As a husband, the father of three adult daughters, a father-in-law to my son’s wife, and the grandfather of Emma, I celebrate that a major political party could endorse a woman for President of the United States. But what I celebrate in principle is what countless millions like me lament in practice: the choice.
Once Hillary Clinton officially became the Democrats’ presidential nominee we were informed (to list just a few items) that we should set “petty partisan differences” aside; recognize that she is more qualified than her husband was when he ran for President (and won) in 1992; and that anything less than flattery of the former Secretary of State is thinly-disguised (or not so thinly-disguised) sexism."
However when you are talking about Hillary Clinton, the epicenter of the worldwide campaign to eradicate not disease but as many “unwanted” unborn babies as possible, then your happiness that a woman can ascend to the most powerful political office in the world is negated by who that woman is.
Put another way, I lament with every fiber in my body that the woman who ”broke the ultimate glass ceiling” did so at least in part over the broken bodies of unborn babies all over the world.
In what sense is that charge true, and not an exaggeration? If you go elsewhere on NRL News Today, you’ll find a story by Political Director Karen Cross that compares Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on abortion which links to a downloadable flyer.
So let me offer just a few additional points here.
Is there an abortion–any time, any place, for any reason–that Clinton would say, “That goes too far.” No.
Does the unborn child have any recognizable rights, let alone constitutional protections?
In April, Chuck Todd, on Meet the Press, asked Clinton: “When, or if, does an unborn child have constitutional rights?” She answered, “Well, under our laws currently, that is not something that exists. The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.”
On the off-off chance Clinton wanted some wiggle room, two days later, Paula Faris (ofThe View) asked this follow up question:
“And Secretary, I want to ask you about some comments that you made over the weekend on Meet the Press regarding abortion. You said, ‘the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.’ My question is at what point does someone have constitutional rights, and are you saying that a child, on its due date, just hours before delivery still has no constitutional rights?Clinton responded,
“Under our law, that is the case, Paula. I support Roe v Wade.”By overwhelming margins, the American people do not want to finance abortions. Surely, as a “pro-choicer,” Clinton believes that the public should have the choice whether to pay for abortions, right?
Article continues here