To: Tax-chick
Unfortunately, he just reverted back to where he was in 1996...before he decided he needed the votes of prolife conservatives.
43 posted on
04/13/2007 12:22:37 PM PDT by
EternalVigilance
(Laws that infringe on unalienable rights are not laws at all...they are in fact lawless edicts.)
To: EternalVigilance
Ah, I see. 1996 is about the first time I paid any attention to him, aside from his business discussion, which was very sensible.
44 posted on
04/13/2007 1:34:26 PM PDT by
Tax-chick
("His mother said to the servants, 'Do whatever He tells you.' ")
To: EternalVigilance
Unfortunately, he just reverted back to where he was in 1996...before he decided he needed the votes of prolife conservatives.Forbes called himself pro-life, but he was not pro-life, he was pro-choice. He said he was for more restrictions on abortion in late pregnancy and for restrictions on sex selection abortions, but ultimately he was for any woman in the first or second trimester having full choice. That is not a pro-life position, no matter how you cut it.
55 posted on
04/14/2007 12:08:49 AM PDT by
Elyse
(I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson