic choice to many, many women.' "
I would say it is a tragic choice to the unborn children. Hillary is trying to have it both ways and play it right down the middle. We will be seeing a lot of this re-positioning of herself in the next 4 years as she tries to re-make her liberal image into a moderate/centrist. The New York Times article can be read here. Registration required.
The New York Times reports on Hillary addressing a group of pro-abortion supporters talking of her support for the Roe v. Wade ruling but quickly called for a coming together on "common ground to reduce the number of 'unwanted pregnancies' and ultimately abortions, which she called a 'sad, even tragic choice to many, many women.' "
I would say it is a tragic choice to the unborn children. Hillary is trying to have it both ways and play it right down the middle. We will be seeing a lot of this re-positioning of herself in the next 4 years as she tries to re-make her liberal image into a moderate/centrist. The New York Times article can be read here. Registration required.
posted by HeavyHanded at
7:51 PM
2 Comments:
No. The tragedy is and has always been the young women forced into motherhood by a male dominated, unfair and uncaring hipocrytical religious constituency that demands that the world accept the view that government has the right to dominate what people do with their bodies in the privacy of an operating room.
Roe vs. Wade should stand to allow women the choice to terminate their pregnancies when they cannot afford the addition of a child that they cannot feed or take care of.
I am sorry to come down so hard on you over this, fellow blogger. You are clearly wrong on this issue, as is Rush Limbaugh, your pastor and most of the zealots that make up the religious right.
Your serve.
By
Frank Austad, at 9:29 PM
This is a very emotional subject to be sure. I am quite confident I would be unable to
persuade you that it is you who is wrong, nor could you persuade me. So I will make no
such attempt. I do love the idea we can respectfully disagree.
Restricting this discussion to the United States, I reject your premise that today there is
this “male dominated, unfair and uncaring hypocritical (correct spelling) (also, a word
that is overused in general discussion) religious constituency” that somehow is using
some type of unyielding power to control not only the government, but is also able to
manipulate/convince/force the government to “demand” that the “world” accept this view
as well.
Beyond abstinence, there are other methods of birth control. Abortion is not birth control.
You have undoubtedly heard all these arguments before, so it does seem pointless to
regurgitate them now. But my point is whether a person agrees with the Roe v Wade
decision or not, it is my opinion that when the decision was made, and the spirit in which
the decision was made, was not to “promote another form of birth control.”
I also reject the “financial argument” of pregnancy. No, I am not a rich man, nor have
deep pockets. I have seen up close, the trials and tribulation of these unplanned
“tragedies”. Adoption is always an option if one does not want to make the commitment
and sacrifices to keep these “tragedies”.
And finally, I do not have a pastor; and I can honestly say that never before has the term zealot been used to describe me.
By
HeavyHanded, at 7:12 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home