Skip to comments.
Fred Thompson says "No" to Human Life Amendment
CBNnews.com ^
| November 4, 2007
| David Brody
Posted on 11/04/2007 1:38:41 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
Fred Thompson told Tim Russert on NBCs Meet the Press Sunday that he DOES NOT support a Human Life amendment. That position is part of the GOP platform. Heres what the 2004 GOP platform says:
"We must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions." Heres what Thompson said about it lifted from todays Meet The Press transcript:
MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about an issue very important in your partys primary process, and thats abortion.
MR. THOMPSON: Mm-hmm.
MR. RUSSERT: This is the 2004 Republican Party platform, and here it is: We say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, we endorse legislation to make it clear that the Fourteenth Amendments protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. Could you run as a candidate on that platform, promising a human life amendment banning all abortions?
MR. THOMPSON: No.
MR. RUSSERT: You would not?
--snip--
(Excerpt) Read more at cbn.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; abortion; cbn; elections; fred; fredthompson; huckabee; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 601-605 next last
To: Dionysiusdecordealcis
I quite enjoy your posts on this issue. Very well presented.
261
posted on
11/04/2007 5:03:02 PM PST
by
lonevoice
(It's always "Apologize to a Muslim Hour"...somewhere)
To: Reagan Man
Fred`s the real deal.Fred is a fatuous fraud.
To: Blood of Tyrants; holdonnow
We dont need another amendment. We just need for the Supreme Court that the 14th Amendment applies to the unborn, i.e. that the unborn child has the right to life.That's what I've always thought!
If the Supreme Court were merely to admit that unborn children are "persons," then the unborn would be due all the protections of the 14th Amendment...
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
There would be no need for an additional amendment to protect the unborn.
263
posted on
11/04/2007 5:03:25 PM PST
by
shhrubbery!
(Max Boot: Joe Wilson has sold more whoppers than Burger King)
To: Grunthor
Rudy is Pro-Abortion, would pay for the murder of his own grand child and wants you and me to pay for the murder of poor children. Fred doesnt. Is that easy enough or do I need to break it down further?You have no idea if Fred would or would not pay the bill for his daughter to have an abortion, do you?
264
posted on
11/04/2007 5:03:42 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: Canticle_of_Deborah
It’s a position that can lead to Roe v. Wade’s overturn.
265
posted on
11/04/2007 5:04:13 PM PST
by
RockinRight
(The Council on Illuminated Foreign Masons told me to watch you from my black helicopter.)
To: Mr Rogers
But not everyone is a Christian. Many believe it is a lump of flesh with potential for life. Faith aside, an unborn baby is either alive or dead, and either human or not.
It can easily be determined that the baby is, in fact, alive, and human.
266
posted on
11/04/2007 5:04:33 PM PST
by
B Knotts
(Tancredo '08!)
To: pissant
No, his position is one that gives us more hope of overturning Roe v. Wade than the alternative.
267
posted on
11/04/2007 5:04:54 PM PST
by
RockinRight
(The Council on Illuminated Foreign Masons told me to watch you from my black helicopter.)
To: The Dude Abides
Not even close. Rudy would appoint a David Souter while Fred would appoint a Sam Alito.
268
posted on
11/04/2007 5:06:24 PM PST
by
RockinRight
(The Council on Illuminated Foreign Masons told me to watch you from my black helicopter.)
To: Petronski
Fred’s position will do more to overturn Roe v. Wade than any other ELECTABLE candidate.
269
posted on
11/04/2007 5:07:50 PM PST
by
RockinRight
(The Council on Illuminated Foreign Masons told me to watch you from my black helicopter.)
To: JCEccles
>>>>>>Fred is a fatuous fraud.If that was the case, Fred wouldn't be the #1 choice for members of this conservative forum. I see you still have your head up your butt. Carry on.
270
posted on
11/04/2007 5:09:12 PM PST
by
Reagan Man
(FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
To: RockinRight
Not even close. Rudy would appoint a David Souter while Fred would appoint a Sam Alito.Rudy contradicts you. You make this up as you go and you guessed wrong this time.
271
posted on
11/04/2007 5:10:20 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: RockinRight
As a lobbyist Fred took blood money from the abortion industry to advise them on how more effectively to pitch infanticide to lawmakers. It was a cool, calculated business decision and it caused him no distress whatsoever.
To: Reagan Man
yes well...my opinion is that there are plenty of ways we can reduce abortion without changing any law and yet nobody talks about those methods
Everyone is seriously upset that Fred ‘only’ wants to repeal Roe v wade. But even achieving that will take a long time, much less an actual amendment.
273
posted on
11/04/2007 5:10:47 PM PST
by
ari-freedom
(I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
To: Scotsman will be Free
Whether we like to admit it or not today...abortion just wasn’t an “issue” that was widely discussed before Roe v. Wade.
274
posted on
11/04/2007 5:11:21 PM PST
by
RockinRight
(The Council on Illuminated Foreign Masons told me to watch you from my black helicopter.)
To: Mr Rogers
I respect Fred for his position, and his honesty in stating it.
I will support Hunter until his candidacy ends. However, that in no way detracts from the validity of your comment. I will not likely get what I want one year from tonight. But politics in America, IMHO, is rarely about getting exactly what one wants.
In my view, abortion on demand -as currently provided in the US, is the judicial taking of innocent human life. Many of us believe that explanation will not suffice to save our souls when it is time to defend our actions on this planet, including supporting politicians and policies that condone killing for convenience.
By supporting candidates with Hunter's views, I have taken the first step in trying to stop the killing of innocents. If I have no choice in Nov. 2008 other than a Dim who will put the pedal to the metal with respect to this wicked policy or a Pub who will slow the process, I will vote for the Pub.
I have witnessed two Pub organizations, that I previously belonged to, tear themselves apart over this issue. I am now wondering if the virus will spread to the party at large.
275
posted on
11/04/2007 5:11:50 PM PST
by
PerConPat
(A politician is an animal which can sit on a fence and yet keep both ears to the ground.-- Mencken)
To: Rudder
we know what kind of judges rudy appointed in the past.
276
posted on
11/04/2007 5:12:08 PM PST
by
ari-freedom
(I am for traditional moral values, a strong national defense, and free markets.)
To: Canticle_of_Deborah
So he is like Mitt then...
277
posted on
11/04/2007 5:12:52 PM PST
by
ejonesie22
(Real voters in real voting booths will elect FDT.)
To: JCEccles
Lying and distorting don’t seem to bother you.
278
posted on
11/04/2007 5:13:18 PM PST
by
Clara Lou
(Thompson '08)
To: fatima
Got to watch the guys from the southern states. Fred is from Alabama. I don’t see how he would oppose slavery on his rational either. “States Rights” you know.
279
posted on
11/04/2007 5:13:22 PM PST
by
bjs1779
To: All
Fred's lobbyist hands are indelibly stained with the blood of the innocent unborn.
It was more than a business decision. It was a moral test of the highest order.
And he failed it.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 601-605 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson