Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has become somewhat of an independent darling during her run for the White House. The Hawaii Democrat is one of the youngest candidates, and with a handful of libertarian tendencies on issues such as foreign policy, she appeals to some voters who reject the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party and its more mainstream establishment.
It’s Gabbard’s unorthodox views that have earned her some cross-partisan support. For instance, during a recent appearance on “The Rubin Report,” Gabbard surprised many by vocalizing her personal opposition to third-trimester abortions:
“For me personally, I would not make that choice for myself, but I don’t believe that I should be telling anybody else the kinds of decisions that they should make for themselves or their family and therefore a woman should have the right to choose and I will stand up and fight to protect her right to do so.”
She continued, “I think the third trimester, unless a woman’s life or severe health consequences is at risk, then there shouldn’t be an abortion in the third trimester.”
In contrast to many of Gabbard’s Democratic competitors, this stated opposition to late-term abortion is, at first glance, refreshing. After all, in recent months, there has been an alarming trend of high-profile elected Democrats offering their support for abortion in the third trimester and even up until the moment of birth.
But in terms of the inherent worth of unborn life and the issue of abortion itself, Gabbard’s declaration means very little. Conservatives should not embrace her as a Democratic pro-life champion of any sort.
Gabbard’s personal conviction that there should be an abortion cutoff before the third trimester does not appear to inform her public policy stance. This is a problem.
Basic morality, especially when it comes to protecting another’s life, should not be compartmentalized in order to keep from offending Democratic voters. If an individual is privately pro-life but publicly supports a legal right to abortion, they are not in any meaningful way an ally to the defenseless and innocent inhabitants of the womb.
In 2013, Gabbard co-sponsored a bill that would make numerous “limitations and requirements concerning abortion services unlawful and prohibits their imposition or application by any government.” Individual state restrictions would be overridden.
Pro-life group Live Action said of the bill, “This is Roe v. Wade on steroids. Those who feel that abortion is best left up for the states to decide will also find this bill problematic with its overreach. Sadly, the bill also uses the Fourteenth Amendment to justify abortion, as the Supreme Court did, even though in actuality it would make much more sense to protect the lives of unborn Americans.”
Lest we forget, Gabbard’s personal opinion on abortion is nothing more than the old-school Democratic approach that once said “safe, legal, rare.” Gabbard reiterated her supported for such a standard during her appearance on the “Rubin Report.”
But in recent years, that slogan has been discarded for “abortion on demand.” That Gabbard has not privately adopted the latter mantra is a positive, but hardly significant, development.
Even if Gabbard opposes elective abortion in the third trimester, that still leaves almost 27 weeks of fetal development in which an unborn baby may lose their life. And with technological advancements, viability now hovers around 24 weeks, and in some cases, 22 weeks. Does Tulsi Gabbard really support the legal abortion of viable babies?
Gabbard’s conservative fans ought to acknowledge that commending a politician for holding personal views that barely meet the minimum of human decency is a strange, pointless exercise. Elected officials are in positions of power, and with their influence, it is possible to bring about real change.
The most basic human right is the right to life. Denying that to the unborn in any trimester is inexcusable.
So while some on the Right, especially those who lean libertarian, may appreciate what Gabbard says on a variety of issues, they must be realistic. On core issues like abortion, she is hardly less radical than the others in her party — and that is nothing to praise.
Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner‘s Beltway Confidential blog and a columnist at Arc Digital.
