Posted on 10/20/2011 6:05:43 PM PDT by rintense
PASADENA, Md., Sept. 21, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ -- Katherine Cesinger, State Press Director, RickPerry.org, Inc., says, re: Governor Rick Perry's 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."
In response, Michael Anthony Peroutka, co-founder with his brother Steve of "Institute On The Constitution" (TheAmericanView.com), has issued the following statement:
(Excerpt) Read more at christiannewswire.com ...
Perry’s abortion stance is not a reason to oppose his nomination. It is well within any standard definition of pro-life.
The reason not to nominate him is that he about as smart as a bag of nails.
The candidates were Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore. Fiorina received the endorsements of SBA Fund and California Pro-Life. Both groups sold out.
Link of SBA Fund endorsement: http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/2848513730.html
Here is the record of alleged “pro-life” Carly...
1) Fiorina told a group of reporters in November that she would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to SCOTUS:
Source: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34552
2) On November 5th, 2009, Fiorina was directly “asked whether she would vote to reverse” Roe v. Wade, and dodged the question: “The focus of my campaign are the issues that matter to the people of California, and what matters is what’s on the table right now — is how to we create more jobs and how do we get federal spending out of control.”
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=51106&tsp=1
3) On November 9th, 2009, in a KPCC interview, Fiorina downplayed her pro-life stance, saying, “I believe that life begins at conception ... I also recognize that these social issues are not whats on the table today.” Of note is that she said this at the same time the so-called Stupak Amendment was a topic of national debate.
Source: http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2009/11/09/carly-fiorina-runs-for-senate
4) Finally and most revealing, in a conversation to with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, Fiorina affirmed that she was personally pro-life, but reiterated her support for Sotomayor, saying, “I do not believe where a potential judicial nominee stands on that issue [of abortion rights] is a qualifier or an unqualifier.”
She then went on to characterize the entire American pro-life movement as essentially a waste of time, saying: “[M]any, many voters are going to conclude while that is a very important issue, it is frankly a decided issue. The law is clear in the state of California, where there is a constitutional guarantee to the right to an abortion. So why are we talking about a theoretical issue?”
Story and audio here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/02/MN8J1CP7H5.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/opinionshop/detail?&entry_id=60529
Contrast this record with Chuck DeVore’s. He has a 100% pro-life, pro-family rating from the Capitol Resource Institute — and multiple 100% ratings from the California Republican Assembly to his credit.
Much of the above was posted on this thread and many other threads during the primary campaign: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2509577/posts
Now I don’t want this thread to turn into a Susan B. Anthony Fund thread, the group that you keep trying to promote as a credible pro-life group to distract from what Rick Perry may or may not believe on pro-life issues, or any other candidate for that matter including Herman Cain. Nor do I want this thread to continue to re-hash a nasty U.S. Senate campaign from two years ago.
It is important to vet each and every candidate so we can determine the best candidate to be our next President of the United States. Hopefully we will be successful in that venture.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAA!
So sad that the people calling this race over back in August are now viewing everyone from the bottom of the heap, including from behind Ron Paul.
But bless your heart for trying.
I’m beginning to detest Perry too, you Perrywinkles are making your savior look bad. He’s a loser, get over it.
Came to that conclusion long before learning of Perry's 'exceptions'.
Let's see... WHY she was prolife?
"I myself was not able to have children of my own, and so I know what a precious gift life is," Fiorina said. She helped raised two stepchildren, the daughters of her second husband, Frank Fiorina. One, Lori Ann Fiorina, 35, died last year.Carly Fiorina outlines her anti-abortion stance"My husband's mother was told to abort him," Fiorina said. "She spent a year in the hospital after his birth. My husband is the joy of her life, and he is the rock of my life. So those experiences have shaped my view."
Your charge is repulsive, CCC.
Governor Perry has always championed prolife laws, including the one we passed this year, which did not have an exception for rape and incest. That law has already caused Travis County and Austin to stop paying for abortions from the County tax funds. Last year, they paid for nearly 400 abortions.
Admittedly, this was the first of our laws that did not have that exception, but it is is a first. And we were assisted by the Governor’s atmosphere of protecting the right not to be killed.
He understands that life begins at fertilization and that is in our laws since 2003. He has been a strong defender of life outside the womb, from conception. We have had intense pushes in the last decade to fund embryonic stem cell research and cloning (clone to kill bills that redefine cloning, pregnancy, blastocysts, embryos and force the killing of embryos by day 14.) When Governor Perry talks about the differences between the two he understands the subtlety between the unethical, destructive embryonic and non-destructive, ethical adult stem cell research.
