Gee, my stance is rather simple, I am not pro-abortion I never see myself in the position to need one. But then again it's not my decision to make. When abortions were not avaiable in clean medical faculities they were still preformed and women died needlessly of infection and blood lose.

So if you are a true and blue pro-lifer then I say don't get an abortion, and by the way, mind your own buisness.

As to the fact that most pro-lfers also appear to be in favor of the death penalty, I can not confirm this, but then again if someone is guilty of a truley horiffic crime deserving of the death peanlty, which do you think serves justice, making them live with what they have done and be reminded daily for the rest of their life what they have done, or giving them the cowards way out and awarding and eye for and eye justice, so you feel better.

Now as far as Fred Thompson goes, Fred this is reverse advise most actors get, I hope you did not quit your acting job.

Kate in Aurora

I'm sorry to hear of you difficult upbringing, and yes many fixes are needed but regardless abortion is wrong,

back to reason and logic finding fault in one aspect is not a good reason to allow fault everywhere !! if you read these post they complain about Iraq of child health-care and blah blah blah but the point is still the same 'abortion is wrong' its point blank wrong and using other perceived wrongness to advocate it, is a lib shell game,

saying its none of your business is irresponsible !! for it is your business, when billboards asks "'are you pregnant ? are you scared ?" and then gives a number were they are selling abortion for profit ??? when a woman can abort a child without informing her husband than it is all our business,

Abortion is barbaric and it will go the same way slavery did……..as a sad case of human inhumanity towards themselves and history will ridicule our culture for the 45 million murdered so far and counting !!

Genocide is described as an act of killing 10% or more of a population and we abort 25% of our unborn here in the USA …………..shame on us all !!!

In response to those who said my logic was flawed and I support killers over babies. Firstly as far as my own position goes I believe it is the woman's choice whether to have an abortion or not. It is not my place to pass judgment on anyone. That being said I myself would not have an abortion. I was one of those babies some of you state you would take care of. My birth mother was 17 and after two years of abuse with her I was removed from the sate and placed in a Catholic run group home. Problem is I spent nearly 6 years in the group home being abused by the workers. Secondly, I believe it is up to GOD to judge not me. I cannot tell a 13 year old rape victim to keep the baby, I cannot tell an incest victim she must keep the baby and neither can you. It is not up to the government to pass laws telling people what they can or cannot do with their bodies and if they want to become a parent or not. I do not place the lives of murderers over children. I simply do not understand why pro-lifers seem to want to rescue the cute innocent babies but then not claim any responsibility for them once out of the womb. How many children in this nation are uninsured and not getting the proper healthcare? How many children in this nation are obsese and becoming diabetic? How many children are not getting a valued education due to poorly funded public schools? How many children are victims of abuse due to the abusers being let out of jail on third and fourth convictions? How many children are sitting in a group home waiting to be adopted only to be thrown out at 18 years old? I believe if you are going to rally so hard to protect the lives of newborn babies then you should work just as hard at ensuring that child has the best quality of life after birth as well.

Ah, yes! Some people in this country are still calling abortion a woman’s right to choose. I thought the right to choose consisted of such things as what book to read, or what movie to see on a Saturday night. I thought choice was what to order from the menu when you go out to eat; should I order steak or chicken? I think I’ll have the steak. Should I order medium rare or raw? Should I buy that new SUV in black or midnight blue? Whom should I vote for in ’08?

So, it’s perfectly ok for a woman to go around having sex and then get an abortion when she finds out that she is pregnant and doesn’t want the kid? So let me pose this little question. Is it okay for a woman to get rid of her two year old who is getting into everything, driving her nuts and depriving her of what ever? Don’t think so. So why is it okay for a woman to dispose of an unborn child but not acceptable for her to rid herself of the one that is living and breathing?

I find it fascinating that this country will harangue China, North Korea or some other country concerning their human rights record, or lack thereof. But abortion? I guess a fetus is not eligible for human rights. It must be some age thing.

