'Jane Roe' endorses Paul

Posted: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:05 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008, Paul

From NBC's Gabe Herman
On the 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling, Norma McCorvey (a.k.a. "Jane Roe," who later changed her views on abortion in the mid-90s) gave Paul her official endorsement today.

"I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v. Wade. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn," she said at a press conference in Washington this morning.

Paul accepted the pro-life activist's endorsement, saying of abortion: "It is still one of the most crucial issues of our day that we deal with this. As much as I talk about economic liberties, and civil liberties, and trying to avoid the killing overseas, I think the issue of life is paramount."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

It's my hope that this endorsement will help open the eyes of Christian conservatives, most of whom have been blindly supporting Mike Huckabee as the "Christian pro-life candidate". Ron Paul is both a Christian and pro-life, and, unlike the Huckster, doesn't use his religion to get votes.

Robert Hawes (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:10 PM)

I'll support a ban on abortion when males who abandon their children,are the fathers of aborted fetuses,or don't pay child support are physically castrated.
Fair enough?

Don't want an abortion? don't have one?
Male and don't believe in abortion? Don't have sex.

It's damn easy.

Keep your laws off of other peoples bodies.

Damnstraight,Ill (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:20 PM)

Wow, I'm going to join the Ron Paul revolution after hearing this!

Ron Who (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:21 PM)

The Ron Paul Revolution - the new Code Pink.

Like a Fungus amoung us (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:22 PM)

As a Christian Democrat I have finally found a non-hypocritical religious Republican I would feel comfortable voting for. Ron Paul.

joshua bruce (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:23 PM)

I'm pro-choice, but I'm still voting for Ron Paul because this issue isn't the most important issue we face, not by a long shot.

Plus, what he really wants is to allow states to make the decision. So, the southern states can make whatever laws they want and the northern states can keep things the same.

This might work out well anyway. The US has had a shortage of babies available for adoption for a long time. Perhaps this will make it easier for those wanting to adopt.

Ian, Eastham MA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:23 PM)

Ron Paul also received the endorsement of Don Luskin, prominent financial commentator, and former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson today. Combine this with his 2nd place win in New Mexico and $2M MLK money bomb yesterday and he has the most momentum of all Republicans right now. Dr. Paul seems to be the only candidate that can truly unite the fiscal conservatives and the religious right.

John, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:25 PM)

Damnstraight - There is no ban in discussion here. Overturning Roe v. Wade will allow states to decide.

Ian, Eastham MA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:25 PM)

I pray that all those who are Pro-Life will see this and understand it. Now is the chance to make things happen for Ron Paul.

Fred Thompson just dropped out. The economy is going belly up. Conservatives think they do not have a real choice when he is right under their nose if they only knew where to look.

Please see the clear choice in Ron Paul.

Travis, AZ (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:32 PM)

Robert Hawes, don't hold your breath.

MSNBC likes Huckabee and dislikes Ron Paul. Look no further than their repeated adoring mentions (including on national TV) of Chuck Norris and Ric Flair. Compare this to David Schuster’s recent analogy of RP (and/or his supporters) to Al Qaida… again… on national TV. It was only due to Joe and Mika’s repeated demands for an explanation that Schuster retracted his comments.

And how could you forget Schuster for blasting RPs opposition to the Civil War… that was while Schuster was sub’ing for Tucker… of course, Schuster never mentioned that RP’s alternate plan (buying freedom vs. use of force). If I recall correctly, it was one of his guests who had to add that… and it is a relevant point… whether or not you agree with RP.

Also go look at the dates when FR (and MSNBC) started discussing Huckabee. Then compare those dates to the RCP polls.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

In the case of MSNBC and their obvious anti-Paul bias, it’s clear the establishment “MSNBC Opinion” came before “Public Opinion.” In turn, witness The Rise of Huckaboom! Brought to you by MSNBC and the MSM!

Tim, CT (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:35 PM)

People are finally waking up to Dr. Paul's message, he cured my apathy! We need a doctor in the house!
He's been predicting the economic downturn for sometime now and understands economics. Romney would consult his lawyers! LOL!
Ron Paul 2008!

Rosco1776 Folsom, PA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:38 PM)

I will support a ban on abortion when this country puts up finances to help young unwed mothers and go after the rat bastard fathers who are proud of their procreative powers but do not take responsibility for their child, jail time sounds good!
Giving the states the options sounds good but then we will deal with 50 different kinds of problems as we do now with child support, adoption and foster parents and a host of other problems because the federal government does not really support the rights of children. This is not about states rights it is about protecting the next generations of americans.
Don't whine about taxes or federal laws, it's about the children of the future pure and simple.

John Alexander (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:38 PM)

I'm pro choice but still pro Ron Paul. You don't have to rubber stamp a person's views to support them. He is an honest, good guy who spreads no manor. He therefore doesn't stand a chance. I will continue to have his sign on my lawn and his bumper sticker on my auto. It is a thrill to finally discuss an issue instead of the race issue. Lets have more discussions of substance.

Uptight in the Valley (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:39 PM)

Vote with a conscience!
Thank you Jane Roe!

Ron Paul 2008 dot com

Noel, Vancouver (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:43 PM)

Folks, it's a great day to be a Ron Paul supporter. Tancredo gone, Duncan gone, Fred gone, Rudy & Huckabee broke and soon to be gone. Won't you join us and help save America. Read more about Ron Paul's incredible rise the the presidency here:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/

Karl (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:45 PM)

Damnstraight - There is no ban in discussion here. Overturning Roe v. Wade will allow states to decide.
Ian, Eastham MA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:25 PM)
**************************************************

Yeah, allow states to impose thier religious beliefs on women and thier right of choice. How about if all christians keep thier faith to themselves, and I will do the same. Until then, any bible thumper that I find knocking on my door will have a 90 pound German Shephard to pray with.

Jimmy CHICAGO (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:46 PM)

I am also generally pro-choice, but I am going to support Ron Paul. The issues of war, civil liberties adn monetary policy are of paramount importance. I do not relegate the abortion to unimportance, its just that the president actually has little say over this matter, but he has much to say about foreign policy.

jab2ur (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:48 PM)

I am a Daughter of a Vietnam Veteran and Ron Paul's message inspired me to become Pro-life. What an inspiration this man is. Keep doing it Ron Paul.

Laura (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:51 PM)

"I'll support a ban on abortion when males who abandon their children,are the fathers of aborted fetuses,or don't pay child support are physically castrated.
Fair enough?

Don't want an abortion? don't have one?
Male and don't believe in abortion? Don't have sex.

It's damn easy.

Keep your laws off of other peoples bodies."

This kind of selfish attitude makes me sick. I was born out of wedlock and given up for adoption. I was raised by two loving adoptive parents. If my biological mother had exercised "her right to choose" I would have never had a life and would have been rotting at the bottom of a dumpster somewhere.

Even if irresponsible fathers abandon their children at birth, there is ALWAYS adoption as an alternative if the mother can't take care of her child. The only reason abortion is "needed" in most cases is because women do not want to take responsibility for their pregnancies.

Economist, Aurora, CO (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:52 PM)

Ron Paul is the only candidate that will bring the so called "Change in Washington"
A vote for any of the other candidates is a vote for George Bush's 3rd term if you know what i mean.

New York New York (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:52 PM)

Ian, Eastham, MA - Are you kidding me? There is a shortage of babies available for adoption? You mean there is a shortage of white, perfectly healthy babies, right? Seems to me I know a lot of people who are fostering a lot of children, so I really don't think there's a Shortage. . . And if Roe v. Wade is overturned, I guess you also believe we should ban all Death Penalty sentences? What about war? Should we never go there also? After all, if you want to make decisions strictly because life should ALWAYS be preserved, then don't be hypocritical. If my 13 year daughter is raped, I'll be darned if a bunch of old men will decide whether my daughter has to go through the pregnancy and the labor which follows. Not the mention the trauma of keeping the baby or giving him/her up for adoption. That is a decision we should be entitled to make, not the Supreme Court, or Congress. And what about when the life of the mother is at stake? Whose life is more important? You want the Supreme Court deciding that? I don't. That should be my decision to make.

New Independent (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:53 PM)

Damnstraight... There isn't a politician out there who would agree with your motto ("keep your laws off of other peoples' bodies") more than Ron Paul. He is the only true advocate for States-Rights -- a position which makes our nation a Union in which you can find a state which supports your beliefs. You are alright with people NOT getting an abortion if they don't want to right? So overturning Roe v. Wade would do nothing more than keep the laws of the Federal Government off of your body.

Dylan Odhner, Bryn Athyn, PA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:53 PM)

I lean more pro-choice, but I love Ron Paul's adherence to the Constitution. States' rights are paramount, and Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision.

Clay Shentrup, San Francisco, CA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:53 PM)

The Confederate States of America were also formed on the idea of "states' rights." Apparently, one of those "states rights" also included slavery.

