Because Fred has always been against taxpayer-funding of abortions and supported parental notification laws.
If there are restrictions against abortions, and if the woman has to pay for them, abortions would decrease, don't you think? Now I support a human right amendment to the Constitution but such an idea had no way in Hades of passing a Rat Congress & a Rat President. The pro-life movement basically had to take what it could get.
Look, Fred dropped the ball here, he should have been open from the get-go. But that's not going to change my opinion of him. His voting record, and his subsequent statements affirming his support for life, is enough in my book.
I'm not sure I see that as an answer to my question. Parental notification laws are on the books in many states, and taxpayer-funding of abortion is illegal at the federal level. AGAIN: In what way does Fred Thompson disagree with the current availability of abortion? As far as I can tell, not a whit.