Abortion is nothing more than murder. I wonder how long it will be before the abortion count surpasses 6 million. To all those who support abortion, I salute you. Sieg heil!

Has he filed suit for defamation of character yet?

Well, that clinhes it. Right to Life has been co-opted. I guess I have made my last contribution to them.

On the Republican side:
My first choice – Ron Paul
My second choice – Huckabee
My third choice – Mitt Romney
Juliani – too scary – as much as Hillary. Unfortunatly, these two rank as #1 on the polls.

Must be frustrating for Republicans to see Juliani as #1 (very liberal) as Democrats to see Hillary as #1 (very hawkish).

please, American John. It's not all about you- many comments don't make the cut.

The National Right to Life got it right this time. Fred Thompson appeals to real people. Politicians don't like him because he's not part of the establishment and the media doesn't like him because they know he has the BEST chance at beating Hillary. Fred is 100 percent concervative, but has crossover appeal too.

Abortion is a story as old as time. In biblical times, women used sticks, herbal remedies etc. many times the woman also died. Medieval times – she went to the “woman in the woods” for a potion, threw herself down the stairs, again a stick etc. What were her chances? And so it went. Flash forward to “modern” times….a coat hanger, a med student needing money or a drunken doctor who has lost his license. It was all this time forbidden to women to decide, make her decision in safety. All those young girls, no matter how well brought up, or not… could not tell their parent(s) and risked their lives. It went on and on and on. Against the law did not stop the procedure. It will not stop because the story just keeps repeating itself over and over. It is not about abortion, it is about control.

My comments are being edited and restricted by CNN so – all I can say is that Fred is a loser!

Well – looks like CNN has decided to "moderate" our thoughts – OK. Well my original comment is that Fred looks out of touch. Perhaps a bit aged and jaded! Is that moderated enough?

"The Lights are on but nobody's home"

Look at "old" Freddie and see if that's who you would trust to run our government. Scary thought!!!!!!!

Better a tired actor who wants to shrink the government than an evil socialist who wants to grow it.

I have never truly understood the abortion argument from either side in regards to politics. Clinton had a democratic congress for a short time, and nothing was done in regards to Roe v Wade. Bush had a republican congress for 6 years, and nothing was done in regards to Roe v Wade. So I have a hard time believing that either side would do anything in the abortion realm, but use it as a wedge political issue to get votes.

It's really the end of the United States if it's really Hillary vs. Guiliani. Can't a nation of 300+ million people come up with a few decent people to run for the Office?

"We Republicans need to get behind someone that can beat Clinton. Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

Posted By Terry, Tazewell VA : November 12, 2007 3:12 pm "

Defining yourself by your dislike of a person is self-defeating and somewhat trivial. The best GOP candidate is the one that is solidly and consistently behind the party platform.
If the party would spend more time expounding their beliefs, not bashing the beliefs of others, or wrapped up in winning, regardless of what bed has to be jumped into to achieve it, then maybe the general public would have a better image of the GOP.

Ron Paul has written books:
Abortion and Liberty
Challenge to Liberty: Coming to Grips with the Abortion Issue
Has been published in the International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy with the article: Being pro-life is necessary to defend liberty
as well as given many speeches and authored many pieces of legislation including defining life beginning at conception.

Couple that with him being an OB-GYN who has personally delivered over 4000 babies and this endorsement baffles me.

Kudos for Thompson’s voting record though. We need more that will do the same. You can look at endorsements but when comparing records, Dr. Paul clearly comes out ahead.

CONCLUSION: John McCain is the best pick for pro-lifers.

Posted By Gregg K., Huntington Beach, CA : November 12, 2007 3:25 pm

Gregg you do realize that when you fight a war based on lies and you plan to bomb Iran when you become president is a violation of the 'right to life' concept. Why do you Christians not comprehend this. Hypocrites.

Posted By Billyboy : November 12, 2007 4:17 pm

Billy:

I suggest you do a fact check. Saddam Hussein and his Administration lied about having WMD stockpiles to deter Iran from attacking Iraq and refused meaningful inspections to cover-up his ruse. Previously, over a million human beings were killed in the Iran-Iraq war which ended in the 1980s. This war was caused by Iraq's invasion of Iran and there was no winner. The U.S. and other leading Intelliegence Agencies believed some of Saddam's disinformation and acted on it after Saddam continued to refuse to allow meaningful inspections. In an ideal world, there would never be any war for any reason. However, our country cannot risk allowing men with warped, destructive, inhumane ideologies acquire WMDs to exterminate the U.S., Western European democracies, and Israel. Stopping this is no more anti-Christian or anti-life than stopping Hitler.

Some endorsements you just don't want. I would drop out of the race if they endorsed me and I couldn't get them to recant immediately. Who wants to be know as anti-civil rights?

I find it fasinating that people are willing to call others names as if they were children. How are we to tell our kids to respect one another if we can't do it ourselves?

as for Fred….he's honest,m straightforward, and probbly the best pick we have. Don' like my opinion? TOUGH.

I believe this endorsement is simply a verification of Senator Thompsons beliefs all along. What can't people figure out when he says "I'm 100% Pro Life" or "Marriage is between a man and a woman". Have our leaders given us so much politicotalk that we can't understand simple English. It's refreshing to have a candidate that speaks in English and short, meaningful phrases. I tell people to simply go to Fred08.com and deside for themselves. Watch for Fred'sGivingDay November21st

reproductive freedom

There is no such thing. As a matter of fact, if you're an unfit parent, we take your children away. Unfortunately in cases of abortion that can't be done for 9 months…then we will happily take care of the child that woman fails to care for.

Since when did a parent have the right to kill their own child? We convict people for manslaughter in car accidents with unborn children, but not the mother on the way to the clinic. Double standard.

ALL politicians are not to be trusted. They will say something to pander to a base of "issues voters" and then fail to do anything about it. The tragic thing about these "issues voters" is that they are so ill-informed of what is actually going on in this world that they think it is a good idea to base there vote completely off of whether or not a candidate agrees with them on such trivial matters as the ridiculous abortion debate, marriage rights for the GLBT community, or gun control. Quite frankly, only their ignorance preceeds them because these issues are so far down on the totem pole that they needn't be worried about by these deceptive politicians. Here's what it is ridiculous about the abortion issue: the more idiotic anti-choice people out there would have you believe that legislation banning the practice will solve the problem. It will NOT. Abortion rates do not increase or decrease due to their legality. But it is shown quite succinctly in Europe how abortion rates do go down due to a better informed populace that has access to conctraceptive protection and pragmatic sex education programs. Look, you will never be able to stop people having sex, but you can educate them to make sure that, if they do it, they are protected as well as they can be and they will be able to avoid making the terrible choice of whether or not to have an abortion. You can't have it both ways with this issue. Either you get over your hang-ups with human sexuality and talk about it or you can continue to repress it and know that when someone makes a mistake, abortions are pretty much the only way out of it. I personally find abortions to be extremely unfortunate for anyone, but the solution, which no one has been really talking about for 30 years is through better education systems, not harsh penalties or illegalizaiton. Furthermore, I love the fact that this group of facist religious nuts is all cut up about who to vote for already. The Republican party is getting everything it deserves for selling its soul to these freaks. I hope that one day the Republican party will harken back to the days of Eisenhower and Gerald Ford instead of bastardizing the religious beliefs of a small group of idiots in order to gaurantee a economically profitable war to the war-mongers who are actually running everything up top. The only way a Republican will win in 08 is if they nominate Guiliani and try to re-gain some ground with the moderate, practical minded voters of the Republican party who are socially liberal (as is the vast majority of this country) but fiscally conservative (which no Republican or Democrat in Washington has been for about 15 years).

First, to cultural, religious and Republican-minded folks: Quit your whining and griping! There's a crucial race to win next year. Let's unanimously support whoever the Republican nominee is next year in order to defeat Hillary's quest for power for power's sake. This is ultimately what is at stake!!!

To progressive, Democratic folks: To respectfully disagree with you, we are not imposing our beliefs on you. We are trying to stand up for our society, which is crumbling like when the culture of the Roman Empire crumbled and was no more.

For example, the sad fact is that although we Christians have not done enough to reach out to practicing homosexuals (and others suffering from sexual abuse and childhood neglect) in order to show them the powerful love of God and a better existence, the objective reality still remains the same: if society continues to tolerate and promote this and other immoral things, our civilization will suffer the same fate as the Romans-extinction.

Furthermore, the willingness of many to promote and to attempt to "IMPOSE" this and the ABORTION HOLOCAUST on the rest of us is what is actually offensive.

We must not be earthly-minded in our approach to society and for pressing for change. We must look beyond the materialism of our age to see the spiritual worth of every human person and our ultimate fate after we leave this earth: eternal happiness with God for those who have striven to follow His Ways, or eternal separation from a loving God by those who seek the ways of the world.

Still love you and pray for you regardless of what you do!

One issue voters (and the only one issue voters I know of are pro-lifers) are so narrow minded.

The anti-women's-rights group endorsed Thompson? If he doesn't reject the endorsement then, he's not getting my vote. Rights to life and body should never be revoked, especially when it is selectively biased against one gender.

Let me get this straight – the National Right to Life Committee endorses Fred Thompson, but Fred Thompson advocates continuing death and violence of Americans and Iraqis in Iraq. There is a disconnect there somewhere.

What we need in our next President is a true leader who stands on what is true and his convictions, no matter what is popular. The only person I have heard who does not even try to cater to appealing to as many as possible is Mike Huckabee. He knows what he stands for. What he stands for directs his course of action, and he has no apology; he doesn't look backward to see what people think of what he says. That is leadership, and that is what we need. Not a weak stomached person who wants power and is willing to adopt answers that will be most popular.

They Said It: Thompson Social Security Plan Applauded as ‘Courageous,’ ‘Honest,’ and ‘Substantive’

Courage & Honesty

Republican presidential contender Fred Thompson’s plan to save Social Security and protect seniors, which he introduced Friday afternoon in a Washington, D.C., hotel, differs starkly from standard election year pablum on the subject in one key way: He’s actually treating voters like adults. (ABC, 11/9)

Thompson…is seeking to show he is willing to take on tough issues if elected in November 2008, telling a news conference in Washington he was the only candidate to offer an extensive Social Security plan. (Reuters, 11/10)

“You certainly have to admire his courage for putting this out,” said Alan Viard with the American Enterprise Institute. (Tennessean, 11/10)

Supporters contend that Thompson’s willingness to take on the so-called third rail of politics will impress voters. (Bloomberg, 11/10)

Conservative economic experts applauded Thompson for offering specifics on an issue considered to be politically dangerous. (Tennessean, 11/10)

“He’s not afraid to be brutally honest with the American people about the challenges that lie ahead,” said Representative Zach Wamp, a Tennessee Republican who is working to recruit supporters for Thompson. “People can tell the difference between a strong leader telling the truth and a weak leader talking politics.” (Bloomberg, 11/10)

Substance

[Thompson is] the first candidate of either party to offer a detailed proposal to fix the nation’s retirement system. (WP, 11/10)

The Republican candidate laid out a detailed, four-page proposal (WSJ, 11/10)

Mr. Thompson’s plan…was more specific than what the Bush White House put on the table when it sought to overhaul the system. It also varied substantially from the traditional conservative approach of focusing primarily on personal investment accounts. (NYT, 11/10)

Economist Jason Furman said Thompson deserves credit for offering a detailed plan to address the projected Social Security shortfall…(Bloomberg, 11/10)

In discussing policy, Thompson was in his element. (Politico, 11/9)

He’d prefer to talk about substance. (Politico, 11/9)

Thompson’s plan draws on ideas favored by conservatives: a reduction in benefits, rather than an increase in payroll taxes; and a shift toward private accounts, rather than government-provided payments. (WP, 11/10)

Rivals

[Thompson] ventured Friday into an area few rivals have tread: advocacy of a fundamental overhaul of Social Security. (WSJ, 11/10)

Although all of the presidential candidates have spoken, when asked, about the need to fix the Social Security system, none has offered such a detailed plan nor talked so eagerly and often about the issue. (WSJ, 11/10)

Among Republicans, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney have talked in general terms … but none has offered a specific plan. (WP, 11/10)

Mr. Thompson is the only one of the Republicans running for the White House who has made Social Security a central theme of his campaign. (NYT, 11/10)

He is the only presidential candidate so far to make Social Security an anchor of his campaign. (WSJ, 11/10)

But with less than two months before the 2008 voting begins, candidates have generally been reluctant to confront the Social Security issue. (WP, 11/10)

——————————————————————————–

Saving and Protecting Social Security
A Plan to Ensure Retirement Security for All Americans
http://www.fred08.com/virtual/socialsecurity.aspx

One thing is very clear … if any GOP candidate wins the 2008 presidential election, women can beging to say goodbye to their reproductive freedom. All have made it clear that Roe v. Wade should be repealed … an, yes, this includes Giulliani, who has promised 'strict constructionist' judges. If the women of America value their freedom, they must vote against the Republicans. It is that simple.

Mike Huckabee is the only candidate who is passionately pro-life. I get so tired of politicians toting pro-life stances as a means to garner support. If one believes that life begins at conception, then we are dealing with mass murder. If not, then lets treat it like just another piece of legislation or political ideology. I think most candidates treat it like another piece of legislation–I think Huckabee sees it as a moral travesty needing urgent attention. Let's be consistent here: if Thompson really firmly believed that life begins at conception, then he would believe that those "lives" are protected by the US Constitution.

Fred Thompson has failed to live up to the billing many of his admirers expected of him. When I see his speaking demeanor I'm reminded of the Tom Hanks' character, Forest Gump. This man does not bring passion to the podium. He will not get the nomination, it will be Rudy for the Gop. Anyway Hillary will win the Presidency so it doesn't matter who Gop nominate.

That guy's running for president? Are you KIDDING ME?

dear Kate in Aurora CO

you have the lib talking points down to a tee and even if you were correct ( and your not ) why would the impression of the GOP's inability to take care of children make you advocate the killing of the unborn ??

your logic is flawed !!

and Religion has nothing to do with the prevention of the killing of the innocent !!

I'm agnostic and i live in New England and I'm against the murder of the unborn child on simple logical moral grounds !!

as far as the death penalty that's an easy answer for those people have had the right to life and have forfeited it by killing and or torchering other innocent people !! If a person raps and kills a 9 yr old child then in my book they deserve death but an unborn child does not !!

ill flip around your ridicules logic on you !!! how can you advocate the killing of the innocent unborn in the name of " woman's rights" but not the criminally horrific in the name of justice !!

what it comes down to is the left has no logic in the abortion argument and henceforth you try to obfuscate the matter !!

Kate, Abortion is wrong and all your bait and switch tactics will not change that fact !!

Ron Paul is an avid pro-lifer? Wow, that ought to piss off 37,000 donors! That's almost as good as Huckabee's Norris undorsement. Libertariarianism only for men?