The Texas law overturned in Roe v. Wade allowed for exceptions. It was the strictest abortion law in the country.
Another lying troll is revealed.
I'm not for Perry and never went after Cain on his abortion answer.
You don't even get points for originality.
No!
This post is nonsense. A woman who is forcibly raped has every right to abort. She made no choice or decision to have sex, and can’t be forced to bear the rapist’s child against her will.
Easy enough to say while in good health. You might find that position tougher to maintain while laying in a hospital bed and facing a nasty diagnosis, such as uncontrollable eclamptic seizures and a fast track to multiorgan failure. That happened to an aunt of mine in the early '60s. She grieved the child she lost until her dying day - but she lived to raise her older child and, as a teacher, she touched the lives of countless other children. Am I supposed to condemn her?
These exceptions that are being cast at Perry like stones are actually artifacts of the pre- Roe v. Wade America. I see no harm in setting a goal of rolling back the abortion culture to that particular point... for starters. I would like to think that most pro-lifers would recognize that we will never entirely eradicate this horrid practice and that stopping a large percentage of abortions would be a huge victory.
Leave the arguable exceptions for another time, when we're fighting on more level ground.
I wonder, should someone who is truly pro life be opposed to capital punishment? If someone undergoes surgery to prolong his own life, or for that matter, take medication to control pain or cure disease, is that also attempting to thwart the will of God, by using man’s technology? Just wondering out loud.I am pro life, but I think there are exceptions, too, so maybe I am not as pro life as some are...
Punishing an innocent life, compounding the original crime.
rintense...a troll?? LOL
I hope all three of you in the country that believe such nonsense find the perfect presidential candidate...
I am 100% pro-life, period.
Let me explain. In an interview yesterday with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.
If you listen to the line of questioning, it is clear that Mr. Morgan was asking if I, as president, would simply “order” people to not seek an abortion.
My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.
As to my political view on abortion...again, I am pro-life. End of story.
As President, I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.
I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life.
Sincerely,
Herman Cain
_____________________
`African American Businessman Spends 1M to Urge Blacks to Vote Pro-Life (2006)
http://www.lifenews.com/2006/09/13/nat-2583/
Herman Cain Reaffirms Commitment to Pro-Life Principles
http://secure.campaigner.com/Campaigner/Public/t.show?LVMF—8Oz3-WCSgU7
Cain Picks Clarence Thomas as Model for Supreme Court Pick
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/232604/20111017/herman-cain-clarence-thomas-supreme-court.htm
2004 - Herman Cain blasts Roe v. Wade (Free Republic - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/1063707/posts
And Alveda King affirmed on Facebook that she knew and worked with Cain on Pro-life issues over the years and testifies that he is Prolife
Herman Cain: Defund Racist Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/18/herman-cain-defund-racist-planned-parenthood-abortion-biz/
Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood Should Be Called ‘Planned Genocide’
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/herman-cain-planned-parenthood-should-be-called-planned-genocide.php
Life, liberty & pursuit of happiness starts with unborn life
The Founding Fathers got it right. The Founding Fathers got it right because of those fundamental principles: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They also got it in the right order. That wasn’t an accident. Their vision meant that you could pursue happiness in America as long as you don’t infringe upon the liberties of somebody else. And you can pursue all the liberties that you want as long as you don’t infringe upon the life of anybody else. And that starts with the life of the unborn.
Source: , May 1, 2011
Defund Planned Parenthood; intent was to kill black babies
I absolutely would defund Planned Parenthood—not because I don’t believe in planning parenthood, [but because] Planned Parenthood as an organization is an absolute farce on the American people.
People who know the history of Margaret Sanger, who started Planned Parenthood, they know that the intention was not to help young women who get pregnant to plan their parenthood. No—it was a sham to be able to kill black babies.
Source: Interview on the Bryan Fischer radio show , Jan 18, 2011
Life begins at conception, period
I believe that life begins at conception, period. And that means that I will have to see enough evidence that someone I would appoint shares that same view. I believe that the current Supreme Court is leaning too much to the liberal side.
There is no way I would compromise my religious beliefs about the sanctity of life. And so it starts with, will they have demonstrated, in some of their other rulings, if they come from the federal judge bench, whether or not they also share that.
Because I believe that the principles that our Founding Fathers cherished, when they founded this country, and wrote the Declaration of Independence which inspired the Constitution, they were based upon biblical principles.
ontheissues.org
Quick story. When I joined FR, I was pro-choice. Now, I am unequivocally pro-life. Why? Because EVERY conception is a miracle from God. Even those conceived in a crime. It is an innocent LIFE, regardless of how it was conceived.
Thanks :)
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.