The Meaning of "Pro-life"
The staff over at Jerry Kilgore for Governor has been apoplectic this week about a few words uttered by their candidate's Democratic opponent, Tim Kaine, at last Saturday's Virginia Bar Association debate:
"I am pro-life," Kaine said when talking about his view on abortion.
Kaine says that while he has a personal, religious opposition to abortion, he is supportive of a women's right to choose. And he explained that as part of his answer.
But the Kilgore camp says that when Kaine says, "I am pro-life," he is being disingenuous. As the argument goes, the phrase "pro-life" has a specific meaning in the American consciousness, and is associated with the belief that abortion should be outlawed.
"It is a classic example of Tim Kaine recognizing the audience and delivering the message that the audience wants to hear," said Tim Murtaugh, Kilgore's press secretary. "One the one hand he [runs] ... down his supposed list of pro-life credentials and on the other he gathers with liberal Democrats at a fundraiser and uses all code words of the pro-abortion crowd."
Kaine's press secretary, Delacey Skinner, said that Kaine wasn't trying to mislead anyone.
"I don't think it's something that he threw out as a way to confuse people or try to signal something." she said. "I think it's the way he would describe himself ... he's describing himself that way because it's a short hand for talking about his belief in the sanctity of life."
Virginia political science guru Larry Sabato said that Kaine's approach is nothing more than what Democratic politicians have been doing since Jimmy Carter: Trying to split their personal and professional beliefs in two. Considering Kaine's phrase, Sabato saw some semantic problems.
"It would be like John Kerry saying 'I'm conservative,'" Sabato said. "But there's a definition of "conservative" that has been excepted." It's the same, he said, as Kaine saying "I'm pro-life."
"There's a commonly understood definition of that that makes that statement untrue," Sabato said. "Come up with a different construction that doesn't misuse that commonly understood term."
Skinner said that Kaine does explain himself when he uses the "pro-life" phrase:
"I've never heard him refer to himself as pro-life or his beliefs as pro-life where he hasn't followed that up with a pretty extensive explanation where his personal faith-based opposition comes from and what he would do as governor."
By Chris Jenkins |
July 22, 2005; 1:48 PM ET
| Category:
Jerry Kilgore
, Tim Kaine
Previous: Md. Gov Says He Likes Warner, Really |
Next: Mason-Dixon Poll
Posted by: | July 24, 2005 07:41 PM
Methinks, someone is being disingenuous, and it sure isn't Tim Kaine. I have never met a single soul who says they are "pro-abortion."
I have, however, met many people like Tim Kaine, who describe themselves as "pro-life" and who are personally opposed to legislation restricting abortion. Why? For the simple fact it ought not be any of the government's business.
These are good, God-fearing men and women, just like Tim Kaine, who believe that when the power of prayer is combined with the wisdom of education and equitable employment, that our society is then armed with the most effective tools to fight abortion.
God gave each one of us a free will and who am I -- or anyone else -- to take it away? Kilgore talks a good game about wanting to keep government off our backs and out of our pockets, but by winking, nodding and dodging this question, just who does Jerry Kilgore really think he is fooling?
How dare Kilgore think himself more omnipotent and omniscient than Almighty God.
Posted by: Prayerful & Pro-Life, Scottsville, Va. | July 24, 2005 07:58 PM
I still want to know: is Kilgore in favor of putting women and doctors in jail or not? If people are going to claim that Kaine isn't pro-life because he won't take that extreme step, how can Jerry Kilgore claim the title when he won't support it publically either? What's the actual policy difference here, other than smoke and mirrors? Roe being overturned might be disasterous for Republicans given how many enjoy posturing on the issue without having to worry about doing anything substantive about it. At least Kaine is clear where he stands: in the center.
And will Larry Sabato ever address this question full on, or is it shill city for the next couple of months?
Posted by: jconnor | July 25, 2005 02:34 PM
The problem with the abortion debate is that the two sides aren't on the same page. The "Pro-life" side claims that abortion is a morally wrong procedure because they assert that life begins at conception. The "Pro-choice" side argues that the issue is related to Constitutional rights. Namely, that a fetus doesn't have the same aforementioned rights as a born person does. So until the two sides get on the same page, the debate will continue without resolve.
That said, as usual, radical Republicans are being absolutist on the issue. The majority of America, including thousands upon thousands of Republicans, is "pro-choice" in some way or another. Can someone be simultaneously anti-abortion and pro-choice? Sure, why not? I see the procedure as a necessary evil. Why not keep Rove V. Wade on the books, and simply implement certain restrictions? I'm a civil libertarian Democrat who's for parental consent for minors who wish to have an abortion, and against abortion in the second and third trimesters. Republicans to the extreme right would probably say that I'm a baby killer. Hey, it's a free country.
Instead of overturning Roe V. Wade, a more pragmatic approach would be to limit the need for it, via education. And I'm not referring here to the Republican voodoo sex ed. that seems to be so pervasive in some public school systems these days. The bottom line is that abortion isn't a new procedure. It's been in existence for thousands of years. Some women are going to need and have abortions, so it should remain safe and legal in America.
Posted by: con_crusher | August 2, 2005 04:19 AM
This answers many of the above posters.
1) God gave us free will, but the government continues to limit that free will through things called "laws". Would you support overturning every law because they restrict free will?
Also, the pro-life argument stems from the belief that abortion is murder (which is based on scientific evidence, if a fetus is not a human being then what is it? No other "glob of cells" has ever just turned into a human). The government restricts and limits other forms of murder. I suppose you would also feel this is the state thinking it is "more omnipotent and omniscient than Almighty God". Also, God himself told us not to murder anyone.
2) When do women need to have abortions?
Other than "life of the mother" which is a ridiculously small percentage. If a woman is raped, does getting an abortion eliminate that rape? What about the girl who is in college and gets pregnant. She might have to miss class, or do an extra year of school. Clearly the need to complete school on a schedule, in your view, would outweigh a human life.
America needs to take responsibility. Abortion gets men off of the hook as well. Many fathers refuse to be a father and simply insist the woman has an abortion. You should think about every instance where you feel abortion is "necessary" and then really consider if that situation deems a human sacrifice there life to alleviate it.
3)What are the differences, across the board, between a second and first trimester baby? If development, abilities, and level of consciousness are criteria for judging societal worth, is my life more valuable than a 5 year olds?
4)"So until the two sides get on the same page, the debate will continue without resolve". Isn't that the nature of an argument?
Posted by: | October 24, 2005 01:49 PM
Post a Comment
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.
Methinks, someone is being disingenuous, and it sure isn't Tim Kaine. I have never met a single soul who says they are "pro-abortion."
I have, however, met many people like Tim Kaine, who describe themselves as "pro-life" and who are personally opposed to legislation restricting abortion. Why? For the simple fact it ought not be any of the government's business.
These are good, God-fearing men and women, just like Tim Kaine, who believe that when the power of prayer is combined with the wisdom of education and equitable employment, that our society is then armed with the most effective tools to fight abortion.
God gave each one of us a free will and who am I -- or anyone else -- to take it away? Kilgore talks a good game about wanting to keep government off our backs and out of our pockets, but by winking, nodding and dodging this question, just who does Jerry Kilgore really think he is fooling?
How dare Kilgore think himself more omnipotent and omniscient than Almighty God.