Skip to comments.
Cain: Government Shouldn't Make Decision on Abortion, Rape
LifeNews.com ^
| October 20, 2011
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 10/20/2011 7:50:01 AM PDT by julieee
Cain: Government Shouldn't Make Decision on Abortion, Rape
Washington, DC -- Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain is raising eyebrows today of pro-life advocates and political pundits who thought he had previously taken a pro-life position on abortion.
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/10/20/cain-government-shouldnt-make-decision-on-abortion-rape/
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; cain; government; incest; moralabsolutes; rape
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 last
To: TexasFreeper2009
But Perry's stance on abortion is VERY clear:
Katherine Cesinger, State Press Director, RickPerry.org, Inc., says, re: Governor Perrys position on abortion: His position has been consistent on this. Gov. Perry is pro-life, with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.
141
posted on
10/20/2011 5:42:38 PM PDT
by
rintense
(ABO is not a winning strategy.)
To: Responsibility2nd
There’s no point. He’s just a Cain spammer.
To: firebrand
He DID clarify on Facebook: ‘I’m 100% pro life. End of story.’ Yet, Perrywinkles are spinning a lie even worse than the NYT, especially when their own guys isn’t 100% pro life.
143
posted on
10/20/2011 5:45:19 PM PDT
by
rintense
(ABO is not a winning strategy.)
To: CharlesWayneCT
Pro-aborts like to think pro-lifers make an exception for rape and incest. The truth is that when this concession is made, it is a political concession. No pro-lifer that I know, and I know many, would make an exception for rape or incest.
I know Jewish pro-lifers who make an exception for the life of the mother. That’s about it as far as pro-lifers’ concessions and exceptions.
144
posted on
10/20/2011 5:49:00 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: MNJohnnie
Why are you tediously repeating your answer to several posters individually instead of pinging them as a group?
145
posted on
10/20/2011 5:54:11 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: metmom
There are such cases. The pro-life movement has many examples of situations where the medical people involved insisted, totally in good faith, that the woman could not survive the pregnancy but where the woman chose to trust in G-d and go on with it. There could be cases where the woman did not survive, but those are not the ones I’ve heard about.
146
posted on
10/20/2011 6:07:14 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: rintense
I’m not a Perrywinkle if that means believing Perry can do no wrong. His position is a political position, as all the candidates’ positions are. I will look at all the candidates individually and with as little shallow emotion as possible at some point before our primary.
147
posted on
10/20/2011 6:14:37 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: firebrand
Why are you tediously repeating your answer to several posters individually instead of pinging them as a group?I can't speak for the poster you addressed that comment to, but I find the removal from context of Cain's remarks by more than a few posters to be tedious.
Perhaps the posters became impatient.
To: rintense
Also, he seemed to be making a distinction between personal belief and his political stance. He has to clear that up. He has to say what he means politically by “pro-life”—will he back up his personal belief with the correct executive orders and positions on Roe v. Wade and the proposed human life amendment? As I pointed out earlier on this thread, the term “pro-life” is misused by many.
149
posted on
10/20/2011 6:19:47 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: FreeReign
We will soon see, as long as we have a smart interviewer this time and one who isn’t trying to pull any tricks.
150
posted on
10/20/2011 6:40:12 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: firebrand
Again, though, there simply are not that many situations in which it is necessary to take the life of the baby because of a threat to the mother’s life, especially in the early stages of the pregnancy.
The life threatening to the mother’s life ones tend to happen at a stage in the pregnancy when the baby can be delivered prematurely without being killed.
Any life threatening issues that occur in early pregnancy, before 20 weeks, if they threaten anyone, are by far more likely to be threatening the life of the baby, resulting in a miscarriage.
151
posted on
10/20/2011 6:43:01 PM PDT
by
metmom
(For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: metmom
This could be true, statistically. But we are not talking statistics. We are talking about the cases where perhaps the mother has an underlying medical condition prior to the pregnancy, and it is known from the get-go that she will not or might not survive. Or she develops an illness early on.
152
posted on
10/20/2011 6:52:38 PM PDT
by
firebrand
(Why didn't they impeach him before he started the revolution?)
To: metmom
And what situation would that be where a baby would pose such an immediate threat to the mother's life at a stage in the pregnancy where the baby is too young for survival, say 20 weeks?
I'm simply saying that that is the only logical possibility where early delivery might be warranted, a situation where the mother's life is in real danger and delivery would save her - and only early delivery will save her, there is no alternative. I'm not advocating for abortion, simply discussing a hypothetical situation that has probably come up only very rarely, where that early delivery is known ahead of time to be dangerous for the child.
Rape, incest, all of those simply mean that people regret who the father is, but having a repugnant father does not justify killing the child.
Abortion is intentional killing of the child. I can't think of a case where that is warranted. Early delivery would entail making the child as comfortable as possible if it was most likely that they would die. But early delivery does not mean - as far as I know- inducing delivery then killing the child.
The only justifiable situation for doing something that is likely to result in the death of the child is that is if that it is the only way to save the life of the mother. I googled a little, I could not find a specific case where that happened, though it may have. The only thing I found in my quick search was eclampsia, but it did not look like that was typically life-threatening for the mother these days before the earliest possible delivery.
Yes, in terms of no need to kill the baby after early delivery is possible, (20 weeks, 24 weeks, whatever the precise time is, doctors know), that's absolutely true. Once the child can survive if delivered, I did not find any medical reason why killing the child would save the mother's life.
153
posted on
10/21/2011 6:28:55 AM PDT
by
PieterCasparzen
(We need to fix things ourselves)
To: PieterCasparzen
The only situation that I am aware of where the baby poses a threat to the life of the mother early in the pregnancy is in the case of a tubal pregnancy and addressing that is not considered abortion.
154
posted on
10/21/2011 8:32:48 AM PDT
by
metmom
(For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson