Where does Fred Thompson stand on abortion

Race42008 ^ | March 27, 2007 | DaveG

[RepublicanPOTUSin08]

Let’s settle this once and for all...

Having done actual research on this subject to get to the truth, I’ve concluded that Sen. Thompson a) is, and has always been, opposed to the notion of a constitutional right to an abortion; b) is, and has always been, in favor of banning partial-birth abortion; c) is, and has always been, in favor of restrictions on most later-term abortions (post-first trimester); and d) is now across-the-board pro-life, but in the 1990s, was in favor of earlier-term abortions (first-trimester) remaining legal...

If you pick up the 1994 post-election edition of National Right to Life news, you’ll see a list of pro-life Senators elected in the class of ‘94. Thomspon was on the list, with a cross by it.

The cross stood for Thompson’s support for legal 1st Trimester abortion. He was generally pro-life, but supported abortion during the 1st trimester...

As such, Thompson’s voting record is consistent with his 1994 position: he’s pro-life on everything other than making first-trimester abortions illegal...

What seems to be clear is that Thompson has never supported the constitutional right to an abortion, has never supported partial-birth abortion, and has never been opposed to restrictions on post-first-trimester abortions. Further, Thompson’s opposition to Roe means that he’d have no problem with states prohibiting or regulating first-trimester abortions. Thompson has only parted with pro-lifers on first-trimester abortions, a stance that a) may have since changed over the past decade and that b) is moot for all practical purposes, as sufficient political support for banning these abortions at the federal level just doesn’t exist regardless of what the Supreme Court does.

[Ol' Sparky]

Despite the frivolous accusations of the Rudybots stating those opposing him are looking for a perfect candidate, we're not. Fred Thompson may not have always been perfect on the abortion issue but there is no doubt in my mind that he would appoint justices to the Supreme Court that would overturn Roe and would support pro-life legislation in Congress.

[MamaB]

We just value human life and the conservatism cause. We do not support Rudy who is a liberal and should not be our candidate.

[Always Right]

Funny, those issues never turn up in any poll on important issues.

What planet have you been on?

[Giant Conservative]

I still have a hard time believing this is the most important issue to alot of you.

Protecting the right to life of innocent pre-born babies is natural to every sane human being. Why does it perplex you personally?

[Giant Conservative]

I just think we're in a fight for our existence and abortion will be moot if we lose the WOT.

Killing babies does not help any war worth fighting.

[Giant Conservative]

Actually, the Iraq War is what cost the Republican party the election of 2006.

[MamaB]

Like Rudy?

[floozy22]

Despite the frivolous accusations of the Rudybots stating those opposing him are looking for a perfect candidate, we're not. Fred Thompson may not have always been perfect on the abortion issue but there is no doubt in my mind that he would appoint justices to the Supreme Court that would overturn Roe and would support pro-life legislation in Congress.

Nothing against Fred, but below is a quote from a NYT's article from 2/10/07:

"In his recent travels, he has directed questions on the issue toward a discussion about judges, saying he would appoint jurists who believe in interpreting, not making, the law: judges, he said, like Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Alito Jr., who he has said he believed would place limits on Roe v. Wade. “On the federal judiciary I would want judges who are strict constructionists because I am,” he said last week in South Carolina. “I have a very, very strong view that for this country to work, for our freedoms to be protected, judges have to interpret, not invent, the Constitution. “Otherwise you end up, when judges invent the Constitution, with your liberties being hurt. Because legislatures get to make those decisions and the Legislature in South Carolina might make that decision one way and the Legislature in California a different one.” On the issue of a disputed abortion procedure called “partial-birth abortion” by opponents, he told Mr. Hannity that a ban signed into law by President Bush in 2003, which the Supreme Court is reviewing, should be upheld."

[floozy22]

The NYT quote is about Rudy, btw

[Politicalmom]

Oh, you mean that PBA ban that he came out against? He now supports it, huh? Imagine that.

[shempy]

he would appoint jurists who believe in interpreting, not making, the law...

To be clear, this is coming from a candidate that thinks gun control and abortion are consistent with a strict adherence to the constitution. So in other words, it is a meaningless statement.

[Gelato]

He's all but renounced McCain-Feingold.

Actually, he started that sentence with, "I’m not prepared to go there yet."

For Thompson to denounce his main accomplishment in the Senate--campaign finance reform--would be a delicate maneuver indeed.

"If McCain-Feingold passes, it will not have happened if it weren't for Fred Thompson," said McCain's chief of staff, Mark Salter, on Wednesday evening. (March 29, 2001)

The thought of Thompson seeking to repeal or undermine McCain-Feingold is ridiculous. He helped author it, way back when it included more radical provisions, and devoted most of his years in the Senate to its passage.

[Paperdoll]

LOL! I didn't say I'd vote for him.

[epow]

In '96 Thompson was endorsed by the Christina Coalition and by the National Right to Life Committee. I hardly think those two staunchly anti-abortion orgs would endorse a pro-abortion Senate candidate. I have read that he was supposedly pro-choice in '94 when he ran for the Senate, but his voting record after being elected has been solidly pro-life.

The only mark against Thompson on the National Right to Life scorecard is his support for McCain-Feingold, which NRTL considers to be a pro-choice vote since it placed restrictions on political donations by pro-life orgs'. Of course that also applies to the pro-abort orgs, so in that respect it isn't partial to either side IMHO.

McCain-Feingold is an awful law, and is no doubt unconstitutional if the 1st Amendment means anything at all. I don't like that unconstitutional law any more than any other conservative, but IMHO it's not a sanctity of life or sanctity of marriage issue since it applies equally to advocates on both sides of those issues. Therefore a Senator's vote for M-F doesn't necessarily disqualify him or her for my vote the way a vote in favor of a cut-and-dried pro-abortion or pro-"gay" marriage bill would.

[Paperdoll]

>Apparently, you're one of those 'my way or the highway' types that are NEVER satisfied with a candidate.<

Oh dear, another annalyst. Where did you get your degree? :o) I AM very satisfied with a candidate. Read my tagline.

[Hildy]

As soon as the name Hitler is enacted, you become irrelevant. Adios.

[Pure Country]

How old is Fred? He looks to be well along in years.

[Oztrich Boy]

With Socialism, Marxism and terrorism knocking on our back door is this the only thing important to Conservatives?

Because if the Religion of Peace takes over the one issue AntiAbortion crowd get what they want anyway.

[Hildy]

Hey, like I said, I'm open to Thompson. All I care about is someone who has balls and will stand up to the Dems on the WOT. I KNOW RUDY will. If Thompson can convince me he can, I just might vote for him.

[Kaslin]

Fred Thompson on Abortion

• Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)

• Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)

• Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)

• Voted against abortion (December 7, 1995)

• Voted for Partial Abortion ban December 7, 1995)

• Voted yes on a bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to ban partial-birth abortions. (November 8, 1995

• Votes Yes on overriding veto of the President of the U.S.?; Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1995 (September 26, 1996)

• Voted yes to prohibit the use of funds for research that utilizes human fetal tissue, cells, or organs that are obtained from a living or dead embryo or fetus during or after an induced abortion. (September 4, 1997)

• Voted yes dewine amendment no. 936; To prohibit the use of funds the pay for an abortion or to pay for the administrative expenses in connection with certain health plans that provide coverage for abortions (July 22, 1997)

• Voted yes on Partial Birth abortion (May 20, 1997)

• Voted No daschle amdt no. 289; To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the performance of an abortion where the fetus is determined to be viable. (May 15, 1997)

• Voted no Feinstein amdt no. 288; To prohibit certain abortions. (May 15, 1997)