Norris Takes An Odd Position on Abortion and Civil Unions

This May, freshman Republican State Rep. Justin Harris faces a primary challenge apparently from a moderate flank.  Harris was an outspoken tea party favorite during his first term, which put him in the crosshairs of those on the left.  And the latest Arkansas Voters' Guide from Family Council reveals just how far to the left his primary opponent might be. But her answers are rather shifting.

Harris is a solid consistent advocate for the protection of the unborn and traditional marriage.  However, his Republican opponent Lisa Norris of Alma has given troubling answers on both issues.

When asking specifically about the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion decision, she declined to state whether she supported or opposed the decision and instead said, “I believe health care decisions are best made between an individual and his or her health care provider — not by government or courts.”

This is clearly a pro-choice stance.  However days after completing this survey, she backed away from her position and offered a strange explanation.  She explained when asked about the landmark Supreme Court decision making abortion on demand legal in all 50 states, that she was not talking about the abortion, but instead vitamins.  Yep, you read that correctly. She actually tried to wiggle out of the answer by saying she was talking about a woman's health ca

re decision such as whether or not to take prenatal vitamins.  She is really pro-life, she said.

Now it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that dog don't hunt. Coverage from Larry Henry with 5News here.

Another area turning heads is an answer that seems to indicate she is in favor of civil unions for same-sex couples.

When asked about allowing same-sex couples to form domestic partnerships, civil unions, or other legal arrangements that are similar to marriage, she again declined to say whether she supported or opposed them saying instead – “I am supportive of the traditional definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Regarding other such arrangements, I would be cautious of restricting the right of any American to freely associate or enter into voluntary contracts.”

Sort of a confusing answer and she does not come out and say it, but it appears Norris is for some sort of middle-ground civil union.

Norris' other answers on taxes, voter id, and immigration all appear to be conservative.  But it looks like if social conservatives pick Norris over Harris, they are taking a big gamble on someone who is wishy-washy at best compared to someone who has always been with them.

That's a gamble I would guess they are not going to take.