Cain clarifies again: Abortion shouldn’t be legal, but some families might decide to break the law

HotAir ^ | Saturday October 21, 2011

[Bigtigermike]

Full Title: Cain clarifies again: Abortion shouldn’t be legal, but some families might decide to break the law anyway.

A better answer than yesterday’s spin attempt but Mediaite is right that it still doesn’t jibe with what he said to Piers Morgan. Then:

No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, 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 try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision…

The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.

Now:

Look, abortion should not be legal. That is clear. But if that family makes the decision to break the law, that’s that family’s decision. That’s all I’m trying to say.

Big difference between (a) the government shouldn’t tell you what to do about “sensitive” social decisions and (b) the government should tell you what to do by criminalizing one of your options. In fact, per Heinze at the The Hill and Philip Klein at the Examiner, even in today’s answer there’s an element of choice insofar as Cain suggests that a pregnant woman might end up breaking the law to get an illegal abortion. That’s, er, true — some of them would end up doing that — but it’s an odd note for a man in his position to sound. Rarely do would-be presidents acknowledge lawbreaking as an option

[the invisib1e hand]

wtf is the problem? it makes perfect sense, which is why most people can't understand it.

fortheluvofgawd, people who twist words ought to be strung up.

[muawiyah]

You have Presidents like Obama who recommend immorality ~ suggesting that some might break the law is hardly in the same category.

Imagine Joe Biden as President. He's using the threat of commiting rape to try to get Congress to vote his way.

Talk about some immorality and law breaking ~ I'd save the attack for the Democrats.

[MNJohnnie]

Here is a transcription of what was Cain actually said.

"I believe that life begins at conception. And abortion under no circumstances," Cain said. Morgan asked Cain if that meant he felt the procedure was impermissible in cases of rape and incest, which many anti-abortion activists and conservatives carve out exceptions for.

Cain reiterated that there were "no circumstances" under which he supported abortion. "If one of your female children, grandchildren was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?"

Morgan asked. Cain said that Morgan was "mixing" questions, but then replied: "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 incidents, 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."

I don't know how he could make it any clearer then this.

People around here who are emotionally tied to other candidates in the campaign need to keep in mind the 9th Commandment is not a suggestion.

Bearing false witness is still a sin

[org.whodat]

The perrywinkle attack against Cain is full steam ahead. Do you people not understand, that doofus perry is tied with or below Ron Paul in the first five primary states. His chances are those of a snow ball in hell.

[MestaMachine]

Because it is the one thing they have latched on to to try and bring Cain down. They are stringing this out to ridiculous lengths to convince people that Cain, who is the most consistently pro-life candidate we have, or have had in a long, long time, is somehow pro-choice. And they ain’t gonna stop either.

[Average Al]

"Look, abortion should not be legal. That is clear. But if that family makes the decision to break the law, that’s that family’s decision. That’s all I’m trying to say."

Does he want to try to state a position for a third time? ;-)

[cripplecreek]

Because it is the one thing they have latched on to to try and bring Cain down. They are stringing this out to ridiculous lengths to convince people that Cain, who is the most consistently pro-life candidate we have, or have had in a long, long time, is somehow pro-choice. And they ain’t gonna stop either.

He's being Palinized. It just solidifies support for him.

[Baynative]

"I believe that life begins at conception"

That's all you need to say, Mr. Cain. The president cannot change the law of the land without a Constitutional Amendment. So, don't get caught up in any more "gotcha" discussions.

[Cicero]

I am not a Cain supporter. I have serious doubts. But I have pointed out again and again that what Cain said is that the only choice that the mother of an unborn child who was raped can make is whether to keep the baby or give it up for adoption.

See post #4 for the transcript. It has to be read carefully, but if you do read it carefully, then it is clear that he is answering the question of whether the mother is obliged to keep the baby. No, if she cannot face being reminded of the rape, then she has a right to give birth to it and have it adopted out.

Any real pro-lifer will say the same thing.

[Netizen]

What surprises me is that they are allowed to misrepresent Cain over and over.

[the invisib1e hand]

Lynchin’ blacks shouldn’t be legal, but some klan boys might just be out for a good time. But that’s their decision. Just sayin’

I believe this is one of the stupidest FR posts I've read in over 13 years.

If you're going to take the medias bait so eagerly, FR isn't for you.

Unfortunately you have tons of company.

[montag813]

What does Rick Santorum want Cain to say? That abortion should be a crime, with doctors charged with murder and women as accessories to murder? Santorum has no credibility whatsoever on social issues after backing radical pro-abortion Arlen Specter over pro-life Pat Toomey years ago.

[Netizen]

You know darn well that Cain is responsible for everybody’s behavior, not just his own. /S

[Jonty30]

He should have just left it at, “There is no federal role in the abortion law. It is a state issue.”

And then shut up about it.

[trumandogz]

And when they break the law, they will be charged with capital murder.

[presently no screen name]

Yeah, but he has no problem voting for someone who has a strong pro-abortion stance. Self righteous hypocrite.

[mkjessup]

What Herman Cain is saying, and what some people obviously can't comprehend, is that he believes abortion should be ILLEGAL. And if it WAS illegal, there may be some individuals who will choose to break the law, rather than abide by it. And that applies to all SORTS of laws, for example if tobacco were outlawed, you can bet that some people would still grow their own, sneak out in back of the barn, and light up. Ditto for alcohol. Prohibition was the law of the land for a brief time, and MANY people obeyed that law, but there were others who chose NOT to.

NOBODY can force an individual to obey the law, ANY law, unless the individual in question is morally convinced that obeying the law is preferable than breaking that law.

Every single day, millions of Americans break the speed limit. The law is broken. But that is their choice as individuals, to either be law abiding, or to be lawbreakers.

Now obviously the question of abortion is much more serious and much more profound, because it affects the existence or the non-existence of a created human being. That is why I believe that Cain's absolute belief in the sanctity of human life is not only easily understood, but is without doubt, morally defensible. The only POSSIBLE reason for an abortion would be if the life of the mother would be placed at risk by continuing a pregnancy. If a child were conceived by an act of rape or incest, that life is still innocent, although the mother is certainly not obligated (in my view) to raise that child unless she chooses to do so, in such cases adoption may well be a preferred option.

One thing Herman Cain is absolutely correct about, and that is the dark and murderous legacy of Planned Parenthood and it's evil racist founder Margaret Sanger, one of the original purposes of Planned Parenthood was plain and simple eugenics and 'culling the herd' by killing unborn black babies. Margaret Sanger viewed blacks as an inferior race, and it was her objective to ultimately remove them from her version of 'civilization'. Herman Cain is one of the few (in fact the ONLY) candidate to speak out on this deplorable fact which has decimated the American black family ever since it was founded in 1921.

[demkicker]

You make an excellent point and one I'd like to hear Santorum try to defend (the indefensible).