Posted on 03/11/2009 9:02:19 PM PDT by xjcsa
In an interview with GQ, Michael Steele called abortion an "individual choice" and said the question should be left to the states.
Quotes from the interview; interviewer's questions in italics:
THE GOOD:
Do you think bipartisanship can work?
No. [pause] Look, I’m sorry, I know this is, you know, la-la land and Rodney King time and we all wanna get along, but that is not the nature of American politics. That is not the nature of politics, period.
I don’t know if refreshing’s the word, but to hear someone say bipartisanship doesn’t work—
It doesn’t work! I mean, I understand the ideal of it. But at the end of the day, this is a game of winners and losers. This is zero-sum. Your winning is my losing. My winning is your losing.
[snip]
THE BAD
Do you think homosexuality is a choice?
Oh, no. I don’t think I’ve ever really subscribed to that view, that you can turn it on and off like a water tap. Um, you know, I think that there’s a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can’t simply say, oh, like, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being gay.” It’s like saying, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being black.”
[snip]
THE UGLY
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion? Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
It is precisely, and exactly the very same thing. And be careful how you throw that capitalized "Messiah" around. Some here find that offensive.
Handing the matter of abortion back to the states will reduce the number of abortions in America.
Certainly you are in favor of overturning Roe.
Who do you think you’re kidding? You can’t overturn Roe if you agree with its author’s central premise: that unborn children aren’t PERSONS. You’ve destroyed the moral, intellectual and legal basis that argues against abortion and euthanasia.
Even Blackmun conceded, in the text of Roe, that if they are PERSONS, they are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
So, tell us, are the unborn PERSONS?
If they are, they are protected by our Constitution on every square inch of American territory.
The focus of “pro-life groups” has been all wrong.
But, it’s a new day.
Not for some years now- The Pro-Life movement adopted a position of Constitutional protections about the time they turned to a Constitutional amendment as a preference to overturning Roe v. Wsde.
The argument that the Right to Life belongs to the states is an invalid one, and a distraction- It can never be won, because it is wrong.
As a legal issue, Steele is on solid ground.
He needs to retire.
I think we need more than a legalist as a leader.
What kind of moronic question is that, EV?
You can’t overturn Roe if you agree with its author’s central premise: that unborn children aren’t PERSONS.
Of course you can. The fact of the matter is that the SCOTUS wrongly decided to overturn a Texas law it had no business overturning and creating a right to privacy out of whole cloth.
You’ve destroyed the moral, intellectual and legal basis that argues against abortion and euthanasia.
But not against the right of a state to enact its own laws without interference from a SCOTUS that invents rights out of thin air.
Roe was wrongly decided, and as such it can be overturned.
That isn't the argument.
The right to life was not “invented out of thin air.”
And no individual or state or government of any sort has no right to abrogate unalienable rights it didn’t, and never could, grant.
I find it laughable that you think you’re going to overturn Roe arguing against the right to privacy. The Planned Barrenhood ghouls have you right where they want you.
Can you read EV?
That’s a funny question coming from someone who can’t seem to read the most important portions of our founding documents, or look up the simple definitions of their crucual words in a dictionary.
Two questions:
1. Are unborn children PERSONS?
2. What other unalienable rights are you willing to let states alienate if they want to?
By the way, the right to privacy was not invented out of thin air, either. It is a long recognized natural right, and it is well-covered in the Bill of Rights.
It just can’t be used as a cover for killing other persons.
Yes, in fact, it is.
Yes.
2) What other unalienable rights are you willing to let states alienate if they want to?
The point is that they are now alienating the rights of the unborn via legalized abortion in every state. My willingness to allow it has no bearing. The Supreme Court has decided via Roe that these women have a constitutional right to abortions, and no state law may prohibit it unless the child falls within its view of viability.
Overturning Roe would reduce abortions. It was wrongly decided. Bork believes this; Scalia believes this. You?
If it was wrongly decided, it can be overturned.
If you want to reduce abortions, overturn Roe.
No, in fact, it is not.
Steele’s job as head of the RNC is to raise money for the party. To the extent he does that, he has succeeded. To the extent he doesn’t, he has failed.
Yes, in fact, it is. Show me ANY precedence for the right of privacy trumping the right of life and I would cede your point, but other than RvW, and the malformed arguments leading to RvW, you will find none.
Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided- but on the basis that the woman, the state, and the federal governments have any business at all messing with the life within the woman- They have no jurisdiction to do so, as the Constitution does not grant them leave, without due process.
The right to LIFE is enumerated as God given from our very founding. It is the very first enumerated right declared in our very first document. If it is not granted to the weakest and most innocent among us, then it is granted to none.
You may try to hide this issue behind a thin veil of privacy, and parse the beginnings of personhood, but it is nothing but crafty lawyer-speak. There is no justice in it. There is no justice in it.
It is all about LIFE, and whether our foundations are as true and solid as our forefathers meant them to be, and whether we will be true to them, and honor them as we must, ere we will surely die as a nation, and as a people.
There is a reason God the Father was called upon to witness the intentions of those men, those who signed the Declaration which made us free. It is His justice we rely upon, and preserve in our laws. Pervert that justice, and there will be no justice at all.
If you want to END abortions, rightly decide Roe.
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.