Interesting that that code phrase, which is so imbued with a double meaning, still exists in this country.

You'd think Ron Paul supporters would have a sense of history in that regard, as you would Fred Thompson. Well, Thompson is gone, so now how about Ron Paul?

Well, at the end of the day, I have not heard, yet, a good constitutional argument by Ron Paul supporters that the "floating currency" is unconstitutional. Speaking of which:

Article I, sec. 8, para. 5: {The Congress shall have Power To] coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures"

So, what's the problem folks?

Angry Vet, Minn. (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:53 PM)

I am strongly pro-choice and dont think pro-life matches the libertarian argument, BUT, I, too, will still vote for Ron Paul because the other issues of liberty are more important at the moment. So, Go Ron !

ZinkDude, CT (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:57 PM)

The Huckabee evangelicals in NH were tricked into supporting the preacher because they failed to see that he was being controlled by the godless and pro-abortion CFR and that he is not a conservative.

NH (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:58 PM)

Paul is for overthrowing Roe vs Wade, which forces all states to allow abortions, and often with government funding. Paul, while against abortion, would allow states to make the laws - as they should. It's silly that the federal government makes this decision.

Abortion is a touchy issue, though I am surprised how many people seem to think it should be an automatic right. While I am pro-choice in general only because I don't want to impose my views on others, a fetus is in fact a living being with a heart, feet, and toes even pretty early on in pregnancy. I can understand how the climate in some states might give individual rights to an unborn child - it is life by basically all measures.

William Smith (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:58 PM)

Ron Paul is the only major player who is not part of the Council on Foreign Relations. Don't want to see the end of the United States? Vote for Ron Paul!

Kellen Lewis, Racine, WI (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 4:59 PM)

If Mike Huckabee uses his religion to get votes from Evangelicals, then Ron Paul uses the war in Iraq to get votes from anti-war activists. What's the difference? What should Huckabee do, say I'm a Christian but I don't want any Christians to vote for me. That's just dumb.

Ron Paul is attacking the symptom not the source. Mike Huckabee wants to defend the Constitution against activist judges, by amending it to protect the God-given rights of the unborn.

Can it be done? I don't know, but it is perfectly in line with the Republican Party Platform.

Terrence, Atlanta, Ga. (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:00 PM)

The federal government has no business in our hospitals or doctors offices, it is not a matter of interstate trade or international policy. Dr. Paul is pro life but he feels that it is not a federal matter but a state issue to govern this matter as each state sees fit. Vote Ron Paul to regain the freedom so many american citizens have faught and died for.

Sean Genung, Industry PA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:01 PM)

Allowing states to "decide" would be unconstitutional to those who live in those states. Just as it would be to allow teaching of intelligent design in public schools would be unconstitutional to those children of families who don't subscribe to someone's (and some board of educations) religious doctrine.

And for those who think this issue "isn't the most important one", maybe it isn't for you. But it is for others, and to think there is some sort of heirarchy of issues is pointless. All things matter.

Ronald Foster, Los Angeles, Ca (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:05 PM)

it's simple....if you want an abortion go to a state that will allow you to have one, or vote on the local level to keep it legal in your state. I think the whole point of Paul's stance IS TO keep the federal government's laws off of your body. There are much more pressing issues though....like our collapsing economy and almost worthless dollar. Paul is the only candidate with viable long-term solutions for these problems. Until any of the other candidates do, I'll be voting for Paul.

John Call (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:07 PM)

Damnstraight - go back to your feminist blog and post there. What should women who don't believe in abortion do to prevent the 1.4 million abortions per year?(1 in 5 pregnancies)

Since it is your body, then if a pregnant women is killed, It would be difficult to consider it a double homicide...am I correct?

RP, Iowa (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:09 PM)

This is a personal issue, and needs to be addressed at local levels, and not by our federal government or with tax payers dollars. Personally, I believe if a woman wants to kill an unborn baby, she deserves no support from the public to do it period.
If she does not believe it is human, let her see the remains of the aborted fetus when the procedure is done, bet she wished she had made a different decision. An abortion is no different than killing innocent Iraqi children.

Tess (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:10 PM)

Hey, maybe we should allow "states to decide" whether they would like to overturn Brown v Board of Education too!

Using Paul's logic, states should be allowed to segregate their schools, and force black people to go back to the back of the bus again, right?

Hey, if you don't like it, move to another state.. right?

(uggh)

JPB, Silver Lake, California (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:11 PM)

Ron Paul needs to step aside like Fred.This guy is way out there...Please do us all a favor and Quit...

