# Fred Thompson would ban abortion, gay marriage **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 17, 2007, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002 "2007-08-17T21:50:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/21 "2007-08-18T05:12:32Z")
[QUOTE=Leaper] [Thompson denies supporting a federal anti-gay marriage amendment.](http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTY1MTQ1NWM3ZWQ5MTIxYjk3ZTIzNGJlZTI3YTBhZDA=) [/QUOTE] Kinda crummy of “team Thompson” to say that “I’m afraid CNN story you linked mischaracterized Thompson’s comment on gay marriage” in the linked article. Weather he said what he actually meant or not, Thompson definitely answered yes to the “would you actively push for a anti-gay marriage amendment” question in the linked video. He then went on to talk about the “full faith and credit”, but he never went back and corrected his statement about supporting the gay marriage amendment. Seems rather childish to blame CNN for reporting what he said rather then what he now claims he meant. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/22 "2007-08-18T05:35:48Z")
I dont quite get it why he’s spinning at all. He seems intent on playing to the knuckle-walking Bible-thumpers (meaning no disrespect to genuine troglodytes in the audience…) Which means he has to be dead solid on those issues, a wink and a nod ain’t gonna get it. Once he’s solid there, he may make a few gestures to the sane center, but not until. None of this makes much sense. ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/23 "2007-08-18T07:45:09Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] No. The ballot initiative was to remove the law banning abortions, not to ban abortions. [/quote] “No,” yourself. The very first line of your link: “A ballot measure that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota was rejected on Tuesday.” Later in your own link: “The Legislature passed the law last winter in an attempt to prompt a court challenge aimed at getting the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the nation.” > [@](#): > > I don’t really care whether you are reassured about anything, especially since you don’t even live in this country. I lived in the United States until a year ago. In a few years’ time it’s entirely possible I’ll be living in the United States again, depending on the vagaries of the job market. Whether you like it or not U.S. policy affects me. So spare me your condescension. > [@](#): > > I’m just saying that abortions are pretty hard to get in some states now, so banning them completely in those states doesn’t change things all that much. People will just go out of state to get abortions. And most people in the US do want abortions to be legal. We might even see a constitutional amendment passed to protect abortion rights if Roe were overturned. That is, I’m sorry, asinine. That’s like saying that repealing the laws against stealing from poor people wouldn’t change all that much; after all, it’s not like they have anything to steal. If Roe does get overturned, it will be poor families living in those states…families that don’t have the time or the resources to go doctor-shopping across state lines…that will get screwed. And you want to toss them over the rail in the hopes of getting a _constitutional amendment_? Do you honestly expect a constitional amendment legalizing abortion to pass _two-thirds_ of the House and Senate, let alone the states, anytime in the next freakin’ decade? No Republican would ever…_ever_…be caught voting for such an amendment, and the Democrats can’t even get 60 votes in the Senate for cloture right now. And for this you want to throw out Roe? ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/24 "2007-08-18T08:10:52Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] My link was a direct quote from the text of the article. Any misrepresentation is not mine. [/QUOTE] Yes. I read it and listened to the interview and he doesn’t say that he’d ban abortion. He doesn’t say that he’d ban gay marriage. From the opening paragraph: > [@CNN](#): > > Likely Republican White House hopeful Fred Thompson told CNN Friday that **he would work to** overturn Roe v. Wade if elected president, and **would push for** a constitutional amendment that protects states from being forced to **honor gay marriages performed in other states**. Any misrepresentation is most certainly yours. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/25 "2007-08-18T10:35:44Z")
[QUOTE=Quartz] Any misrepresentation is most certainly yours. [/QUOTE] [Perhaps you missed this.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8890881&postcount=4) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/26 "2007-08-18T13:49:29Z")
[QUOTE=Orbifold] “No,” yourself. The very first line of your link: “A ballot measure that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota was rejected on Tuesday.” Later in your own link: “The Legislature passed the law last winter in an attempt to prompt a court challenge aimed at getting the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the nation.” [/quote] Yes, and the very next sentence says: “Instead of filing a lawsuit, however, opponents gathered petition signatures to place the measure on the general election ballot for a statewide vote.” Opponents put it on the ballot to overturn the law. > [@](#): > > I lived in the United States until a year ago. In a few years’ time it’s entirely possible I’ll be living in the United States again, depending on the vagaries of the job market. Whether you like it or not U.S. policy affects me. So spare me your condescension. Well, perhaps when you move back here, you’ll be more up on the news stories like that one and you’ll actually understand them instead of misrepresenting them. The ballot initiative was in reaction to the legislative ban. > [@](#): > > That is, I’m sorry, asinine. That’s like saying that repealing the laws against stealing from poor people wouldn’t change all that much; after all, it’s not like they have anything to steal. It’s asinine to state a fact? Interesting… > [@](#): > > If