When is “pro-life” not pro-life?

When is “pro-life” not pro-life?

Here’s the headline: “Pro-life Democrat vying for governor”. It’s a Washington Times story about Democrat Bill Ritter challenging Gov. Bill Owens. All the Democrats are excited because they think they have taken the pro-life issue off the table by advancing a “pro-life” candidate. So just what does a pro-life candidate look like to these people?

Bill Ritter, the former Denver district attorney who’s running unchallenged for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, doesn’t describe himself as pro-life—but he is also not pro-choice—thus violating what has become a virtual litmus test for Democratic officeholders.

That’s not an auspicious beginning. Thus we have the true shape of things emerging.

For his part, Mr. Ritter doesn’t shy away from his opposition to abortion, although he’s quick to assure Democrats that he has no intention of advancing a pro-life political plank. “I’m opposed to abortion as a matter of conscience for me, but our agenda doesn’t involve changing the law,” Mr. Ritter said at a meeting of Drinking Liberally, a club for young, urbane Democrats. His agenda places the emphasis on reducing unintended pregnancies and promoting adoption as an alternative to abortion. He said he also would restore state funding for family planning cut by Republicans, and that he would have signed the emergency-contraception bill recently vetoed by Mr. Owens.

He’s no different than Mario Cuomo… or Bill Clinton

Technorati Tags: , , , ,