September 2000 – At last a “pro-choice” politician has been made to publicly defend his position. And it was a painful sight!

Here’s how it went when NBC’s Tim Russert grilled Vice President Al Gore on NBC’s Meet the Press on July 16.

Russert: …Mr. Vice President, you said that…this presidential election will decide the future of the Supreme Court.

Gore: Yes, very much so.

Russert: And people immediately turn their attention to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision…

Gore: Right.

Russert: …which allowed abortion. I want to ask you a very simple question. Do you believe that life begins at conception?

Gore: No. I believe there is a difference. You know, I believe that the Roe v. Wade decision wisely embodies the kind of common sense judgment that most Americans share.

Russert: In 1987 – let me show you a letter you wrote to your constituents…. (from the letter) “During my 11 years in Congress, I have consistently opposed federal funding of abortions. In my opinion, it’s wrong to spend federal funds for what is arguably the taking of a human life. Let me assure you that I share your belief that innocent human life must be protected, and I am committed to further this goal.”

You went on with Washington Monthly and gave an interview which says, “It is quite correct that a position like mine in opposition to the federal funding of abortion results in unequal access to abortions on the part of poor women. Nevertheless, I feel the principle of government not participating in the taking of what is arguably a human life is more important.” When did you change your mind on that principle?

Gore: Ten, 15 years ago. I can’t give you the exact day. It’s been quite a while ago. And here’s the reason I changed. I talked to a lot of women who taught me about the kinds of circumstances that can come up and the kinds of dilemmas that women can face. And the circumstances are so varied. I’ve come to the very deep conviction that a woman’s right to choose must be protected regardless of the woman’s income. Now, I’ve always supported Roe vs. Wade and I’ve always opposed a constitutional amendment to take away a woman’s right to choose. I changed…

Russert: But you did vote to define a person as including an unborn child.

Gore: Well, that was a very odd procedural vote on the SillJander [sic] amendment years ago.

Russert: When do you think life begins?

Gore: I favor the Roe v. Wade approach, but let me just say, Tim, I did…

Russert: Which is what? When does life begin?

Gore: Let me just say, I did change my position on the issue of federal funding and I changed it because I came to understand more from women – women think about this differently than men.

Russert: But you were calling fetuses innocent human life, and now you don’t believe life begins at conception. I’m just trying to find out, when do you believe life begins?

Gore: Well, look, the Roe v. Wade, decision proposes an answer to that question…

Russert: Which is?

Gore: …which is, in my view, a commonsense approach that there is a developmental process during which the burden kind of shifts over time. And they say – you know, they talk about the burden being different – burden of proof different in the first trimester than the third trimester. I mean, that’s the way the Supreme Court has addressed it. And incidentally, it was just reaffirmed by a narrow one-vote margin, 5-to-4. The justices chosen by the president elected this November will determine whether or not a woman’s right to choose is protected or taken away. I will protect a woman’s right to choose. Governor Bush has sworn to take away a woman’s right to choose. He has told Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson that he will make appointments that will be very pleasing to them. That’s not difficult to interpret. And, you know, the court picked by the next president will shape the Constitution’s interpretation for the next 30 or 40 years.

Russert: Do you believe there should be any restrictions on a woman’s right to choose?

Gore: Yes, the ones in Roe v. Wade.

Two days later Paula Zahn on Fox News asked Gov. Tom Ridge, Republican of Pennsylvania, the same question about the beginning of life. He simply wouldn’t give a straight answer.

When I took biology at Tupelo High School in 1979 I was taught human life begins with the union of the sperm and the egg. At conception. When did that change? I would be satisfied if Gore or Ridge would just pick a day during the gestation period. Then at least we would having a starting point for discussion.

The Vice President says that he changed his mind on the most profound moral issue of our time and he doesn’t remember when. I suggest it was when he, like many other politicians, realized that he couldn’t rise in the ranks of the Democratic Party if he protected unborn babies. Jesse Jackson, Bill Clinton, Dick Gephardt, and Sam Nunn came to the same conclusion. It was politics, not principles.

I believe Mr. Gore knows when life begins. And he knows that an abortion ends a human life. But winning the upcoming election is more important to him than protecting a baby.

God help you, Mr. Gore, Mr. Ridge, and all the others.