Giuliani Holds Firm On Abortion Funding

(AP)  Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Thursday defended his record favoring the use of public money for abortions, saying he wouldn't try to undo a Supreme Court ruling allowing the procedures.

"Ultimately I believe it's an individual right and a woman should make that choice," the former New York mayor said during a Statehouse news conference where he picked up three endorsements.

Support for abortion rights is unpopular with conservatives who dominate the GOP in South Carolina, an early voting state.

"I tell people what I think. I tell them (to) evaluate me as I am and do not expect them to agree with me on everything. I don't agree with me on everything," Giuliani said. "If that's the most important thing, then I'm comfortable with the fact you won't vote for me."

The comments came as South Carolina lawmakers push a measure that would require women seeking abortions to first view ultrasound images of their fetus. If the South Carolina measure is approved, the state would be the first to make such a requirement. Other states require the images be made available to women.

Giuliani said states should make the call on such issues. "The Legislature of South Carolina should make its decision about that," he said. He also said states should make the decision whether to use public money for abortions.

Conservatives and political experts in South Carolina said Giuliani's moderate stance on abortion will hamper his ability to win votes here.

"He's toast," said Clemson University political scientist Dave Woodard. "I think it's going to be really hard for him to overcome this in South Carolina."

While Republicans in South Carolina oppose abortion by degrees — allowing abortions in certain circumstances, such as a mother's health, rape or incest — there's little room on public financing, said Oran Smith, executive director of the Palmetto Family Council, an anti-abortion group.

"That's usually one of the first things off the list when you talk about things related to abortion," Smith said.

Some Giuliani supporters said the abortion issue doesn't bother them. "I'm really for the whole package. I feel like I'm comfortable being for him," said Rosemary Byerly, a staunch abortion opponent from Inman.

But Alexia Newman, a state Republican Party first vice chairwoman who runs Spartanburg's Carolina Pregnancy Center, said she felt duped by Giuliani's recent comments to the state Republican executive committee that if elected he would appoint judges who favor a strict interpretation of the Constitution to the Supreme Court.

However, Giuliani said those comments weren't a nod in the direction of undoing Roe v. Wade.

"If I'm going to appoint strict constructionist judges, which I'm going to do, for the reason that they are going to strictly interpret the Constitution, then, as president, I have to be a strict constructionist," Giuliani said. "The present state of the law on these issues is not something that I would seek to change."

Giuliani also said the state should be left to make its own decision about the Confederate flag, which flies outside the Statehouse.

[fizzal-2009]

What about the doctors rights loss of an aborted customer, they should sue the gov,t for cumlative comissorry damages in loss of shots,exams, perscriptions with doctorly advise, along with the associated income.

[motherjones-2009]

DOES ANYONE KONW WHO MARGIE SCHOEDINGER WAS?

[randalds]

Regardless of how a person feels about the morality of aborition, a person with a law degree has to know that the Roe v. Wade decision exemplified judicial acitivism in its very worst form, not strict constructionism!
Posted by gpfrasco at 08:30 PM : Apr 05, 2007

That's right, let's return the strict literal interpretation of the Constitution. You know the one where only men could vote and then only if they owned land. The one where black people only counted as 3/5th human. You know, that Constitution. Strict constructionism all the way.

[kansas1946]

a person with a law degree has to know that the Roe v. Wade decision exemplified judicial acitivism in its very worst form, not strict constructionism!
**************
I don't have a law degree, but I respecfully disagree. The court took the stand that a woman owns her body, and that it is her "right" to control it. Even abortion is not in the constituion, the grand ideal that we own our own minds and souls (and bodies) is certainly suggested by the constitution. And even if it was activism which I don't beleive, it certainly is not activism at its worst. That would be their decisions to take peoples property for private gain which they did a couple of years ago. Now THAT is activism at its worst.

[gpfrasco]

I admire Giuliani's honesty about his position on abortion rights. It truly is commendable.
However, I do not believe that Giuliani is being honest in his statements about legal strict constructionism as it relates to abortion. It cannot honestly be argued that the people who wrote our Federal Constitution clearly intended to say anything about abortion rights. (E.g., where is abortion mentioned in the Constitution, or anything that even realistically or clearly relates to abortion?) Consequently, if we consider only legalities, abortion is clearly under the purview of the legislatures, not the courts. Regardless of how a person feels about the morality of aborition, a person with a law degree has to know that the Roe v. Wade decision exemplified judicial acitivism in its very worst form, not strict constructionism!

[randalds]

Rudy has no chance of being elected president because there is not a snow balls chance in hell that he'll make it through the primaries. The church mice that have the republican party by the balls won't vote for him. Even if a miracle occurs and he is the nominee all of the holier then thou types will sit on their hands on election day because they just won't be able to bring themselves to vote for a pro-choice candidate. And as Bush proved a republican can not win if the lunatic fringe religious right doesn't turn out to vote.

[kansas1946]

I am not a big Giuliani fan, but God it is refreshing to hear a politician say, "This is what I believe and if you can't vote for me because of it, don't."
Not only is it refreshing, it is almost unbelievable. He moves up a whole lot of notches on my esteem belt for that.

[ianlou]

erichsh,
Giuliani has my support also, he's the best Democrat the Republicans currently have to offer.
In reference to your comment about Tom Delay and his interest in Pages, I think you meant Tom Foley. I know, I also have a hard sometimes keeping so much scum straight in my head.

[erichsh]

Giuliani is dammed by the press/democrats if he does, and dammed if he doesn't. If he supports abortion rights he's alienating the conservative base. If he opposes it he's a right-wing firebrand who'll set the women's movement back for decades. I live in NYC and have seen what he's done for this city - he's got my support.

Oh, and for those who like to hold up Tom Delay as a poster boy for Republican sexual miscreants, remember he resigned over a series of IM's involving no physical contact with a page, whereas Gerry Studds actively had *** with a 17-year-old page and went on to hold his office for years thereafter.

[jn122736]

"would much rather be a member of the " 'Holier-Than-Thou' republican party" than the party of no morals, God hating Democrats. At least SOME of us have ethics and morals."

Posted by BIGDADPATRIO at 03:29 PM : Apr 05, 2007
-----------------
Why is it that the word "hate" is used consistently, almost habitually, in most republican comments? Could it be because it is predominant in their mindset/character?