Abortion rights activists were unhappy with the president’s comments, as millions of people are being denied access to abortion care in nearly half the country.
I don’t like a lot of things about Biden, but his comments on abortion have always made sense to me. Pretty much “I personally would never have one, but it’s not my business to tell you what you can do with your body.” Which is really the only proper response from anyone.
I remember him debating Paul Ryan and Ryan said “I don’t understand how you, as a catholic, can be pro-choice” and his answer was essentially “My personal religion needs to stay out of my politics” which I personally think is the even bigger problem with this whole deal.
It’s called a right to choose stance. He can not be in favor of someone getting an abortion, but still acknowledge his personal opinions have no bearing on a woman’s control of her own body.
This is how all people should approach all things. Have your opinion, but accept that your opinion is not, nor ever should be- the driving force behind someone else’s decisions for themselves, their health, and their life.
Ironically most of the Constitutional Law experts will argue that Roe v Wade got the reasoning wrong, even though the decision and the legal effects were right. Because Roe depends on a Constitutional right to privacy, and it’s pretty much the only Supreme Court ruling to claim the Constitution grants a right to privacy. Meanwhile you could fill a book with the number of SCOTUS decisions that rely on denying the Constitution has any mention of a right to privacy.
It really should have hinged on the right to bodily autonomy and the lack of legal personhood of an embryo. Religious definitions of personhood is irrelevant there are as many beliefs about it as there are religious sects. Choosing one religious definition to dictate the legality of abortion is a religious infringement on the beliefs of all other with different beliefs, faith-based or otherwise.
In my opinion, It is crucial for a leader to uphold a clear differentiation between their distinguished responsibilities and personal convictions.
I too like this response. It shows that he keeps his personal beliefs as his own view and understands that governing has little to do with belief and everything to do with providing the people what they need most.
I don’t really have a problem with the president saying “I don’t personally like abortion, but I still stand by a woman’s right to choose”. I’m a staunch atheist and I would much rather work with that style of Christian than the ones who want to force others to follow their own insane rules.
This is actually the type of president we should want. As long as they can do that in all aspects, that is.
Right? Like one who sets the example “I may disagree but my personal opinions aren’t law”
Too many politicians nowadays conflate the two
I think this is a pretty good stance? Seems to read like, “While I’m not a big fan of abortion, it’s not mine or the government’s decision to decide on this matter.”
It’s a great stance for a reasonable right wing politician like him.
I mean, no one ever is “big” on abortion. It’s a traumatic procedure done for many reasons, personal or medical. Don’t want one, don’t get one. I hate it that it’s still somewhat controversial, even where I live, when the laws were passed almost 50 years ago.
I’m very much in favor of safe effective medical procedures of all sorts. Acting as if abortion is something bad that must be tolerated is not helpful.
Abortion rights activists were unhappy with the president’s comments, as millions of people are being denied access to abortion care in nearly half the country.
Then stop voting for Republicans, it’s THAT simple.
I didn’t.
Didn’t help.
The Roe ruling was garbage and deserved to be overturned. As another poster mentioned, basing it on the right to privacy was a mistake.
And people seem to forget that the question is not whether you support abortion or not. That’s irrelevant. The question was always whether there was a Constitutional right to abortion.
