Posted on 06/19/2007 6:18:53 PM PDT by monomaniac
KANSAS CITY, June 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Although Fred Thompson is not officially in the running as a GOP presidential candidate, the veteran politician and actor to all outward appearances is in the campaign as much as any of the other Republican hopefuls; and, like many of the others, Thompson has begun courting the religious and pro-life right, touting his solidly pro-life voting record.
Earlier this week Thompson sent a video to the National Right to Life Committee. In the video former Senator Thompson is found standing in his garden outside his house, where he first introduces his wife and children. "I'm sorry I couldn't be there with you," he says, "but I appreciate you letting us be with you anyway, and I especially appreciate what you're doing."
"When I was in the Senate a lot of people would come to see me and it usually would have to do with business matters or financial matters, or something pertaining to their financial welfare. When you came to see me," Thompson said to the crowd of pro-life activists, "I always knew it was about something much more important than that, the most important thing of all in this world, and that is life."
"I must say that those issues are even more profound to me as the years go by. Jeri [his wife] and I have truly been blessed," he added.
Thompson then went on to highlight his pro-life record, and made explicit his stance on a number of contentious life and family issues. "In 1994 I made my first run for the US Senate and I was proud to receive the National Right to Life endorsement," said Thompson. "I've been with you ever since, and you've been with me ever since."
"On abortion related votes I've been 100 percent On stem cell research, I'm for adult stem cell research, not stem cell research where embryos of unborn children are destroyed. It looks to me like there is a lot of promising developments as far as adult stem cell research is concerned anyway and we don't need to go down that other road."
Thompson also added that so-called partial birth abortion is more like "infanticide."
He concluded, saying "Of course I'm also concerned about these children after they're born. I'm concerned about the cultural environment that they're going to grow up in." He also mentioned his concern about "enemies" of America, presumably referring to such as the Islamic terrorists who masterminded and executed the 9/11 attacks.
According to attendees at the conference, Thompson received a standing ovation for his taped address.
As the imposing and authoritative film and TV star is increasingly in the public eye, his half-existent campaign appears to be gaining significant momentum, largely on account of his particular brand of "straight-talk."
However, as Thompson does slide up the polls, and enters the ring with the other official GOP candidates, his stance on numerous issues will be put under the microscope. While Thompson's voting record has been solid on the pro-life issues, according to NewsMax the former Senator wasn't always as 100% solid as his voting record would make him seem.
According to NewsMax, ( http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/6/17/214454.shtml?s=ic ) in 1994 Thompson stated that he was not in favor of criminalizing abortion on an Eagle Forum survey, while in 1996 he said on a Christian Coalition questionnaire that he was "opposed" to a constitutional amendment that would have protected the sanctity of human life. He also stated in a campaign policy, the date of which NewsMax does not specify, that he did not believe that the government should legislate on early term abortions, saying "the decision to have an early term abortion is a moral issue and should not be a legal one." And perhaps most worrisome for conservative voters, is Thompson's statement to a Tennessee newspaper that, "The ultimate decision on abortion should be left with the woman and not the government."
Nevertheless, compared to the various other GOP front-runners, Thompson does appear to have a solid record, and has always voted on the side of pro-life and pro-family. As such, many conservatives are enthused about the possibility of a man with apparently solid convictions on matters of life and family who is willing to fill the void of truly conservative, high-profile GOP candidates.
Several weeks ago Thompson indicated to the public that he was considering the possibility of a presidential run, if he thought there was a reasonable chance of success. "We'll go into the testing the waters phase and that will allow us to raise some money and start building a staff to get out there and make sure that what we feel like is going on is going on," Thompson told FOX News. "There's a desire for someone to come in and run a different kind of campaign and come with a different message and address some of the issues our country is facing."
To see Fred Thompson's address to the National Right to Life Committee visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_naRwAHb2gs
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Pro-life Senator Fred Thompson to Add "Law and Order" to Republican Presidential Candidate Race http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/may/07053109.html
I read this but couldn’t discern what Thompson proposes to eliminate abortion. What is he going to do about abortion if he becomes POTUS?
Push to overturn Roe vs Wade and then kick it back to the states again, the way it used to be.
He'll nominate far better judges to the Supreme Court that either Hillary or Obama. Hell, Giuliani, for that matter...
Some states will ban abortion, many won't. Women will go across state lines. I don't see this as a solution.
Then what?
I'm not saying its the solution, but its how the country operated from the begining up until roe vs wade came along.
Though Thompson, during senate, voted for every single abortion restriction that came up for vote. In one of those weird twists of irony, if roe vs wade is overturned, there can be no national ban of abortion, and all the restrictions probably go pop too, at the same time, about 3 quaters of the country have existing laws banning abortion already on the books from before 1973.
To go further, the only solution would be a anti-abortion amendment to the constitution, and there has never been enough momentum for it.
Well then you need to address your concerns to Congress and to your State Legislature. Fred proposes to do all that the Constitution authorizes the President to do. The rest is up to others under our Constitution.
Since the President can not really do anything about abortion except appoint SCOTUS judges, and given his positions and his work with Robert’s nomination, I trust he will appoint judges that share our positions.
What else do you think he can do...
Remember when President Bush supported that bill that went through Congress to ban partial birth abortions? We got the Rats on record as supporting functional infanticide.
How about President Thompson calling for a ban on abortions for sex selection only? I'd love to see how the liberals justify a vote to sanction killing female children!
In terms of legislative maneuvers, not much. He could appoint an advisory group, of mostly women, to recommend viable alternatives to abortion, e.g., adoption, and promote it from the bully pulpit and via providing incentives to both birth mothers and adopters. Might work.
Actually, if you could sucker the libs to respond to this---and I think they would---it would take their position down a notch or two.
I fear that as a whole, we will never be totally rid of abortion in the US, but there will be many states that at least restrict it. Then it is up to us and God...
...and women who would seek abortion. I would focus upon that.
1 - 10 | 11 - 20 | 21 - 30 | 31 - 40 | 41 - 50 | 51 - 51 |
083 | 084 | 085 | 086 | 087 | 088 | 089 | 090 | 091 | 092 | |
Tennessee | ||||||||||
Frist (R) | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
Thompson (R) | X | X | X | O | X | X | X | X | X | X |
Key To Votes: | ||||||||||
|
He is not Catholic but has a better rating on life issues than most of the Catholics presently in Congress.
ping
“He’ll nominate far better judges to the Supreme Court that either Hillary or Obama. Hell, Giuliani, for that matter...”
______________
This is a weak expectation of a president in regards to the issue regardless of what Sean Hannity has been saying to try to drum up support for Rudy. A president can do a lot more then appoint judges who claim to be “originalists”. A real pro-life president will introduce legislation, push for legislation, ie. call in political favors to get laws passed, sign legislation, use the veto pen when necessary, use adminsitrative powers to make changes in policy (such as Bush did with stem cells). The “he’ll support better judges argument” is a cop out.
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.