But for some reason, dear readers, this appears different. Could it be that Rev. Jackson has finally had a come-to-Jesus meeting with his conscience, and has come back to his pro-life roots? Said Jackson in 1977:
"There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of [a] higher order than the right to life ... that was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore outside your right to be concerned."Jesse has since travelled on a tortuous journey, saying in 1988:
"What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience? What kind of a person and what kind of a society will we have 20 years hence if life can be taken so casually? It is that question, the question of our attitude, our value system, and our mind-set with regard to the nature and worth of life itself that is the central question confronting mankind. Failure to answer that question affirmatively may leave us with a hell right here on earth."
''it is not right to impose private, religious and moral positions on public policy.''Again, in contrast, the Reverend Jackson of 2005 states:
"I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips," said Jackson, who has run for president as a Democrat. "This is a moral issue and it transcends politics and family disputes."
It's still too early to say whether the Rev. Jackson is indeed back to his pro-life roots, or whether the ever-available ulterior motive is at play. If it is indeed the former, all I can say is, "Welcome back!"