abortion, politics, public policy, Women's Health

>Women do not want pro-abortion President

>The New York Times has weighed in on the secret to Hillary Clinton’s win in New Hampshire: women voters.

I am convinced that Senator Clinton’s campaign is very aware of the importance of the women’s vote. (I believe that the “crying” incident of January 6th was aimed at reminding women that Hillary is a woman, and that this is their chance to have a woman President. But that’s just my opinion.)

Pro-life voters who do not want a pro-abortion President must begin to emphasize and educate one another about the voting record of the candidates. Our belief that every human life has value (not the personalities of the candidates, inevitabilities, and religious identification) is something that we have in common with members of both the major parties.

There is no question that Hillary and Obama fought the Partial Birth Abortion ban (Hillary as First Lady and then as NY Senator and Obama while still in the Illinois legislature). Polls like this one (comments here and the poll in .pdf, here) from the Susan B. Anthony List, from last August, show that even among women who want to vote for a woman to get a woman President, a large number will not vote for the advocates of Partial Birth Abortion. These are the voters we need to alert/inform.

The reality is that politics will play a part in our goal of protecting human rights in medicine and science policy in the US. The next President will, like this one, be in a position to name several Supreme Court Justices.

About bnuckols

Conservative Christian Family Doctor, promoting conservative news and views. (Hot Air under the right wing!)


2 thoughts on “>Women do not want pro-abortion President

  1. >I find it interesting that of those who tried to fight the partial-birth abortion ban, almost all of them actually found partial birth abortion so appalling they would ban it if they could – but they saw the legal system forcing their hands, because a ban on partial-birth abortion could easily be the first step towards a far wider ban. That is the nature of the current legal situation – it forces people towards the extremes. Those who support limited abortion rights must support all abortion in order to prevent those who oppose all abortion from making incrimental gains.

    Posted by Suricou Raven | January 9, 2008, 4:09 pm
  2. >I disagree. Even the students of the Blackmun School of Medicine who decided Roe v. Wade and the Casey decisions agreed that there could be limits, based on the viability of the child. The bans on live birth abortions and on partial birth abortion fit within these parameters very well.The proponents of abortion have painted themselves into this corner for partisan and monetary reasons – and for the power they can gain.

    Posted by LifeEthics.org | January 9, 2008, 5:05 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

If the post is missing: take the “www.” out of the url




%d bloggers like this: