Friday, September 08, 2006

Green's extreme abortion position

Abortion rights seems to have disappeared from the political discourse in the Wisconsin governor's race, no doubt to the relief of Extreme Mark Green. Green wants the anti-choice people to know he's one of them, but would rather not have the general public realize how extreme he is on the issue.

A Des Moines Register story offers a reminder:
Nussle asserts he'd outlaw all abortions in Iowa
'I am not for an exception for rape and incest,' he says. He would permit use for saving mothers' lives.

Boone, Ia. -- Republican Jim Nussle said Wednesday he would sign legislation as governor banning all abortions in Iowa, except those that would save the life of the mother.

Democrats had accused the Manchester congressman of trying to soften his position on the social issue.

It reassured social conservatives made nervous by reports that Nussle would consider keeping abortion legal and prompted sharp criticism from Democrat gubernatorial nominee Chet Culver, who has said he would block attempts to restrict access to abortions.

Nussle's position sets him apart from most GOP candidates in states with competitive races for governor, coming at a time when regulation of abortion could be handed back to the states if Roe vs. Wade is overturned...

Among Republicans running in competitive gubernatorial races, only U.S. Rep. Mark Green of Wisconsin shares Nussle's position.
The Wisconsin State Journal reported in April:
Green wants to revive Wisconsin's criminal abortion statute, which banned all abortions except those to save the life of the mother and exposed doctors who performed abortions to prison time. The law remains on the books but hasn't been enforceable since a 1970 federal court ruling, three years before the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade.
The question for Green, which no one has asked, is would he sign an abortion ban? It seems pretty clear the answer is yes, but that should be on the record before voters choose a governor on Nov. 6. It is not just a hypothetical question, as new laws in South Dakota and Louisiana have demonstrated. It's too important to let Green have a pass.

Brew City Brawler says the Journal Sentinel needs to ask Green a few more questions, instead of just printing the pap he provides to their "Issue of the Day."


At 5:25 PM, Blogger bruce fischer said...

Once again, you paint a pro-life candidate as an "extremist". This is because the candidate will not compromise his principles by condoning abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or (in your words) when the life of the mother is at risk. The pro-life position is clear: an unborn child is a human being. To "abort" a child is to kill him or her. There is no doubt that the crimes of rape and incest are horrendous, and the criminals should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, killing the child only adds another victim to the crime: two wrongs do not make it right. In the event the mother's life is at stake, you have consistently mis-represented the pro-life position. Here is a quote from Pro-Life Wisconsin, taken directly from their web site: "In high risk cases (such as an ectopic pregnancy), all necessary steps should be taken to save the woman’s life and the baby’s life. If a preborn baby dies while the doctor is trying to save the mother’s or baby’s life, this is not considered an abortion." Did you catch that? The pro-life position is NOT to let the mother die: it's to remove the child while making every effort to save BOTH. That is not "extreme", nor is the view of a "whack job", the other moniker you have attached to a pro-life candidate. Being pro-life (not "anti-choice", your preferred tag) means you value the sanctity of life, most especially the life of the most vulnerable, the unborn.

At 5:33 PM, Blogger Xoff said...

Hey, Bruce, take a deep breath and read it again. I don't see the "life of the mother" claim you're responding to.

As for extreme, let me quote from the story:

"Among Republicans running in competitive gubernatorial races, only U.S. Rep. Mark Green of Wisconsin shares Nussle's position."

Your boy is out there on the fringe.

At 5:48 PM, Blogger demdiva said...

Green is indeed extreme on the issue of abortion, and on all kinds of women's reproductive rights, voting to block access to birth control, pre-natal care, and preventative care like cancer screening.

But he has answered that he supports a criminal abortion ban. Wisconsin already has a law on the books that makes abortion a felony for women and doctors - it was never repealed after Roe v. Wade, and would go back into effect if Roe were overturned.

Green's campaign said to Wispol: "Green supports the laws that are on the books in Wisconsin. State statute prohibits abortions except to save the life of the mother. The law is not enforced because of the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. . . . Asked if there were any circumstances under which Green would support the right to an abortion, Punzenberger said, "The best answer I can give you on that is that Mark supports the laws that are on the books in Wisconsin."

We've got him on record as supporting a criminal abortion ban in Wisconsin - one that is worse than South Dakota's in terms of the penalties it provides.

The next question: will the mainstream media cover it, or will they just let him off the hook?

At 8:34 PM, Blogger Troy Fullerton said...

When will the Left be giving their rationale for why it's okay to murder a 9-month-old baby, and will the media keep letting Doyle off the hook or question his extreme liberal views?

Doyle's views may be okay in Pelosi territory, but this is Wisconsin, and Jim Doyle needs to come clean and admit to citizens why he thinks children deserve no protection whatsoever.

At 9:32 PM, Blogger bruce fischer said...

I took a deep breath... and looked at your comment on May 10th: "What makes him a wack job is his willingness to go the extra mile and put an unborn fetus ahead of a living, breathing woman whose life is at risk." This is the "life of the Mother" position I am referring to. A position which is NOT pro-life. As for the remark about Green "Among Republicans running in competitive gubernatorial races..." How's that for a qualified statement? What's the sample size on "competitive gubernatorial races"? Please. You're pro abortion. From what I've read, I take it you think it's just fine for a woman to kill her unborn child. Green is pro-life. He is consistent in his view; i.e. it's never okay to kill an innocent child. Once again, this is not extreme, nor is it fringe. It is a very common pro-life position.

At 12:26 AM, Blogger George Roberts said...

It may not be an extreme moral position to you, Bruce, and it may be a very common position among others of your beliefs -- but this is about politics.

An extreme position politically is one with which most Americans and Wisconsinites disagree . . . not to mention the law of the land.

Got it? Now, how do you stand on the death penalty for people already born, pro-lifer?


Post a Comment

<< Home