Abortion Opponent “Roe” From Roe v. Wade Endorses Paul
EmailABC News’ Z. Byron Wolf Reports: It’s not as well-known as his anti-war stance, but Ron Paul – an OB-GYN by trade – is also pro-life.
This is a fact he has highlighted in Republican early primaries as he has tried to sell his libertarian, anti-establishment ethos to the Republican rank and file.
He will get a boost at an event in Washington tomorrow when the "Roe" in the Roe v. Wade 1973 court case, Norma McCorvey, endorses his bid for the presidency.
McCorvey has famously changed her mind about abortion and now the woman whose court case created current abortion law crusades against the practice. Paul is McCorvey’s current choice for President, but he was not her first.
Back when the Presidential campaign was getting going, before the summer, McCorvey endorsed Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. She even campaigned for him at the Iowa straw poll in August, which is an early test of a campaign’s organization in that state.
At the outset of the 2008 campaign, Brownback was seen as the pro-life candidate of choice. But his star fell with the rise of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, who eventually won in Iowa at the January caucus.
It’s interesting that McCorvey is now going to go with Paul, although, with Brownback as evidence, don’t expect her endorsement to turn the public tide in Paul’s favor.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Ron Paul’s position on abortion is that it is not the jurisdiction of the Federal Government to decide on. His position is that the Constitution implicitly defines this is as an issue for each State to decide on its own.
Posted by: V | January 21, 2008, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
Dr Paul’s resoning is sound in that Roe V Wade was based upon the interstate commerce law. Basically abortion itself wasn’t the issue but the right of abortionist to perform said procedures across state lines. This is where the decision superceded the Constitution. And should be unconstitutional.
Posted by: Gm | January 21, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
Call me crazy but didn’t choice mean CHOICE, so why are the women’s righters so angry when women CHOOSE to have the baby? I never could figure that out. And can somebody explain to me why conservatives are Pro-life but against welfare? It seems kinda weird to me. If all life is sacred, then ACT like it!
Posted by: thematrixisreal | January 21, 2008, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
Although I am personally pro-life I firmly agree with Dr. Paul that is the decision of each separate state to allow or disallow the act. The feds are ignoring the Constitution.
My thanks and praise to Miss McCorvey for her stand.
Posted by: David Cheney | January 21, 2008, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm
“And can somebody explain to me why conservatives are Pro-life but against welfare? It seems kinda weird to me. If all life is sacred, then ACT like it!”
-What needs to be explained? Welfare is stealing from everybody who works hard and giving to someone who won’t. The majority of conservatives I know give voluntarily to charity and many of them volunteer their own time at charities.Charities (such as the Red cross) and most non-governmental human aid projects are inspired by Christianity. So is free market economics. The first true hospitals were founded in the middle ages by monks and nuns. Charity is a personal duty. Welfare is the way atheistic humanists comfort their consciences. But its not the same thing. Charity is voluntary act of giving. Welfare is a violent act of stealing and it is depersonalized and inefficient to boot.
How can anyone be pro-market and pro-welfare? How can anyone believe in property rights and limited constitutional government but also accept welfare?
Posted by: Josephishere | January 21, 2008, 8:05 pm 8:05 pm
Ok ABC.. I’ll be sure to make note of that.. Ron Paul’s going to get a “boost” tomorrow, “but don’t expect it to change the publics TIDE in Paul’s favor”
WHATEVER THAT MEANS …
Lets get this Revolution rollin people!
Posted by: Pro Peace Republican | January 21, 2008, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm
I’ve heard alot of pro-lifers talk, I’ve yet to see them get involved. If more people backed up what they believed with action, I would believe them. But until they are the majority, welfare will continue. Bottom line. You and I may not like it or agree with it, but that’s the way it is. Conviction is a luxury for those on the sidelines. It’s time for those who believe to ACT.
Posted by: thematrixisreal | January 21, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
josephshire, I take exception to one comment you made:
“Welfare is the way atheistic humanists comfort their consciences.”
I’m an atheist who opposes the welfare state. And there are many more like me, who view the welfare state as promoting poverty not helping to alleviate it.
Ergo, I encourage you to beware of stereotyping.
Posted by: Sey Naci | January 21, 2008, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
We all hear about a woman’s “right to choose” but we don’t hear the rest of the sentence – the right to choose what?
The right to choose to kill her unborn child? What about the baby’s right to choose not to die? What about the baby’s constitutional right to life etc.? Remember, in a pregnancy there are 2 people, mother and baby, not 1.And remember the saying “The right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins.” If a woman does not wish to be pregnant that is her right. But she does not have the right to kill her baby to become non-pregnant. Dr. Paul is an honorable man who recognizes the baby’s right to life and he deserves credit and our support for that.