Who is the favorite Republican of the large majority of editorial board members, OpEd columnists, "news" writers/program directors, etc. for ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Public Television (KCET), New York Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times? Rudy Giuliani, of course, due to his liberal social values/values. There is no conspiracy. Liberals tend to go into professions that are predominately "low pay" but have "high social influence" like journalism, acting (TV, movies), music, and teaching at all levels (pre-school through PhD programs (one aberration is law, a high paying profession dominated by social issue liberals). Conservatives disproportionaly tend to go into business and military, where there is very little ability to influence popular culture and advance pro-life, pro traditional family, and respect for Judeo-Christian values. The end result of all of this is a culture that has dramatically lunged to the left since the early 1960s (the leftward drift has coincided with the spread of TVs in nearly every American home). First talk radio and then Foc News became widely popular as there was pent up demand by social issue conservatives to get their news from a more balanced media "filter". LET"S BE BRUTALLY HONEST, CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL ACTIVISTS AND MODERATES SEEK TO INFLUENCE EVERYTHING FROM WHAT OUR CHILDREN LEARN FROM PRE-SCHOOL THROUGH DOCTORAL PROGRAMS, WHAT VALUES WE HOLD, EMPLOYMENT POLICIES, IMMIGRATION POLICY, HEALTHCARE, TAX POLICY, ETC. For those in the so-called political center and those who don't particpate in the political process (including those who don't vote), considering taking an interest in the world in which you live. There is more to life than eating, sleeping, sports, and entertainment. I do respect your right to be apathetic and cynical. In closing, PRO-LIFERS, don't let the "media elites" shape and advocate will be the Republican nominee for President. However, don't be stupid. If Rudy Giuliani does win the nomination (he is my last choice), we should support him over Hillary and hold Rudy to his word of "appointing strict constructionists" to the U.S. Supreme Ct.

My question is how do the majority of pro-lifers explain their support of the death penalty? -Kate

Only a wilded-eyed, kool-aid drunk liberal would compare unborn, unblemished, children to murders. But hey, let’s follow this warped sence of reason and find out what the libs preferences really are.. Kill the kids and keep the murders or Keep the kids and kill the murders??
Kate’s choice is obvious, what’s yours??

As a Republcan, I have been forced to come to a disturbing realization. I compared the background, the voice, and the policies of all the candidates. As much as I cannot admit it, I have to support the candidate that will be best for our country. Although it is way too liberal for my taste, I think Hillary Clinton will get my vote… Seriously, we need to do whats right for the people not just our party.

Thompson? Come on NRLC. Someone wake him up ! I bet he doesn't even know this yet cause he's takin a nap. He is not a strong Pro Lifer. They must have missed his interview with Tim Russert. He's losing ground cause he's freakin boring and he cannot communicate without a script just like our current president.

They should have endorsed Huckabee.

here we go with the hate from the left !! "BUT KEEP IT TO YOURSELF, you moronic rednecks." ………………….that's a racist remark buddy !!

listen,

Live Free or Die Trying, your not talking about yourself when your advocating genocide of the unborn child your killing an innocent being !!

As far as the story goes anyone who saw Fred gaffs on meet the press 2 weeks ago knows he is wishy washy on abortion anyway !!

McCain in 08 !!!

This is actually very good news for Rudy Giuliani, as it confirms the division of the Religious Right. Read full analysis here.

CONCLUSION: John McCain is the best pick for pro-lifers.

Posted By Gregg K., Huntington Beach, CA : November 12, 2007 3:25 pm

Gregg you do realize that when you fight a war based on lies and you plan to bomb Iran when you become president is a violation of the 'right to life' concept. Why do you Christians not comprehend this. Hypocrites.

To Mike:

Somehow I doubt that 3 SCOTUS seats will open up in the next 4 years…

He has openly and repeatedly said that criminalizing all abortion on a nation level is not the answer. I agree. I'm pro-life, but I'm also a realist.

Federalism. Leave it up to the states. Forcing a stance on a topic that will NEVER be agreed upon (morally or legally) by an entire nation is stupid.
Using it to decide our Presidency is even more stupid.

I'm not sold on Fred, but I do like alot of his common sense ideas to things. Immigration and taxes being two of them.

Oh, and the "tired, dead, actor" comments aren't funny anymore. Really, they've already been worn out.

I don't have anything negative to say about Fred Thompson. But, it is absurd beyond comprehension that any candidate other than Mike Huckabee would get this endorsement. Yet again, we have vivid proof that the powers at be in current presidential politics have no regard for the positions and beliefs of their constituency.

If you read this article and want a candidate who will stand up for you, I urge you to support Mike Huckabee and take my challenge by visiting: http://www.abuckforhuck.com

With your help, he will make a difference!

