Clinton’s view of abortion should give voters pause
During an interview on “The View,” Hillary Clinton doubled down on her abortion position again claiming that the unborn child has no constitutional rights, even hours before delivery. I am pro-life, but by no means a single-issue voter. It should be understood, though, that one’s position on abortion is a definitive marker or at least lead indicator of one’s ability or willingness to reason clearly and be factually informed.
It may be, in this case, a canary in the coal mine (part of a flock actually) or a foretaste of the quality of decision-making we can expect from Clinton on a range of potential issues that she as president would be in the position of influencing.
Please understand that it’s not my intention to malign Clinton but merely to point out error where I see it. If in a clear and well-formed conscience someone can draw an arbitrary line across the birth canal distinguishing human life from fetal tissue, then it’s evidently a line drawn from political motive or social agenda and not from any position based on sound reason or science.
Perhaps if the child in the womb had the ability to vote, she would be inclined to draw the line at conception? But drawing the line anywhere postconception, once the child is launched on the trajectory of life, encroaches ever closer to infanticide, which for now remains illegal.