Posted on 01/18/2007 9:27:26 AM PST by Dark Skies
As pro-lifers prepare to mark Monday’s 34th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade decision, many wonder whether they could support former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani for president despite his pro-choice views. While some of Giuliani’s statements on abortion make pro-lifers fret, they should find his record surprisingly reassuring.
“I don’t like abortion,” Giuliani said in South Carolina’s The State newspaper last November 21. “I don’t think abortion is a good thing. I think we ought to find some alternative to abortion, and that there ought to be as few as possible.”
Nevertheless, Giuliani’s pro-life critics point to his April 5, 2001 address to the National Abortion Rights Action League’s “Champions of Choice” luncheon in Manhattan.
“As a Republican who supports a woman’s right to choose, it is particularly an honor to be here,” Giuliani said. He added: “The government shouldn’t dictate that choice by making it a crime or making it illegal.”
“I have a daughter now,” Giuliani told TV’s Phil Donahue during his unsuccessful 1989 mayoral campaign. Giuliani continued: “I would give my personal advice, my religious and moral views…I would help her with taking care of the baby. But if the ultimate choice of the woman -- my daughter or any other woman -- would be that in this particular circumstance, to have an abortion, I’d support that. I’d give my daughter the money for it.”
But did Giuliani’s mayoral deeds match such words?
According to the state Office of Vital Statistics, total abortions performed in New York City between 1993 (just before Giuliani arrived) and 2001 (as he departed) fell from 103,997 to 86,466 -- a 16.86 percent decrease. This upended a 10.32 percent increase compared to eight years before Giuliani, when 1985 witnessed 94,270 abortions.
What about Medicaid-financed abortions? Under Giuliani, such taxpayer-funded feticides dropped 22.85 percent, from 45,006 in 1993 to 34,722 in 2001.
The abortion ratio also slid from 890 terminations per 1,000 live births in 1993 to 767 in 2001, a 13.82 percent tail-off. This far outpaced the 2.84 percent reduction from 1985’s ratio of 916 to 1993’s 890. While abortions remained far more common in Gotham than across America (2001’s U.S. abortion ratio was 246), they diminished during Giuliani’s tenure, as they did nationally.
Giuliani essentially verbalized his pro-choice beliefs while avoiding policies that would have impeded abortion’s generally downward trajectory.
New York pro-lifers concede that Giuliani never attempted anything like what current Mayor Michael Bloomberg promulgated in July 2002. Eight city-run hospitals added abortion instruction to the training expected of their OB-GYN medical residents. Only those with moral objections may refuse this requirement.
Giuliani could have issued such rules, but never did.
Interestingly enough, after Giuliani left, Medicaid abortions under Bloomberg increased 5.19 percent from 34,722 in 2001 to 36,523 in 2003.
Asked if he could cite any Giuliani initiative that advanced abortion, New York State Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long told me, “I don’t remember, and I don’t think so.” He added: “I never remember seeing him promote the issue, to my knowledge.”
“I like him a lot -- although he doesn’t share my particular point of view on social issues,” televangelist Pat Robertson said May 1, 2005 on ABC’s “This Week.” “He did a super job running the city of New York and I think he’d make a good president.”
If Giuliani can sway Pat Robertson, can he attract other pro-lifers? Short of dizzying himself and others with a 180-degree reversal from a pro-choice to a pro-life posture, Giuliani should embrace parental-notification rules, so minors who seek abortions need their folks’ permission, as they now do for ear piercing. He should oppose partial-birth abortion, which even Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and liberal stalwart Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont have voted to prohibit.
Similarly, Giuliani should propose that Uncle Sam exit embryonic-stem-cell research laboratories and instead let drug companies -- not government -- finance such embryocidal experiments, if they must. He also could pledge to nominate constitutionalist judges skeptical of penumbras emanating outside Planned Parenthood clinics.
And, of course, Rudolph W. Giuliani should remind Republican primary voters that on his watch, total abortions, taxpayer-funded Medicaid abortions, and the abortion ratio all went the right way: down.
