The most liberal show on television just got more liberal. The “conservative” co-host said in an interview that sure she thinks abortion is killing a human but that doesn’t mean it should be illegal. Yahoo reports:
Hasselbeck, who campaigned with Sarah Palin in ’08, insists that she’s been misunderstood, saying in a recent interview that she regards President Barack Obama as an “incredibly cool guy” and parts company with conservative culture warriors on the charged issues of gay marriage and abortion rights. On the latter front, she says she’s “torn”; she offers fairly unequivocal support on the controversial question of same-sex unions.
In an interview with Fancast’s Adam Buckman, Hasselbeck insists she’s not “ultra-ultra-conservative on every issue.” “I actually support gay marriage,” she says, an admission that puts her to the left of Obama.
As for abortion, Hasselbeck confirms she believes that life begins at conception but also says she doesn’t think the government should tell women what to do with their bodies. “I’m torn there in terms of supporting laws” for or against abortion, she says. “I always say I would rather a change in heart than a law.”
The want (even need) to be liked is a dangerous thing.
I can’t stand when people say that when it comes to abortion they’d rather change a heart than the law. I always wonder, can’t we do both?
August 25, 2010 at 4:36 pm
Read C.S. Lewis's "The Inner Ring", again, if you've already read it.
“Over a drink or a cup of coffee disguised as triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still-just at that moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naif or a prig-the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which is not quite in accordance with the technical rules of fair play: something which the public, the ignorant, romantic public, would never understand: something which even the outsiders in your own profession are apt to make a fuss about: but something, says your new friend, which "we"-and at the word "we" you try not to blush for mere pleasure-something "we always do". And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world.
It would be so terrible to see the other man's face-that genial, confidential, delightfully sophisticated face-turn suddenly cold and contemptuous, to know that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules . . .
Lewis concludes: `The quest of the Inner Ring will break your heart unless you break it'.
from essay by ANDREW LINZEY*
August 25, 2010 at 4:44 pm
I think she's an ex-Catholic, right?
August 25, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Holy crap- I just woke up to the world and found out I was a Democrat- has reality been totally altered?
Sorry if I'm a pro-lifer who's been disgusted with the Elizabeth Hasselbecks, Lindsey Grahams, Laura/George Bushes, John McCains and others who feed us pro-lifers pathetic lines because they know the other party is so pro-death that we can't help but vote for them as a matter of ethical logistics. Heck with that.
Spend your time voting for lesser evils, and you will arrive at the throne of judgment trying to explain why you ever voted for evils in the first place, no matter how you tried to minimize them in comparison with the evils for which you didn't vote.
I stand by my comments. When the Michael Steeles and John McCains of this world speak up for virtue instead of politics, then I will readily stand by their sides. In the meantime, all they have to offer us is the same thing the currently elected administration offers on a daily basis: "we aren't nearly as bad as the losers who came before us!"
Give me solid proof that the Republican party has the pro-life agenda at the forefront of its administration, and I'll concede defeat. Until then, I will stand by my assertions that the pro-life plank of the Republican platform is the main reason that most of us idiots continue to vote for other idiots who are wrong on a bajillion issues but happen to give lip service to the protection of unborn babies.
August 25, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Honestly, she is no different than other prominent conservative women in her view, cf. Laura and Barbara Bush and even Nancy Reagan. Its just sad.
August 25, 2010 at 5:59 pm
Until 5 minutes ago I never even heard of her.
August 25, 2010 at 6:15 pm
M. Swaim : Very intersting post. You've given me a lot to think about. I never thought of the the PL plank being used as a shallow, lip-service-y lure for suckers like me.
But it is true. I feel like all these RINOS have gotten one over on me bigtime.
Sarah Palin. Michelle Malkin. Michelle Bachman. I need to remind myself that there are still real women of character in politics.
As for EH, what has she every done in her life but be a thin blone who married a football player? That is the genius of the View. The conservative voice is a shrill and senseless sellout. Give me straight Whoopi. Seems like there is a soul in there somewhere, even though terribly misguided.
August 25, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Matt,
Steele isn't pro-life. I couldn't agree more with you. Steele has said as much while McCain always just seems pro-McCain to me.
The Republican Party establishment looks down on pro-lifers and consider them a necessary evil they have to give lip service to in order to get reelected.
August 25, 2010 at 7:33 pm
Abortion is murder – just because a child gestates within a woman, does not give her the "right to her body" to kill that infant. For example, if you use a knife or a handgun to kill someone – you "use your body in a manner that you wish" to complete the job of killing another. It is erroneous to imply that a woman has a right to her body – in the case of the act of murder, no one is legally allowed to use their body in such a way as to cooperate with the death of another.
August 25, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Ben, you've got more courage than I. Until very recently I was still trying to maintain those friendships, and was hurt by their rejection. What guts to lose friends over your convictions, and then take it a step further an convert to Catholicism! I can't help feeling that in these days the wheat is being seperated from the chaff….after all we are all sinners, and I certainly chief among them, but will gladly give up this mortal life in order to be counted among the Remnant. We do need the encouragement of others when the going gets tough.
August 25, 2010 at 7:41 pm
Re: "they'd rather change a heart than the law." One can say the same thing about laws against discrimination, yet no one dares to say, "Let's make discrimination legal and change the heart instead."
August 25, 2010 at 8:11 pm
I'm guessing the pic is intended as a graphic representation of EH's moral laxity – letting it all hang out (or very nearly all of it), which shouldn't make her statements on abortion or gay marriage all that surprising. She's been pickled.
Thanks, also, to Katy for the C.S. Lewis quote. And Rick makes a great point, too, about the inconsistency of their "changing hearts instead of the law" cop-out.
August 25, 2010 at 8:12 pm
Oops! I meant thanks to Kathy C, not Katy.
August 25, 2010 at 8:56 pm
I can relate to her position. The notion that abortion should be illegal in every circumstance is simplistic and unrealistic. Pro-lifers sometimes forget the woman, pro-choicers always forget the baby. We need to remember both parties and understand that there needs to be a little(a modicum) legal latitude for a crisis pregnancy even where there is no moral latitude.
August 25, 2010 at 10:01 pm
M.Swaim – I couldn't agree more. I haven't voted Republican for years now…because I CAN'T. All the Republican candidates in my state are pro-abortion, meaning I cannot in good conscience vote for them.
Some of you are confusing RINO's with CINO's; the Republican Party can change its platform at any time. There is nothing stopping it. Currently there is a very pro-life portion of the charter. But should the party decide we just don't matter anymore when it comes to votes, then away it will go. And in my state it has long gone. We need a national "Christian National" party. Anyone who has hitched thier conservative wagon to the Republican party will find themselves way off the trail.
re the photo: Geeze! Get over it! You see more on the wall of most churches in the Vatican!
August 25, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Would you please state your reason for choosing that particular picture for this aricle.
August 25, 2010 at 10:39 pm
Were she a REAL PRO-LIFE CONSERVATIVE, she would have never been allowed to co-host that show.
http://www.FreeTheND88.org
August 25, 2010 at 10:44 pm
Photo: Because it shows what she's good for. A shallow, thin, blonde, with big boobs that she flaunts on camera… and she comes with a big name, the name of a relatively famous NFL QB, the dream of every high school Barbie.
Nothing more. The picture fits the title of the post perfectly, don't you think?
Swaim is right, by the way. Repugnicans are Demoncrats with a different mascot. Only a Catholic who is true to their faith can see it. Catholics who choose to support either party choose politics over their religion, period. It's basic logic.
August 25, 2010 at 10:58 pm
T Shaffer;
I haven't known pro-lifers to forget the woman. Where I live there is the HOPE clinic that offers to take care of the women during & after pregnancy. This cannot be said for the abortion clinics, who in my mind take care of neither the baby who they kill, or the woman who they send off after they get their money. I have friends who had abortions (before I knew them) and the clinic only cared about payment, not the woman. It is the Pro-Lifers who offer things like Rachel's Vineyard to help heal from abortion and Silent No More. I see no counseling from abortion providers other then to say, "it is not a person so don't feel guilty," which is a flat out lie.
August 25, 2010 at 11:20 pm
While there are some images in the Sistine chapel that are revealing, it is the manner of revealing. Dresses like this automatically draw the eye to her cleavage which is the desired result. I have never and will never see "The View" and am sorry for all those who would base their 'morality' on such a program but I suspect that there are plenty of clueless souls that do.
You can gain the whole world but if it is at the cost of your soul….
We pray for those who have traded truth for fame or power or whatever; may the grace of conversion be given them.
August 25, 2010 at 11:49 pm
One difference between Repubs in the White House and Democrats in the White House is the extension of Planned Parenthood into foreign aid to underdeveloped countries. Pres. Clinton and Pres. Obama pushed funds into abortion-supporting foreign aid. Pres. Bush II revoked that.
One recognizes that in some cases (tubal or other extrauterine pregnancies) no practical way exists of bringing the infant to term. Nevertheless, the "health of the mother" exception is large enough to drive a Mack truck through, as many abortionists have smoothly done.
Stopping the government from financing Planned Parenthood and other abortion enterprises is merely the first necessary (but not sufficient) step. This battle is not over.
TeaPot562