Sunday, March 12, 2006

Don't Let George Allen Get Away Without Answering...

Fresh from his trip to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in Memphis and his third-place finish in the presidential straw poll with 10.3 percent, Sen. George Allen of Virginia appeared this morning on "Meet the Press."

Sen. Joe Biden was also a guest; and both agreed "these are tough times in Iraq." what else is new...?

The most interesting part of the segment came when Russert asked Allen about abortion and the extreme law passed in South Dakota that bans abortion in all cases, except to save the life of a woman.

Allen never directly answered the question of whether or not Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Here is his nonanswer:

I think Roe vs. Wade has been interpreted in such a way that it precludes the rights of the people to decide their laws. When I was governor, we passed the law on parental notification. I think parents ought to be involved if a girl who’s 16, 17 years old...
Ask a man a direct question about choice, and he'll set up a straw man to fight with. Señor Allen, we really don't care about parental notification; we want to know whether or not you support a woman's right to choose; and whether Virginians can count on you to keep radical right wing Republicans from outlawing legal and safe abortions.

MR. RUSSERT: So you say overturn Roe. You hope Roe is overturned.

SEN. ALLEN: Well, Roe—if you need parental notification for ear piercing or a tattoo, they certainly ought to be involved with it. And so I think Roe vs. Wade has been interpreted in such a way as to restrict the will of people. Moreover, that decision was from the early 1970s and medical science has advanced a great deal. We know a lot more and of course, unborn children have an earlier stage of development.

MR. RUSSERT: So overturn?

SEN. ALLEN: The point is, rather than arguing on a legal term, the point of the matter is the people in the states ought to be making these decisions. And if that’s contrary to the dictates of Roe vs. Wade, so be it. Because the way that Roe vs. Wade has been interpreted is taking away the rights of the people in the states to make these decisions.

Yes, let's not argue pesky legal points of law; and if a state wants to ban abortions in the case of rape, incest or health of a woman, well she can always travel to another state or suffer the consequences from a law passed by men.

Seems fair to me, now let's just see how Virginia women feel about that!

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?