Mr. Murdock, a New York-based commentator to HUMAN EVENTS, is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.
I understand your position. Fair enough, but I really cannot throw my support behind a guy who is supposed to be a conservative (he's a republicn, aren't they supposed to represent us conservatives?) but is pro-gay, anti-gun, pro illegals (like Bush), pro abortion and a whole lot of other crap I am deadset against.
At this point I don't have to sacrifice any of my ideals in supporting someone like Rudy, so I will not. I wish others would look beyond the MSM's idea of who should be OUR candidate. They hate hunter because they hate conservatives. Why do you think they like Rudy?
I've done the math. During liberal Rudy's reign as mayor of NYC, nearly 1 million children were aborted in New York City. If numbers dropped - slightly - you can be assured that it wasn't because pro-abort Rudy Giuliani had anything to do with it. In fact, during that time period numbers nationwide went down similarly.
Well I might just go do that since we have about 35 lovely beaches here on Anguilla. I'll let ya know how the water was today.
Add his marital infidelities and you have Bill also.
Add his marital infidelities and you have Bill also.
Dear dmz,
In spite of the fact that this article is putrid sewage propaganda, here are a few links with some interesting information:
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
This is a poll from late 2006.
One question asked is whether abortion should be illegal with only one exception - the life of the mother. It shows fully 45% in favor, with 51% opposed.
However, the next question is whether abortion should be: 1) always legal; 2) sometimes legal; 3) always illegal.
The first circumstance is what we actually have under Roe - abortion is always legal. A woman may procure the murder of her unborn child at any time during her pregnancy. That's the law of the land.
Twenty-four percent of adults support that legal regime.
Likewise, only 24% of adults support a complete and total, no exceptions ban on abortion.
And 50% of adults support that abortion should be "Sometimes Legal."
However, the implication of that result is that without realizing it, most people favor a legal regime for abortion that would require overturning Roe.
Here's an interesting poll from a few years ago that points up the precise contradiction about which I'm speaking. It's from ABC News, that font of pro-life propaganda:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/abortion_poll030122.html
American Views on Abortion
Situation Should Be Legal Should Be Illegal
All or Most Cases 57% 42
To Save Woman's Life 88 10
To Save Woman's Health 82 14
In Cases of Rape/Incest 81 17
Physically Impaired Baby 54 40
To End Unwanted Pregnancy 42 57
D&X/Partial-Birth Abortions 23 69
Pregnancy is 6 Months+ 11 86
Fifty-seven percent of folks think that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. But 57% also believe that it shouldn't be legal to end an unwanted pregnancy.
Yet, 96% of all abortions are to end an unwanted pregnancy.
Thus, 57% of the population favors banning 96% of abortions.
Here's another site that gives results to polls, including one that shows that majorities believe that abortion should be:
Legal if there is a strong chance of serious defect in the baby
ILLEGAL if she is married and does not want any more children
Legal if the woman's own health is seriously endangered by the pregnancy
ILLEGAL if the family has a very low income and cannot afford any more children
Legal if she became pregnant as the result of rape
ILLEGAL if she is not married and does not want to marry the man
ILLEGAL if the woman wants it for any reason
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abopollover.htm
Here's a link to a Zogby poll from 2004 that shows that most folks have a generally pro-life attitude:
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=6982
sitetest
This why you should vote for Rudy. Lets first address the social issues. Let's start with pro-homo. He's AGAINST gay marriage. Now as far as homos go, personally, I disagree with their life style but as long as they do what they do in the privacy of their own home I really don't care and nobody else should either, especially not the federal government. The POTUS doesn't have the power to stop people from being gay. And he surely shouldn't be interferring in people's private lives. So therefore voting on the basis of this issue doesn't make much sense.
