Wednesday, September 2, 2015

At least he's being honest.

A pro-abortion writer at the Daily Beast admits that the videos that have been released about Planned Parenthood have made him re-think his position a bit. (A bit of nagging by his wife also seems to be at play.

But that isn't what caught my attention. It was this bit about deciding to be pro-abortion back in 1985.
After all this, I still consider myself pro-choice, as I have for the last 30 years. I staked out this position during my freshmen year in college. Even then, I understood the abortion debate was a tug-of-war between competing rights—those of the mother versus those of an unborn baby. I sided with the mother. And I tried not to think about the baby.

All this was happening in the 1980s, which was a particularly tense time in the abortion debate. Americans were at each other’s throats. Protesters picketed the offices of abortion providers. Clinics were bombed or set on fire. Doctors who performed abortions were being threatened. The Moral Majority, Operation Rescue, and the Republican Party seemed an intolerant lot. I couldn’t imagine siding with them, so I lined up on the pro-choice side. [emphasis added]
Yep, his stance on the abortion issue was dictated by tribal affiliation as much as any moral considerations.

This is actually pretty common. It's little different from how people decide on which football teams to root for, really. Think of this next time you wonder why the sides completely refuse to listen to each other - it's Alabama vs. Auburn, but with actual consequences to real people.

1 comment:

  1. Makes sense, after all rooting for football teams amount to loyalty to the uniform. The players come and go. Politics is the same way. Loyalty to the political label , no matter how despicable the person. Hence , hillary's strong (though declining) support among Democrats.