Posted on 10/20/2011 1:38:34 AM PDT by grassboots.org
I Kings 18:21 And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, hen follow him. And the people answered him not a word.
Herman Cain can't make up his mind whether he is pro-life or pro-abortion. He wants to ride the fence, so let's let him. But I have two suggestions for what to call his position.
First, Unprincipled Pro-Abortion. I don't mean unprincipled and pro-abortion. I mean unprincipled pro-abortion. He is pro-abortion for sure, but not on principle, but rather on purely pragmatic grounds. This will never do for those who (like The Fonz) can't bring themselves to ever say the word "b-b-b-b-a.... Fetus." Cain is no Barack Obama, who never met a single baby that ought to be protected, even one already outside the womb, once that baby has been declared a choice. But Cain is different, more nuanced. He can go long stretches without the pro-life community even noticing he is not one of them. No pro-abort of principle would ever be found hanging out with pro-lifers.
Second, Ineffectively Pro-Life. Just as Mitt Romney loves to say he was "effectively pro-choice", rather than (really) pro-choice, Cain says he is pro-life, but as the transcript below seems to indicate, would not lift one finger to actually stop abortion. He mouths the words, but his true intent is elsewhere. Cain has joined a growing number of supposedly pro-life candidates (like Gingrich, Romney and Perry) who are really pro-choice. The only thing Cain has going for him is that he finally admitted it (kinda). In an interview with Piers Morgan
(Excerpt) Read more at caffeinatedthoughts.com ...
Yes, all abortifacients should be outlawed, including The Pill, but the last three you are making up.
But I am not Catholic.
Geez, passing all of those gun laws sure put a dent in the gun violence in places like Chicago, Washington DC, NY, yadda yadda yadda. Your knee jerked so hard that you just kicked yourself between the eyes.
“Hmmm, it sounds like he was playing with Morgan. Morgan didn’t really press him on this. A president is not dictator. I’m not sure Cain’s position is any different than Reagan’s.”
Nancy or Ronald?
I read this and then your responses again. Here is what your knee jerk, or worse, political hit job has changed the argument.
THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT A VICTIM OF RAPE RAISING THE CHILD, NOT ABOUT ABORTING IT. Mr. Cain answered the question, not your perception.
So would you like to revise and extend your remarks, or just be labeled as a political hack?
Today is my 7th anniversary as a FReeper - so I am going to be blunt.
During this GOP Presidential campaign, I have become increasingly disgusted with the level of vitriol aimed at the candidates and individual FReepers.
I support Herman Cain - primarily because he is not a professional, career politician, who has not caused our current chaos of governmental malfeasance.
So far, Mr. Cain has offered only his 999 plan as public policy. He has not initiated any laws, regulations or rules for the American people.
As a candidate, Mr. Cain has had conversations with TV interrogators and debates with opponents. As a successful private sector businessman, arbitrator, conciliator and motivator - he has been a thoughtful listener. Pondering is NOT pandering. He is humble enough to reflect and consider having being wrong on an issue or a response - when the MSM jerks ask him to ‘expand’.
I don’t know how well Herman will do in the primaries or the GE - but I know one thing: He will continue to succeed as a human being, husband, father and Christian patriot.
We should all be so accomplished.
sod
Bookmark
I think I got the answer to my question to you.
“rather, it’s a decision each individual/family must make on their own.”
Ok, which is it then?
You are kidding aren’t you? You really think a society without laws and without police would look virtually the same as it does right now?
Have you forgotten the LA Riots and what 24 hours without police protection will do?
Nice try. I reread Cain’s remarks. There is no way he was referring to the government’s role in deciding if they raise the child or not. No one ever contemplated such a position before.
If Cain really heard the question wrong or reacted that way to the question, he needs to get his hearing aid checked.
Nailed you and now you want to change the argument again?
Sorry Charlie, your other knee just did it again. You make a point at a “specific” law and I use another “specific” law to point out the folly of your argument. Then you want to change the argument to all laws, get real.
Stick to the argument and you might get somewhere like maybe admitting you are wrong on the point of the original question. See post 45 if your vision is obscured by your constant self induced kicks to the forehead.
What do you mean “which is it?” He said it isn’t the government’s place to make these decisions for people. What is so confusing to you about that?
Matthew 13:13
Therefore I speak to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand
Jeremiah 5:21
Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not:
Isaiah 6:9-10
And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear you indeed, but understand not; and see indeed, but perceive not.
Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.
“each individual/family”
Is abortion an individual right or a group (family) right?
Google is your friend. No one need be ignorant anymore.
Profound and astute comment.
Well now. I’m not a Cain supporter, but his answer there about family decision is so similar to what he said in the debate about an exception for mother’s life, I suspect that interview just might have been edited to make it seem like he’s talking about abortion in general.
If that were me I’d have quit talking to that venomous worm long before they got that far.
(2) Let's look at this question, because it seems Cain got caught up arguing one thing while the interviewer was arguing another.
“”MORGAN: ...If one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?
CAIN: You’re mixing two things here, Piers? Mixing what two things: abortion and who would raise the baby (adoption is an option Morgan nerver mentions).
MORGAN: Why?
CAIN: You’re mixing –
MORGAN: That’s what it comes down to.
CAIN: No, it comes down to it’s not the government’s role or anybody else’s role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidence, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t have to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive issue.””
Again, what decision are we talking about? There decision they are talking about is who will raise the baby.
It is a confusing segment, not doubt. But the idea that Herman Cain is pro-choce is so at odds with his previous positions, that it would like him comming out in favor of ObamaCare. A change of position of such epic proportions that you've got to wonder what else is going on here.
He needs to issue a clarifying statement since I cannot find his stance on the issue on his website.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.