Posted on 01/25/2005 7:50:14 AM PST by alessandrofiaschi
HILLARY MODIFIES ABORTION LANGUAGE
Proposing new political language about abortion rights for an increasingly skittish Democratic Party, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that friends and foes on the issue should come 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."
Clinton, in a speech to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters at the state Capitol, firmly restated her support for Roe v. Wade.
But then she offered warm words to opponents of abortion and said that faith and organized religion were the "primary" reasons teenagers abstained from sexual relations.
The NEW YORK TIMES is set to splash the Hillary speech.
Developing...
The problem here is that Hillary's position isn't black and white. But then again, neither is the position of most Americans.
Most Americans will agree that abortion is wrong. But most Americans don't want it abolished. For most Americans the position is something like, "Yes abortion is wrong. But sometimes it's the best thing in a bad situation." So Hillary's rejection of both the chillingly materialist NARAL language and the right to life position is where most Americans actually are.
Most people's values are pragmatism based, not moral absolute based. Most people's values are based on "never close your options" or "sometimes you have to just plain do whatever it takes". That is why there has been no legislative progress whatsoever towards ending abortion despite numerous GOP presidents.
The American people accept that the Right to Life position is the moral one but the NARAL position is the practical and pragmatic one.
Hillary is in step with the mainstream...
Yes, Hillary is completely in step with the mainstream here, because the mainstream does not think in absolutes.
Most people answer right vs wrong questions by asking "What if it happenned to you or someone you cared about ?"
BOXER/HILLARY FOR '08!!!
First immigration, now abortion. She is running hard, trying to reach "the center."
Hillary lies like a rug.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Whew! ROTFLMAO!
No change is permanent. If it can change once, it can change again.
We'll see her in 2008. Hopefully, we'll see her delivering a concession speech in 2008, but we will see her.
http://orsa.blogspot.com/2005/01/unannounced-candidate.html
This blog is incorrect.
This is an issue where you most definitely CAN have it both ways because on this issue the American people are hypocrites whose actions do not correspond to their words or principles. The American people understand and agree with the moral principles of the right to life movement but chose not to let it interfere with their socioeconomic self-interest.
I'm waiting for Hillary to agree to go on FOX for an interview - so far she hasn't been willing because of the hard questions she'd receive. But, Fox needs to get her on and then show clips of her saying stuff in front of her face and challenge her stance on national tv. Also, Republicans MUST put up a very strong, very charismatic person to challenge her or mark my words, she'll get elected. It comes down to WHO we run against her! NO BOB DOLE types!
Like husband,like (for show only) wife, Hellary Clintoon following in #42's "always take both sides of a issue" is no surprise to me. Remember, Hillary Clinton wants power from the people and over the people, but there’s only one problem: the people keep demanding ideas. She’s afraid to articulate her real ideas, of course, because if she did, she would end up like she did after her infamous 1994 health care debacle. Don't ever forget that.
She'd go on Hannity and Colmes. Alan Colmes would genuflect and Sean Hannity would lack the wherewithal to properly handle HRC in a debate.
Hypocrisy is not entirely a bad thing. Often it is a good thing.
Hypocrisy leavens zealotry with common sense pragmatism and willingness to compromise. Hypocrisy is the glue that holds human society together because it accepts imperfection and inconsistency. Always saying what you think and doing what you believe and following every principle to its logical consequence whatever the real world results is a recipe for disaster.
The American people DO NOT WANT unflinching adherence to moral principle on this subject. They want that "... but sometimes it's the best thing in a bad situation" escape hatch. They DO NOT WANT zealots shouting at each other as the mode of political dialogue.
Beware of the Evil Chamealeon Witch Queen.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid you're correct. Most of the masses would deny that they favor abortion, but if it came down to it, and dear little Timmy or Buffy couldn't take that scholarship to go to college in order to look after their child, well...
This is moral laxity that, combined with political correctness, will destroy our nation.
Redrum, you've missed it.
Hypocrisy is what happens when you have clashing goods. In this case, socioeconomic self interest vs the sanctity of life.
When people have to make choices in their own lives, socioeconomic self interest generally wins. Yes, people can deplore that there are quite so many abortions. But they remember that nothing can be so disruptive of your life as an unanticipated pregnancy.
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.