www.townhall.com/columnists/terencejeffrey/printtj20041013.shtml
Sarah Degenhart's question was simple, straightfoward and had absolutely nothing to do with Sen. John kerry's long-ago service as an altar boy.
"Senator kerry," she asked in the town hall debate, "suppose you are speaking with a voter who bleieved abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person?."
Kerry replied, "I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that."
Eventually, kerry said: "But you have to afford people their constitutional rights. and that means...making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise."
His logic seems to be: 1) whether you like or not abortion is a constitutional right, 2) we need to make "certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise, "therefore 3) we must use tax dollars to buy abortions for people.
Grant Kerry, too his false premise (presumeably based on the atrocious Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade) that abortion really is a "constitutional right." Would Kerry consistently apply the same logic to taxpayer funding of other constitutional rights-- including those which unlike the "right" to abortion, are expressly guaranteed in the Bill of Rights? Fat Chance.
The second Amendment guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms. "Thus strict application of the Kerry Doctrine--taxpayers must subsidize poor people in doing "whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise" --would mean the government must buy poor people guns.
Sarah Degenhart's question was simple, straightfoward and had absolutely nothing to do with Sen. John kerry's long-ago service as an altar boy.
"Senator kerry," she asked in the town hall debate, "suppose you are speaking with a voter who bleieved abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person?."
Kerry replied, "I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that."
Eventually, kerry said: "But you have to afford people their constitutional rights. and that means...making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise."
His logic seems to be: 1) whether you like or not abortion is a constitutional right, 2) we need to make "certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise, "therefore 3) we must use tax dollars to buy abortions for people.
Grant Kerry, too his false premise (presumeably based on the atrocious Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade) that abortion really is a "constitutional right." Would Kerry consistently apply the same logic to taxpayer funding of other constitutional rights-- including those which unlike the "right" to abortion, are expressly guaranteed in the Bill of Rights? Fat Chance.
The second Amendment guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms. "Thus strict application of the Kerry Doctrine--taxpayers must subsidize poor people in doing "whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise" --would mean the government must buy poor people guns.