JK,NV (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:12 PM)

I challenge you all (especially you Damnstraight) to take the Roe IQ test:

http://roeiqtest.com/

This is interesting regardless of what side of the issue you are on.

JM (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:17 PM)

pro-life means more than just roe v. wade. it means no more pre-emptive war. it's time for americans to be the "good guys" again. to bring back the constitution, we need ron paul.

sean truitt, san clemente, ca (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:22 PM)

Based on Damnstraight's argument: if you don't believe in murder, then don't murder, but don't tell the rest of us what to do. If you disagree with rape then don't rape someone, but don't tell me I can't!

Raymond, Spfd, MO (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:22 PM)

Way to go, Norma! At last, a pro-life leader who sees the truth. By the way, Dr. Paul does NOT say that states will be able to make up their minds whether or not to allow abortion. He says that states should be allowed to determine their own punishment for the crime of abortion. All you libertarians think that the woman should be "free" to abort her baby. The baby is a person, too! She can be free to do what she wants with her own body, I agree. But we're not talking about HER body, we're talking about the baby's body. Heart starts beating on Day 18. It's a person with the same right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as the rest of us. Thankfully, Ron Paul sees the truth.

Vickie, Crystal River, FL (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:23 PM)

Overturning gives rights to the states, where it should be so the PEOPLE can decide not the federal government which is so overinflated we are going bankrupt. A vote for Ron Paul is a vote against going into another depression.

Anton Keaton, Omaha, NE (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:28 PM)

Keep your laws off of other peoples bodies.
Damnstraight umm. I know this is a heated topic and easy to react emotionally, please just listen to Ron Paul's position on this issue. The law is unconstitutional and an issue for the states to decide. I know lots of folks would rather not risk over turning and sending the decision back down for the states to decide. They see this as risky to their position as they have noting to gain and everything to loose. I just ask you, for the good of the country spend some time understanding why it is critical to allow the states to decide this issue and not have it decided at the federal level. If you read this far thanks for taking the time. I am pro-life and support Ron Paul's position on this issue.

JP colorado springs (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:28 PM)

Time for FredHeads that care about the Border and who are Pro-Life to get behind the M.D. (OB/GYN) 10-term congressman from rural Texas.

Ron will spend that trillion dollars here to save Social Security and defend our borders, not Iraq and Korea's.

Jane Roe (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:29 PM)

I am pro-choice, and I am voting for Dr. Paul because I believe the over-turning of Roe vs Wade is immensely important. The federal government should not have their hands in this debate. As long as abortion remains a federal issue, it is critical to realize that there is potential that abortion can become illegal by the federal government. Reversing Roe vs Wade restores power to the states and prevents the federal government from flicking that switch.

Laurie, NJ (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:34 PM)

The momentum is building. The snowball has formed and it isn't going to stop. This is the day when Ron Paul begins to make sense to a lot of people. Let this year be known as the year Americans were awakened by a truly honest and good man. A man in the likes of Martin Luther King, Thomas Jefferson, and Barry Goldwater.

This is a proud day for me. I am in the military and the soldiers are getting more excited about Ron Paul every day. If you want to know what the military thinks - we donated more money to Ron Paul than any other presidential candidate. Let our voice be heard as well.

Brett D, OSAN AB, S. Korea (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:34 PM)

Ah ...except Mr. Paul has a snowballs chance in hell of winning.....

j fl (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:35 PM)

Overturning Roe v. Wade is not "banning" abortion.
Ron Paul wants to return power to the states and let them decide locally.

J, Austin (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:37 PM)

I am pro-choice, but I respect Dr. Paul's courage and consistency in supporting a position he believes in. I will support an honest steadfast conservative over a fair-weather libertarian anyday.

Joe Allen, El Paso, TX (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:39 PM)

"Don't want an abortion? don't have one?
Male and don't believe in abortion? Don't have sex. . . . Keep your laws off of other peoples bodies."

I didn't realize abortions were all men's fault?

I agree the way is to not have sex. Realistic? I don't know, but at least be at peace with the consequences.

As for holding this against Ron Paul, he is by far the most freedom endorsing candidate out there -- he just happens to believe the right to life is a necessary prerequisite to the right to liberty.

Steve, Snellville, GA (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:41 PM)

He has his good points but, he has not got a prayer of winning a primary, much less a general election. That has been well established by his past primary performances. I also can't bring myself to see him as a commander in chief. He has been to activily undermining the one we have now to expect support from others. I'll pass.

Sane in Ut (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:42 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=599487