Jul 28, 2004
Badnarik on the Road to Damascus?
[cross-posted at Austro-Athenian Empire]
Badnarik’s website used to have an"issues" section which included, inter alia, a position statement on abortion. In it, Badnarik said that, after much wrestling with the issue, he was inclined to view abortion as a rights-violation. I can't remember whether he said explicitly that it should be illegal, but that would seem a plausible inference.
Shortly after he won the nomination, the"issues" section abruptly vanished from the Badnarik website. When the"issues" section reappeared a few weeks later, there was no longer any mention of abortion. (And there still isn’t -- I just checked.)
But today I notice that AOL's candidate information page carries a new position statement on abortion. Badnarik now says that"the decision to abort must remain the sole province of the mother, the father, and their own consciences," and is"not an issue for government intrusion."
That's a move in the right direction as far as I’m concerned. But I wonder what the story is.
Badnarik’s website used to have an"issues" section which included, inter alia, a position statement on abortion. In it, Badnarik said that, after much wrestling with the issue, he was inclined to view abortion as a rights-violation. I can't remember whether he said explicitly that it should be illegal, but that would seem a plausible inference.
Shortly after he won the nomination, the"issues" section abruptly vanished from the Badnarik website. When the"issues" section reappeared a few weeks later, there was no longer any mention of abortion. (And there still isn’t -- I just checked.)
But today I notice that AOL's candidate information page carries a new position statement on abortion. Badnarik now says that"the decision to abort must remain the sole province of the mother, the father, and their own consciences," and is"not an issue for government intrusion."
That's a move in the right direction as far as I’m concerned. But I wonder what the story is.