Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Evolving Abortion Stance
Mr. Bill Clinton was expounding on the constitutionality of unborn “persons” the other day.
She said unborn persons have no rights – but called them persons? I am confused. What are they then in ClintonWorld?
Tumors, let’s call them tumors – tumors caused by – something. A disease maybe. Maybe the unborn tumors are really a disease – like alcoholism.
Two people get together and one catches a virus from another and you have a disease. You are cured from the disease when the person is born and becomes a – child?
Let’s move on. Progressives make my head spin when they speak English.
Next, after stating that unborn “persons” have no constitutional rights she says:
“Now, that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support,” she said.”
Translation: Unborn personchildren have a right to healthcare.
Here is the difference between a “an unborn person” with no rights and a woman “carrying a child”.
One is a bow towards the alter of abortion on demand donation$ – where all true progressives worship.
And the other is a hat tip to the welfare state that buys the votes of the 47%.
If Hillary’s stance on persons, children, and abortion seem confusing and self-serving just follow the money and the votes.
That is what all Clintons do.