As far as abortion goes, we have a pro-life President now but we are still having abortions. No president has the power to stop abortion. Rudy has already said he supports strict constructionist judges like John Roberts. He constantly praised the President for appointing Roberts and Alito. He said Roberts is his ideal justice. Assuming Rudy gets elected President and appoints Roberts-like justices then maybe Roe v. Wade will get overturned. But even if it does get overturned I hope you're not naive enough to think that would stop all abortions. The abortion issue would then revert back to the states and do you really think California would outlaw abortions? Being pragmatic in our thinking we all know we can't completely stop abortions. Therefore voting solely on this issue very unpragmatic. I hate abortions too but I realize that regardless of how many pro-life presidents we elect, its just not going to stop.
Rudy is great on all the other issues, the ones where the President actually has the power to make a real difference, like the WOT. He's fiscally responible(he turned a NYC's deficit into a surplus), a tax cutter(he cut over 20 taxes as Mayor), conservative on domestic policies(he dropped 600,000 people off welfare and cleaned up the rampant crime as Mayor), supports strict constructionist judges, and is 100% perfect when it comes to his stance on the WOT and all other foreign policy which by the way is 100 times more important than worrying about what some gays people are doing, gay people that doesn't affect your life at all!!!
With Rudy you are not getting a liberal, you are getting a man who is conservative on most issues, the issues where the president actually has major influence over and yes he is fairly liberal on a couple of social issues, issues that the president has very little influence over. Nowadays judges have the most influence on these issues and Rudy supports strict constructionist so that pretty well takes care of the social issues and will help us get these issues back to the states where they belong. So on the average he is fairly conservative and not a liberal and more importantly conservative on the issues where the President can make a difference. And most importantly he will continue Bush's work on the WOT and give us a great foreign policy.
Finally, Rudy and McCain are, IMO, the only two Republicans that can win in 2008. So take your pick, Hillary, McCain, or Rudy. Sure, you can "choose" another Republican but he will lose to Hillary. Back to Rudy, If he's elected President and fights terrorist like he fought crime as Mayor can you imagine the results we will in the defining struggle of our generation, the fight against Islamic fascism. You know for a fact Hillary will surrender the terrorist and hand our foreign policy over to the UN and EU and poor Israel would be left out to dry. Rudy is extremely competetent and a great leader and there is nobody I want more as Commander in Chief. So you go ahead and worry about gays, people that don't affect your life at all. I'm going to worry about Islamic fascism, you know the people that want to kill us all, and vote for someone that will go after them.
Lets review history. World War II ended in 1945. SEVEN years later in 1952 the most popular general of the war, Dwight Eisenhower, won in a landslide despite far right extremist unpragmatic Republicans not supporting him in the primaries. History always repeats itself.
Dear Antoninus,
"Slavery did in the Whigs. Will the abandonment of issues important to social conservatives doom the GOP?"
I've been saying for several years now that if the Republican Party abandons the cause of life, it will go the way of the Whigs.
sitetest
Excellent post!
Dear Antoninus,
I'd sorta liked Mr. Giuliani up until now.
He was sorta roguish. Yeah, he's pro-abort, pro-homo, anti-gun, statist bordering on fascist. But he was so forthright! So brash and honest! So, "I don't give a damn if you don't agree with me!" It made him appealing, even if I could never pull the lever for him.
But this mealy-mouthed trying to have it all ways positively disgusts me. It makes him as dishonest as Mrs. Clinton and many of the pro-abort Democrats, especially the "Catholic" ones.
If a politician is in favor of keeping unborn baby murder legal, he should be bold about it, loud and proud of his stance, not trying to persuade us that black is white and white is black.
Fooey on Giuliani.
sitetest
Nicely written, now I changed my tagline again, LOL!
Untrue! The majority of Americans would ban most abortions -which are convenience abortions. Poll after polls shows this.
Dear juliej,
"Untrue! The majority of Americans would ban most abortions -which are convenience abortions. Poll after polls shows this."
See post #88.
Thanks,
sitetest
Very well put! And we must do everything possible to make it socially unacceptable to have an abortion and go on tv to brag about it.
I'm not surprised Rudy is that person.
I'm also not impressed. We can do better.
Hardly. Please rationalize away his being pro-gun-control and pro-amnesty.
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.