Posted by: David A. Ricks | January 21, 2008, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm
This is the most disgusting display of media bias. Why can’t you simply report the news and stop trying to tell the American people how to think? If I hadn’t found the link to this article on another site I can’t think of any reason I should waste my time and intelligence on reading anything from ABC News ever again. The blatant attempts by ABC and other news networks to turn every Ron Paul achievement into a negative is despicable. Shame on you.
I’ll be watching for Ms. McCorvey’s endorsement of Ron Paul but I’ll be watching on the Internet, the only place I’m able to find the real news without the bias.
Ms. McCorvey’s endorsement of Ron Paul doesn’t have to turn the tide of my favor. Even though I had never heard of Ron Paul before the 1st Republican Debate, I am now a staunch supporter. And no matter how insulting, degrading and in general rude to Dr. Ron Paul, I will be voting for him.
Posted by: Andree Taylor | January 21, 2008, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Nice swipe at Dr. Paul at the end. What ever happened to unbiased reporting?
Posted by: Steve Sadler | January 21, 2008, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm
Dear Sey Naci:
Thank you for making that post. I am not an athiest, but I will support the constitution and fight for your right to choose a religion or no religion at all. It is not right for us to name call and we shouldn’t stereotype…except when it comes to Faux News and the usual biased talking-heads in the MSM. LOL!
Thank you ABC for having the courage to post this article…I now consider you more credible than Faux of CNN.
Ron Paul Love!
Stevo
Posted by: stevo | January 21, 2008, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm
Thank you for covering Dr. Paul. Your article would have been even better without the negative comment about Dr. Paul’s chances at the end. Please report the news without taking swipes. Thank you.
Posted by: 1440 minutes | January 21, 2008, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm
Once again…Repoting with bias. This is not journalism it’s advertising. and eventually the rest of America will find out that all main stream media was bought out by news supressing globalists with a bigger agenda.
Stand up for America, and help us with our fight for liberty.
Posted by: Lou Park | January 21, 2008, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm
Thank you for reporting on this positive development in Paul’s campaign. Although, with your bias as evidence, don’t expect me to trust abc as a reliable source for news anytime soon.
Posted by: Chris | January 21, 2008, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm
It’s a shame that you get better coverage from Al-Jazeera English and BBC, than in the us.
Posted by: thematrixisreal | January 21, 2008, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
Justice Ruth Ginsberg has said that Roe vs Wade was unfounded. She would have found the right to abortion under the equal protection clause: a woman’s ability to compete in the marketplace!!!! Is that sickening??? These people have no right to foist their sick ideas on the American public.
Posted by: Dorothy | January 21, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
Do the right thing and get rid of our “old habits”! Vote for Ron Paul and help us take our country back before it’s too late! He is not just another Republican….he stands alone, but stands firm and is HONEST! You can actually BELIEVE him, WOW! Imagine that, believing a politician! Woohoo!
Posted by: Dana | January 21, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
I am personally pro_choice and that’s why I like Paul’s position that it is up to the States to decide. Some states may allow it, others won’t but at least it will be relegated to the states where decisions like this belong. Arguing this at the federal level gives the government too much power.
Posted by: Robert Moore | January 21, 2008, 11:25 pm 11:25 pm
Every year Ron Paul introduces bills which would 1)remove the issue of abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts, and 2) affirm that life begins at conception. With a simple majority vote, Congress could have overturned Roe.
The majority opinion on Roe stated that should it ever be medically determined that the fetus was a living human being from the time of conception, that Congress could affirm this fact and effectively reverse Roe. (Roe was based in part on the “fact” that it could not be known whether the fetus was alive.)
Oddly enough, Dr Paul’s bills were not supported by the Republican majority. Leads me to wonder just how “pro-life” our Republican leaders are.
Posted by: Alan Couchman | January 22, 2008, 12:42 am 12:42 am
The problem with Ron Paul campaign (or actually the problem with the people) is an INTELLECTUAL thing.
If people open their eyes & ears they will see
# 1 Ron Paul is the most CONSERVATIVE candidate.
# 2 hE is the most honest candidate
# 3 He is the most educated candidate.
# 4 He is the smartest candidate (at age 72 he was asked by SC TV staton to quickly comment on who will win the superbowel, he replied with a fraction of a seconed “whoever run faster”, even the TV hosts couldnt keep up with his quick reply.
# 5 he is the most CONSISTENT candidate, never changed a position.
so why his poll # are low?
the problem is in the PEOPLE & not Ron Paul.
Posted by: resimc | January 22, 2008, 12:54 am 12:54 am
What I always fail to understand is how one can be pro-life and pro-war at the same time. If one feels it is essential to protect a fetus from the moment of conception, how can one also endorse bombing the crap out or an entire culture, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people, including children and the unborn? If our goal had really been to “get the terrorists,” why did we not send in special forces or CIA hit men to hunt down the actual individuals allegedly responsible for the terrorist acts? I don’t think there is any way this can be justified.
