The Commonwealth of Virginia's Ultimate Blog

Monday, September 26, 2005

When is a hypothetical more than a hypothetical?

Our friend Waldo Jaquith is demanding answers from the Kilgore camp about the candidate's stance on abortion. One only need to visit Kilgore's website briefly to discover a clear answer to that question:
Jerry Kilgore is a pro-life candidate, with exceptions for when the life of the mother is in danger or when a rape or incest has occurred...
What Waldo really wants is for Kilgore to wade into the ocean of "what ifs" that were unleashed by Tim Russert at the Fairfax debate. Waldo cites a Virginian-Pilot editorial stating the following:
Given the very real possibility that a reconstituted U.S. Supreme Court might overturn Roe vs. Wade during the next four years, there’s no reason to skirt the obvious question: What would you do if the legislature sent you a bill banning abortion?
This is not just any hypothetical question. It is a hypothetical that is premised on another hypothtical. A "what if?" conditioned by a "what if?" If the candidates were to get into this type of conjecture the possibilities would be endless.

The assumptions made by Waldo and the Virginian-Pilot are off base. There is nothing "very real' about the possibility of Roe being overturned in the next four years. This is a fallacy perpetuated by the left to scare women voters. Even if a pro-life vote replaces O'Connor's there are still five votes in favor of upholding Roe. While it is possible that the court may allow increased restrictions of abortion practices, such as a partial-birth abortion ban that is widely favored by the American public, there is NO CHANCE that Kilgore will have an opportunity to sign a statewide abortion ban during his tenure in office.

To respond to such pie-in-the-sky scenarios would be pointless.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't buy it. If Kilgore did answer the question then we would be here praising and defending his answer and what they told us about his values, not griping about hypotheticals.

More importantly, the excuse is worse than the answer would be: if the next Governor wouldn't have a chance to sign a bill banning abortion, then there is effectively no difference between Kaine, Potts, and Kilgore on this issue. There's plenty of fancy political rhetoric, but nothing worth voting for one over the other on.

7:20 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home