Roe does get overturned, it will be poor families living in those states…families that don’t have the time or the resources to go doctor-shopping across state lines…that will get screwed. And you want to toss them over the rail in the hopes of getting a _constitutional amendment_? Do you honestly expect a constitional amendment legalizing abortion to pass _two-thirds_ of the House and Senate, let alone the states, anytime in the next freakin’ decade? No Republican would ever…_ever_…be caught voting for such an amendment, and the Democrats can’t even get 60 votes in the Senate for cloture right now. And for this you want to throw out Roe? Frankly, I haven’t said anything at all about what I want. I’m just stating what I see will happen. And if Roe gets overturned, it’ll be once of the best things that could happen to the pro-choice movement-- it’ll usher in a Democratic majority in Congress and in many states that hasn’t been seen in years. In fact, the Democrats might not have to rely on very many of the pro-choice Republicans (there are some of those, you know) to pass such an amendment. Your analysis is static, and doesn’t take into account the reaction of the voters if \*Roe \*were overturned. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/27 "2007-08-18T18:43:08Z")
[QUOTE=Contrapuntal] [Perhaps you missed this.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8890881&postcount=4) [/QUOTE] I did indeed. My apologies. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/28 "2007-08-18T21:47:56Z")
To me, he’s just another ambulance chaser-and a Washington insider to boot. I don’t see this guy doing anything spectacular; much less be an effective leader. Does is acting stint make him a good candidate? 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2007, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/29 "2007-08-18T22:04:37Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] To me, he’s just another ambulance chaser-and a Washington insider to boot. I don’t see this guy doing anything spectacular; much less be an effective leader. Does is acting stint make him a good candidate? 🆒 [/QUOTE] Yea, I heard all the hype and so tuned in to one of his interviews on cable TV ready to be impressed (I don’t watch L&O, so I didn’t really know who he was). I came back pretty under-whelmed. His overly laid back persona seems too much like ambivalence, and what he actually had to say about various issues were pretty boiler plate. “This election cycles Wesley Clarke” seems the best prediction I’ve heard for F. Thompson. Putting an actor up for election seemed like a good idea to Repubs dissatisfied with their current candidates, just like putting up a General did to Dems in 2006. ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/30 "2007-08-19T03:48:49Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Yes, and the very next sentence says: “Instead of filing a lawsuit, however, opponents gathered petition signatures to place the measure on the general election ballot for a statewide vote.” Opponents put it on the ballot to overturn the law. [/quote] You’re right, I had not seen that. My apologies. > [@](#): > > Well, perhaps when you move back here, you’ll be more up on the news stories like that one and you’ll actually understand them instead of misrepresenting them. The ballot initiative was in reaction to the legislative ban. Charming. Moving on. > [@](#): > > It’s asinine to state a fact? Interesting… It’s asinine to claim it “wouldn’t change all that much”. I imagine the people in the affected states would think it changes quite a bit. The fact that they have so little access to abortion now makes what access they have more valuable, not less. > [@](#): > > Frankly, I haven’t said anything at all about what I want. I’m just stating what I see will happen. And if Roe gets overturned, it’ll be once of the best things that could happen to the pro-choice movement-- it’ll usher in a Democratic majority in Congress and in many states that hasn’t been seen in years. In fact, the Democrats might not have to rely on very many of the pro-choice Republicans (there are some of those, you know) to pass such an amendment. The current administration has all but gutted the fourth amendment, stampeded willy-nilly into Iraq, outed covert agents for political reasons, appointed buffoons and pandering charlatans to every level of government, and pissed American credibility on the world stage down the toilet. The resulting tidal wave of outrage swept the Democratic party to a five…count 'em…five-seat gain in the Senate in 2006. You really think that the loss of Roe would propel them into another _eighteen_ seats, to push them up to the necessary 67? And let’s not even talk about Republicans. Their record of moderate Republicans when it comes to actually voting against the Republican base on key issues is, shall we say, weak. > [@](#): > > Your analysis is static, and doesn’t take into account the reaction of the voters if \*Roe \*were overturned. And your analysis ignores the stampede of lobbyists and politicians that will be screaming for abortion bans at every level of government, state and federal, the instant Roe is cast aside. Every Republican politician will finally have an issue where they can promise red meat to their base and…for a change…actually follow through at no cost to themselves. And every Democratic politician will be forced to explain why they’re in favour of killing babies on prime-time news. Public opinion in swaying to the pro-choice side, yes. But since when does public opinion of the nation as a whole actually matter, compared to the public opinion of well-oiled and voiciferous lobbies determined to get out the vote on their side? There are still plenty of pro-life voters out there, and the chance to slam through their own laws will energize them tremendously. Whatever. I’ve gotten off-topic and more acrimonious than I intended; I don’t think I’ll be posting to this thread again although I’ll continue to read replies. My apologies. ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/31 "2007-08-19T08:14:13Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] To me, he’s just another ambulance chaser-and a Washington insider to boot. I don’t see this guy doing anything spectacular; much less be an effective leader. Does is acting stint make him a good candidate? 🆒 [/QUOTE] Thompson was dogged about establishing a precedent for true federalism while he was in the Senate: he voted against even good or necessary laws if he felt that they weren’t the province of the federal government, but instead somethign the individual states needed to take care of. Any politician who is willing to take a stand like that is going to be hugely attractive to the business and libertarian wings of the party. The fact that the states (left or right leaning) tend to be less willing to enact gay marriage proposals or allow abortions appeals to many members of the social conservative wing. As an added bonus, the man speaks well, and has an air of command and control about him. Having a head diplomat seem to be in control of himself, and not wont to be a compromiser is a recall to the Reagan days. All Republicans idolize Reagan. Oh, yeah, speaking of that: we like actors, too. When was the last Democratic general Prez? Jackson? ---
**Author:** ![if6was9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e47c2d/32.png) [@if6was9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/if6was9)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 8:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/32 "2007-08-19T08:31:24Z")
and pretty much anything else the fundie right would demand… this is news because… ---
**Author:** ![if6was9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e47c2d/32.png) [@if6was9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/if6was9)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/33 "2007-08-19T08:33:06Z")
[QUOTE=mswas] **My Father** doesn’t expect him to declare, he thinks he’s just fundraising so he can influence the vote and gain favors. That being said, the President doesn’t have such powers to do those things. [/QUOTE] Og speaks to you? ---
**Author:** ![if6was9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e47c2d/32.png) [@if6was9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/if6was9)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/34 "2007-08-19T08:36:40Z")
[QUOTE=the raindog] **bolding mine** _Absolutely._ [/QUOTE] You right-wingers keep on thinking that! Best thing us Dems have going for us. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/35 "2007-08-19T10:35:21Z")
[QUOTE=if6was9] You right-wingers keep on thinking that! Best thing us Dems have going for us. 😉 [/QUOTE] Heck of a lot better than your \* candidates. \* 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/36 "2007-08-19T14:26:57Z")
Which major Repub candidates for President WOULDN’T work to ban abortion and prevent gay marriage? ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/37 "2007-08-19T14:35:55Z")
[QUOTE=Diomedes] Thompson was dogged about establishing a precedent for true federalism while he was in the Senate: he voted against even good or necessary laws if he felt that they weren’t the province of the federal government, but instead somethign the individual states needed to take care of. [/QUOTE] Do you have any examples? Glancing at his voting record [here](http://ontheissues.org/Fred_Thompson.htm), he apparently voted for the federal gov’t to prohibit flag burning, cloning (not funding of cloning, but the actual act itself) and partial birth abortions. I would think that a true federalist wouldn’t feel that any of these things were within Congresses ennumerated powers ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/38 "2007-08-19T16:28:23Z")
[QUOTE=Evil Captor] Which major Repub candidates for President WOULDN’T work to ban abortion and prevent gay marriage? [/QUOTE] The one who is leading in the polls right now-- Rudy Giuliani. ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2007, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/39 "2007-08-19T23:34:39Z")
[QUOTE=Malodorous] Do you have any examples? Glancing at his voting record [here](http://ontheissues.org/Fred_Thompson.htm), he apparently voted for the federal gov’t to prohibit flag burning, cloning (not funding of cloning, but the actual act itself) and partial birth abortions. I would think that a true federalist wouldn’t feel that any of these things were within Congresses ennumerated powers [/QUOTE] From that same site: Fred Thompson is an outspoken and passionate supporter of “states rights”. He was often a lone voice in the Senate cautioning against the creeping effects of Federalism that overburdens taxpayers and state and local governments alike. Thompson says, "Congress routinely passes laws and resulting regulations which are in conflict with state laws and regulations. These federal laws do not state whether or not they are intended to preempt the state regulations. Clearly, members of Congress don’t want their constituents back home asking why their state authority has been stripped. But Congress can have it both ways. They leave the legislation ambiguous, knowing that the federal courts will more often than not interpret the statute as preempting state law. I introduced a bill that essentially said, “Congress must state whether or not the federal legislation is intended to preempt the state regulation.” Period. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2007, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002/40 "2007-08-20T00:05:04Z")
That’s what he _says_, but you suggested that he actually voted against “good and necessary” laws to follow a federalist philosophy. Glancing at his voting record in the linked site, I noted that he apparently has voted to regulate things that are unpopular (flag burning, cloning, partial-birth abortion), even though it seems to me that such regulations at a federal level aren’t consistent with federalism. What specific laws were you thinking of that FT voted against? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fred-thompson-would-ban-abortion-gay-marriage/416002.md?page=3)