There aren’t many politicians whose position on abortion is more extreme, or more deplorable, than Hillary Clinton’s.
She is a long-time defender of partial-birth abortion, was instrumental in removing the word “rare” from the Democratic Party platform’s “safe, legal and rare” language on abortion, and she is now calling for repeal of the Hyde Amendment, a bipartisan rule that for 40 years barred taxpayer funds from being used for most abortions through Medicaid.
But Clinton running mate Tim Kaine’s position is worse, at least in one respect. Unlike Clinton, Kaine seems to recognize that there is something about abortion that is wrong, even gravely immoral. Yet, also unlike Clinton, Kaine doesn’t have the courage of his convictions on the issue.
Back in 2005, while running for governor of Virginia, Kaine said he supported “appropriate and reasonable checks on the right to abortion,” including a 24-hour waiting period, parental notification and restrictions on funding through Medicaid. He even pledged to pass a law barring most partial-birth abortions. All of this frightened NARAL Pro-Choice America’s Virginia chapter enough to withhold its endorsement of Kaine.
Things have changed a lot over the last decade. As a Washington Examiner editorial noted, the day after Kaine was named Clinton’s running mate, NARAL blasted an email to supporters with the subject line, “Now THAT’s a vice president!”
And it’s no wonder NARAL is so happy. Since Kaine joined the Senate in 2012, he’s racked up a perfect pro-abortion-rights voting record. And he’s become more outspoken, on several occasions stating his belief that abortion decisions should be left to women, not laws.
Speaking to CNN recently, Kaine explained his current position: “I have a traditional Catholic personal position, but I am very strongly supportive that women should make these decisions and government shouldn’t intrude … I’m a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade and women being able to make these decisions. In government, we have enough things to worry about. We don’t need to make people’s reproductive decisions for them.”
He has also said he is “personally opposed” to abortion but doesn’t want to prohibit others from obtaining it. This is the well-worn path that many pro-abortion rights Catholics — Mario Cuomo, Joe Biden, John Kerry and Rudy Giuliani — have taken over the years, especially as they look to run for higher office.
Someone who holds this position says, in essence, that while I, and my church, think abortion is wrong, I wouldn’t want to impose my belief on others.
This may sound reasonable, but here’s the problem: When someone says, I oppose abortion in my private life but not in my private life, it begs the question: Why do you oppose abortion in your private life?
In Kaine’s case, it’s because he takes the Catholic view that all human life is sacred and that to destroy it is a grave evil. “I have a traditional Catholic personal position,” he told CNN. The Catholic Church teaches that all human beings, including unborn ones, have an inherent right to life. This isn’t just a religious belief. It is based in the scientific fact that fetuses are human beings and the legal principle that all human beings have a right to life.
Clinton doesn’t appear to believe that fetuses are human beings. That’s scientifically flawed, but at least her positions flows logically from her belief, however wrong that belief is.
Kaine, meanwhile, embraces the inconsistent and dishonest position that human life is sacred, but that people should be allowed to destroy it for pretty much any reason. Such a stance may seem like it helps lawmakers balance the demands between their public and private lives. But is actually reveals something much more malignant.
As Thomas More says in A Man For All Seasons, “When statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties … they lead their country by a short route to chaos.”
Daniel Allott is deputy commentary editor for the Washington Examiner
