I largely agree with you. I’m pro-life and I like Fred. I just don’t understand his emphatic opposition to the HLA and the FMA. After all, those aren’t matters for the executive branch, anyway. And they’re only going to pass if or when the culture has changed to the point that the vast majority of the public is demanding that they be passed. So why bother to declare your opposition to them when you’re running for an office where your position on them would be symbolic in the first place?
Is he saying that if the votes were there to pass a Human Life Amendment, he would go down to the Senate and twist enough arms to kill it? Clearly he’s not saying that, but to the general public, who don’t think about politics 24/7 like we do, it comes off like he’s not that serious about his pro-life views.
If Hillary were president and such an amendment had a chance to pass, she’d use every trick in the book to undermine it. If Fred wouldn’t (and I don’t think he would) then he really isn’t that opposed to it. If his only reason for not supporting the amendment is that it has no chance of passing today, then say so, but don’t declare blanket opposition to it.
I really think there would have only been positives for his campaign by simply saying, “We don’t currently have the votes to pass those amendments, and they’re outside the jurisdiction of the office of the president, but I’d hope we someday have a culture of life where such amendments could be passed”.
I agree that Fred is pro-life and pro-family.
Fred has looked at the HLA and FMA and while he supports the intent, he realizes that they will never go anywhere. How long has the HLA been discussed with no definitive action? He very simply sees his way as a way to “git er dun.” Like Reagan, who believed in working toward a goal and taking what he could get, then working toward the rest, Fred can actually see positive steps toward the goal being made incrementally by taking it to the citizens of each state. He has the belief that the people will make the right decision because of advances in science and medicine that make it less likely for pro-choicers to see their desires as ethically viable.
I do not beleive that Fred has ever said that he is against these amendments, only that he is not “for” them. That is, he isn’t going to waste time chasing these particular rainbows’ ends.
I do not believe that these are “you’re either with us or agin’ us” type situations.