probalby a Rudi forgery.
WOW! Let’s try to make something out of nothing!
What were his votes like in this area?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
IBFZ
This looks like the same crap that has been posted numerous times for weeks. Thompson has explained his current views on abortion in multiple venues. It would seem the people most concerned about abortion would know what his views were in the mid 1990s.
" Darla St. Martin, co-executive director of National Right to Life Committee, said she came to Tennessee in 1994 to meet with Thompson. "I eyeballed him and listened" and came away satisfied he was anti-abortion, St. Martin said."
I do not believe that abortion is a major issue for Fred and that he will not be the champion so many pro-lifers like myself are looking for to be a leader of a culture of life. When I first heard Senator Thompson on the Sean Hannity Show, he made it very clear that he stands firmly against a national right to life amendment. Now, I know that some may argue that such an amendment is not realistic. Such an amendment may not be realistic, but I think a canidate’s position for or against it definitely shows that person’s commitment or noncommitment to the pro-life cause. Fred takes also stands against a marriage amendment and would have the courts decide.
I believe that social conservatives and particularly Christian conservatives should seriously question whether or not Senator Thompson may help their cause at all. In my opinion, Duncan Hunter is absolutely the best on social issues as well as a whole spectrum of other important issues America faces. He in fact is the only candidate who if elected President would choose judicial nominees who are pro-life as well as strict constructionists. By the way, Congressman Hunter also spoke the March for Life this year and reintroduced his Right to Life bill would effectively protect the life of every child from conception.
Making abortion an issue in this Presidential Race is a dead end. The issue should be conservatism, and who has the vision, platform, and ability to expand the positive benefits of limited Federal Government in the broadest sense, while winning the war against Islamo-Fascism. Romney had made a good case. Duncan Hunter has made a good case. I think Fred is making the case, and I like what I hear, is he assembling the complete leadership team, can he recognize the talent that is poised to join his ranks? The Republican Party must show the Nation that we can lead the free world.
A masterpiece of doubletalk and misdirection.
He certainly doesn't openly dispute the legitimacy of Roe v. Wade. He seems to be in favor of allowing some state discretion in the matter. Beyond that, it's impossible to determine exactly what his position is.
FRedheads, your plain-spoken southerner seems to be speaking with a forked tongue.
FLIP FLOP, FLIP FLOP.
The President takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States not his "deeply held convictions". The reason the Constitution has been trampled on for so many years is that too many politicians in the Federal Government have used moral issues to exceed the authority given them. If Fred Thomson believes there should be no federal law against abortion he is exactly right.
I might be more concerned if there was actually a document at the link in the article,and if it could be determined with any certitude that FT filled out the questionnaire himself.
He said this was done early on, and it was written down incorrectly by his campaign workers. He was immediately aware of it. It was just bad pr and communication between his crew, not something to blame him on.
Well, prior to Roe v. Wade, Federalism was the way the issue was approached. The Constitution nowhere gives Congress the power to regulate abortion, so under the 10th Amendment, that power rests in the hands of the states.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, as it should, Federalism will again rule the day.
Gosh, then that would put him with MOST folks in this country! As far as not criminalizing women; I think even folks who are adamantly pro-life know that for the most part, women who are having their first abortion are usually being pressured into it by the father of the baby, or their parents, or even because of a job situation. They truly don't see another way out. We may be interested in criminalizing the doctors, because they are exploiting the situation, and are doing the actual killing.
What a candidate says on a questionnaire is all well and good, but what I'm interested in is, when push comes to shove, what are the ACTIONS. Fred Thompson voted pro-life the whole time he was in the Senate, and he's made it clear since then, that he wants to see Roe v Wade overturned because it was BAD LAW. That's proof enough for me.
This as support of other evidence could be meaningful, but the other evidence all points the other direction, to a guy who has been decidedly and repeatedly pro-life in his positions, and more importantly, his actions.
And I would not put it past SeeBS or some other "reputable" organization to be pushing a forgery. They've done it before.
There’s a whole lot of shilly-shallying in that reply. On such an important issue, I don’t want a pol with marbles in his mouth and indecision one floor up (the brain).
So what. In 1996, I was a *hell* of a lot more pro-abortion than Fred Thompson appears to be in this questionnaire.
Somewhere around 1999, I came to understand that I was completely, mortifyingly, 100% wrong.
I’d pick someone like Fred over someone like Rudy, who says he hates abortion but won’t say why, and promises to reduce the number of abortions, but won’t say how.