My question is how do the majority of pro-lifers explain their support of the death penalty? So in other words you will fight to save the live of an innocent unborn but fast forward 18 years you will gladly flip the switch? What makes the death penalty so much different from abortion? It is still murder and according to your bibles murder in any form especially for revenge is wrong. You rally for laws forcing a woman to give birth to a child she either does not want or cannot support (as well as the rape & incense cases) but then once that baby is out of the womb you no longer want to claim any responsiblity such as the recently vetoed healthcare reform bill. If in fact abortion is wrong and murder then again your bible states it is not your place to judge. Don't waste any more valuable time making up laws to impose your beliefs.

It doesn't matter what a candidate's position is on anything else, if he's even remotely qualified to be President, or even if he knows enough to come in out of the rain; as long as he's "Pro-life" these sheep will follow him anywhere.

Sad, very sad…

Wow, this wasn't as bad as the Robertson Giuliani endorsement, but come on, Fred Thompson…they could have at least thought of Mike Huckabee…who is more likeable in every regards.

I wouldn't worry about it too much as I can't imagine Americans being dumb enough to vote another Republican into office after 8 years of W.

When the next President takes office (whichever Democrat, at this point not sure which is the best), and likely appoints 3 liberal Supreme Court judges, we won't have to worry about Roe v Wade being overturned for a long time.

I think it's interesting that these people seem to have forgotten Fred Thompson's efforts as a lobbyist for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, a pro-choice group.

Also, he's waffled on the abortion issue in the past. He's said he's against criminalizing it and believes that it's no business of the federal government.

He's not saying anything like that now, of course. Right now, he's trying to fool voters into believing that he really is that wise old character from Law & Order.

He was probably taking a nap when he got the good news.

Girl who can't be a woman and state her name "Live Free or Die Trying". Your body is your body, but a living organism inside you is NOT your body, but ANOTHER body.

I do agree with you that they shouldn't make laws about it. No one will adhere to the laws. I think it's disgusting that people will kill their dude or dudette inside them, but laws won't affect it at all. It's a waste of time and money. Education is what should take place. People are evil, they will do what the want. We DON'T need more bloody laws about abortion or homosexuals.

So National Right to Life has endorsed a man who is dead from the neck up…..

Very disappointing that they didn't endorse Mike Huckabee.

Pro-life pick priority:
1) Mike Huckabee (but can he win?)
2) John McCain (he can win if primary votes don't age discriminate; then he would capture lots of independents and win large mandate against Hillary in Nov. '08)
3) Mitt Romney (inconsistent but moved in right direction)
4) Fred Thompson (inconsistent)
5) Rudy Guliani (unacceptable)
CONCLUSION: John McCain is the best pick for pro-lifers.

They should be endorsing Ron Paul.

He is the only person i have heard say that roe vs wade should be repealed.

Ron Paul is a true right to life candidate and is the only person i have heard say that we need to secure our civil liberties here.

Wake up people Fred Thompson is a joke and has no clue what is going on in the world, he recently said to cbs that Iraq had WMDS! What planet is fred living on?

way to go fred!!

Oh please, tell me who I need to vote for, so they can make all of my decisions for me. I wouldn't vote for any one who would try to tell me what I could or couldn't do about my health, or my body. You are entitled to you opinion, BUT KEEP IT TO YOURSELF, you moronic rednecks.

We Republicans need to get behind someone that can beat Clinton. Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

The National Right to Life Committee should have endorsed Ron Paul. He has been a defender of the unborn for many years and has authored or sponsored legislation that declares life begins at conception and that would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by putting abortion as a state-decided issue. He is an ob-gyn who has delivered over 4,000 babies.

Someone should advise this Rip Van Winkle to take a nap. He looks so tired.

They should have endorsed Mike Huckabee. "Hollywood" Fred Thompson is a fraud who has done paid lobbying FOR abortion in the past.

We values voters don't care who the irrelevant power-hungry leaders like Pat Robertson and the committee-run organizations like Right to Life try to push on us, we can see who is true and who is not!

Huckbee 08!