Posted by: warispeace | January 22, 2008, 1:47 am 1:47 am
This endorsement could be HUGE for Ron Paul, especially if Huckabee drops out after Florida, which seems likely, or if the Republicans nominate someone like Giuliani or McCain who is deemed not conservative enough by the base, and Ron Paul mounts a third party challenge.
Posted by: Craig | January 22, 2008, 2:14 am 2:14 am
I hope Ron Paul becomes president of the USA. That would benefit the rise of liberty in the rest of the world too!
Posted by: Marco | January 22, 2008, 6:00 am 6:00 am
Abortion is a heated topic for both women & men. I use to be pro-choice, now I’m pro-preventative birth control. There should be no reason for an abortion today.
I have to agree with Ron that life begins at conception. Have you ever seen a 3D ultra-sound? It’s truly amazing.
There are so many options today for women who do become pregnant. There are so many wonderful couples that WANT a child & are unable to have one of their own. So…….. Dr. Paul’s straight forward talk convinced me. I am now Pro-life! Plus a 3D ultrasound was pretty convincing too.
Posted by: jaymehall | January 22, 2008, 10:51 am 10:51 am
“Call me crazy but didn’t choice mean CHOICE, so why are the women’s righters so angry when women CHOOSE to have the baby? I never could figure that out. And can somebody explain to me why conservatives are Pro-life but against welfare? It seems kinda weird to me. If all life is sacred, then ACT like it!?
What right is granted in the Constitution that allows one person or group to STEAL what is mine in order to give it to someone else. It is a felony. I have a right to choose towohm I give aid not the government.
How much more simple can it be?
Posted by: Carole | January 22, 2008, 11:13 am 11:13 am
I am pro-life and I support Ron Paul.
I also support him for his economic strategies, for example cutting overspending to get the country out of debt and lowering taxation drastically so each person can spend their hard earned money on what they want and need. This is the best way to help people – give us back what is ours and let us be generous with our own money as we see fit. (Just for the record I am not against some cases of government assistance, just the blanket social welfare state that we have now have. May God bless America!
Posted by: Serena G | January 22, 2008, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
America,you need to remember that you will get to live under the person that you elect as your next leader. Ron Paul’s love for the United States is apparent. I believe he is the only person in this election that cares for our country more than the office of president.
I think the news media should be held accountable for their bais reporting. Ron Paul should get equal media time as all the other candidates. We are being lead down a path that liberal Washington wants us to go all because we listen to the media and believe what we hear. America, YOU decide!Get involved! Don’t get lead astray,it will cost you many heart aches.
Posted by: Cliff | January 22, 2008, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
If the media would cover the event and make it positive, it would undoubtedly help Dr. Paul. Drop the negativity. Dr. Paul has done wonders for this country in bringing together free thinkers who care about the direction our country is headed. God Bless Ron Paul and God Bless America!
Posted by: Karen Somers | January 22, 2008, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm
Don’t expect McCorvey’s endorsemnt to make it on the ABC Nightly News, either.
Posted by: W. Gary Johnson, New York, NY | January 22, 2008, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
It is very fitting that the woman who was used by the pro-death fascists (sorry about the label, just trying to be accurate) to make abortion-on-demand legal in the United Staes, is endorsing the Doctor who will deliver the Nation from this travesty of justice.
R-P has the R-ing of P-ower and the forces of the Dragon King Sauron in the Old Media are doing all they can to get it away from him. But with the Fellowship of the Ring to protect and support him he will make it all the way to Mount Washington Doom and cast it into the Potomac River of Fire to destroy it. So let it be written, so let it be done.
Posted by: Jeremiah | January 22, 2008, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
I am pro life and anti-war. I believe that the only wars we should ever fight is when we are attacked such as the War of 1812, but we should never ever go on an offensive Iraq invasion type of war. Also I firmly believe that the military should always be voluntary so that people who are opposed to the war do not have to fight. I believe that Switzerland’s neutrality and strong defensive is the way to go. When you have a strong defense no one wants to attack you. All the men in Switzerland are trained in the military and required to have a gun in their home for self protection. Switzerland has a very low crime rate and has not gone to war for over 500 years.
I also believe that we have to do more to help women keep their babies and make the men who father them responsible. We need to encourage people to raise their kids in a two parent home and put their kids first.
Posted by: Mary M. | January 22, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
“don’t expect her endorsement to turn the public tide in Paul’s favor.” How do you “know” this? This is journalism? Get a clue dude.
Posted by: Brian | January 23, 2008, 11:54 am 11:54 am
January 2009
I just saw a spot on TV with Norma McCorvey. What a powerful message she presented. I was deeply touched and I hope to see the spot again as I believe others will be affected, too.
Posted by: Betty | January 16, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm