Well, then I'm silly.
But if the man wants me to believe that he's pro-life, he has to at least affirm that Roe must go.
If his last statement on Roe is that he accepts it, then he isn't pro-life.
“Anyway I’m sure Steele has made a pro-life statement since, I believe maybe in connection with his run for this chairmanship but I don’t know where.”
Oh heck, he says he's pro-life all the time!
But so does Bob Casey, Jr. Who votes with NARAL 65% of the time.
The thing is, I judge these turkeys based on what they say and do, not on what letter they stick to their backs.
A pro-lifer is a pro-lifer. A pro-lifer, at the very least, affirms that Roe was wrongly decided and must go. And then, a real pro-lifer says that the lives of unborn children must be protected in law.
Folks who accept Roe are not pro-lifers. Whether they're Democrats or Republicans or Libertarians or what-have-you.
He must address the question of Roe, and affirm that it must be in some way entirely nullified, so that the right to life of unborn children will once again be respected in law.
Otherwise, he can say he's pro-life all day long. He's nothing but a fraud.
But a very likable, personable fraud who can give a great speech.
sitetest
So now tell me after having read the above quote that Steele, a devout Mass-going Catholic, by report a daily communicant, a Knight, a former seminarian, anti-ESCR, endorsed by Nat’l Right to Life, who’ve attested that he “clearly...supports protection for unborn children in law...[and] the reversal of the Roe v. Wade...decision” that he based on one segment of one debate that either he’s
A) the greatest pro-life fraud in history
OR,
B) simply bungled the debate, for numerous reasons, by not clearly stating his true position.
Gee I dunno...
If that’s hard for you to figure out then you have a problem.