Anyone can give lip service and claim to be conservative, but Pro-Choice Giuliani did more in eight years to curb abortion rates, then any conservative Republican has done in the last three decades…

I’m not trying to convince you that Giuliani is the best man for the job. I’m not even trying to convince you to vote Giuliani. I’m not thrilled about any of the candidates. I’m just saying not to rule someone out, because of that one issue.

amerpundit on April 4, 2007 at 6:36 PM

I wouldn’t necessarily rule him out because he is pro-choice, as long as I’m convinced he’ll appoint constructionist justices.

But his REASONING has, for me, ruled him out. As I’ve said, abortion is – or should not be – a necessarily moral or religious debate, but a logical one. I loathe abortion because of perfect logic: our society abhors murder, the taking of life without cause or due process – thus, UNLESS a fetus is NOT alive, it is murder. Inescapable logic.

I believe a fetus is alive. Whatever life is (a soul? a biological spark?), science says it arrives long, long before 24 weeks. I err on the side of life and choose conception. It is the logically defensible position. If we don’t condone murder – and I don’t know for a FACT that a fetus is not alive – then I can’t support abortion.

If our society decides killing children is okay, then I’d have no problem with abortion. That’s logical consistency. But today, we live in a society that will send a teenager to prison for killing her newborn … while simultaneously insisting killing it the day before was a constitutional right.

The logic doesn’t work.

SOME pro-choicers are at least logical. Their position is simple: a fetus is not alive. They’re wrong … but if you accept their premise, than abortion makes sense. I’m a libertarian at heart, and I loathe invasions of privacy … so if the fetus is just tissue, of course I’d support abortion. (BTW, if there is even a possibility the fetus is alive, the pro-life position IS the libertarian position.)

I could live with Giuliani if he claimed the fetus was not alive. Fair enough. But he lost me with his reasoning. If it is NOT alive, there is no reason to hate abortion. None. It’s like having a tooth removed.

But if you hate abortion, there can be only one reason: because you suspect the fetus is indeed alive. Thus Rudy has concluded that he may not like killing, but other people can do it (and make me pay for it!).

Sorry. I think he just lost my vote, and I was a big fan. His position is dishonest and unsupportable, and makes me wonder about the rest of his positions.

For the record, whoever compared abortion to slavery up there had the right idea. It was legal, constitutional, and people were willing to defend that right – and insisted that slaves were not “alive.” (As in human). They were wrong. We are wrong on abortion today, and our descendants will view our generation exactly the same way we view slave owners.

Rudy’s logic is what has been used by decent people throughout history to support or condone all kinds of atrocities. I won’t violate Godwin’s law … but use your imagination.

Give me an honest pro-choicer who thinks a fetus isn’t alive over Rudy’s tortured logic any day.

That will only happen with a different court.

Which Rudy has promise to appoint.

In reality, it’s up to the states.

nico on April 5, 2007 at 7:47 PM

Nah, it’s up to the courts until the SCOTUS walks back from RvW. The states have no ability under current precedent to regulate abortion. You may be talking in principle, but that principle only has meaning under a federalist interpretation of the Constitution on the issue. That will only happen with a different court.

I was truly supportive of a strong war candidate like Rudy and was willing to forgo the usual abortion barrage because the reality is it is up to the courts

In reality, it’s up to the states.

In many ways, I think it is unfortunate that Abortion has that kind of effect on the electorate. And I don’t say that as someone who is “above” this issue or “above” the fray. It has definitely been a significant factor for me in New Jersey gubernatorial (sp?) races.

From CNN,Ultimately, it’s a constitutional right, and therefore if it’s a constitutional right, ultimately, even if you do it on a state by state basis, you have to make sure people are protected, Giuliani said in an interview with CNN’s…

He is always crowing about how he reduced crime in NYC. But he was just mayor at the time that the first aborted generation would have matured into crime. What do you think happens to unwanted babies forced to live. They turn into criminals at a higher rate than those babies who are wanted and loved. You legalize abortion in ’73 and crime goes down across the nation in the 90′s — when the aborted generation would have been 17. Coincidence? I think not.

That being said, he still gets my vote and my $$$.

Bad Candy on April 5, 2007 at 12:02 PM

It’s akin to making fun of a persons humility towards God.

Also, I don’t know what magic underwear is exactly, but it sounds great!!!

honora on April 5, 2007 at 10:45 AM

The ‘magic underwear’ thing is some sort of undergarment that Mormons wear. It has some religious meaning, which I forget, but I do know its an obnoxious thing to make jokes about, and I think it pisses em off.

I wasn’t embargoing this — it’s just I couldn’t watch the video. Still can’t. My Firefox browser won’t play embedded video and my IE browser is totally screwed and shuts down upon starting. (Yeah, I re-installed it. Helped nothing.) So……

I heard Hannity on Fox making interview love to Mitt. I was surprised Mitt is a very partisan weenier. He had nothing but praise for Bush. I’d heard enough to not vote for him. Besides Mormons wear magic underwear, think they can become on equal par with God and woman can’t go to heaven unless they are married. So single woman who never married get a dead man to marry them, called a “spirit” husband. No thanks. Mormons are militant. Go live in Salt Lake and not be a Mormon. They’ll be nice, but if you don’t join you are shunned. Most prejudiced bunch of cult members you will meet.

gmcjetpilot on April 5, 2007 at 1:14 AM

Did you see the Romney ad that talks about vetoes? “I love vetoes, can’t wait to get to Washington to veto spending etc.” Seems to me a pretty direct shot at W.

Also, I don’t know what magic underwear is exactly, but it sounds great!!!

All right, I get Rudy’s strategy. He can’t convincingly convert to social conservatism, so he’s offering social conservatives a deal, as I noted in my column. You get the judges, the charisma, the security from both terrorists and another Clinton……