Posted on 10/30/2011 1:25:41 PM PDT by Steelfish
Cain Says He Opposes Abortion Without Exceptions SHANNON McCAFFREY
— Republican Herman Cain on Sunday said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake, contradicting previous statements in which he favored some exceptions.
The tough stand that Cain staked out during an interview with CBS' "Face the Nation" comes as he tries to clear up his position on an issue closely watched by social conservative and evangelical voters, who are among his strongest supporters.
In a 1998 interview with Nation's Restaurant News, the former pizza executive described himself as "pro-life with exceptions, and people want you to be all or nothing."
In a recent interview with CNN, he said the government should not tell women what to do in cases of rape and incest. Afterward, his campaign issued a statement saying he was "100 percent pro-life." It did not specifically mention whether he supported any exceptions.
The no-exception position is considered the most rigid in the anti-abortion community. Even some who oppose abortion support exceptions in extreme circumstances such as when the mother's life is at risk. Cain told CBS he's "pro-life from conception, period." Asked whether that includes instances of rape, incest and life of the mother, Cain said, "Correct. That's my position."
He also endorsed a controversial theory linking abortion to racial genocide. Cain said Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger wanted to eradicate minorities by putting birth control clinics in their neighborhoods, a charge that the group denies.
Cain said 75 percent of the organization's abortion facilities were built in black communities.
"In Margaret Sanger's own words, she didn't use the word genocide, but she did talk about preventing the increasing number of poor blacks in this country by preventing black babies from being born," Cain said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Seems the smear machine cannot decide which way to smear Cain.
born December 13, 1945 in Memphis, TN (Meets the Jus Soli Requirement)
Parents were
Luther Cain Jr., born March 16, 1925 in TN, died March 29, 1982 in Atlanta, GA
Lenora Davis, born July 27, 1925 in GA, died August 20, 2005 in Atlanta, GA
Both parents were US Citizens at the time of his birth (Meets the Jus Sanguinis Requirement)
Herman Cain is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama ISN'T!
Click on the cane.
“when the life of the mother is at stake”
Well he (and other candidates) are going to have to explain how this one would work in practice.
“Republican Herman Cain on Sunday said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake...”
Herman Cain understands the words of Thomas Jefferson who wrote in the Declaration of Independence that “All Men Are Created Equal.”
Furthermore, Cain understands the Equal Protection Clause of our Constitution which states that “no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
And it is time for American to understand Herman Cain and to understand that even those children conceived via rape are people just like you and me and should be protected under our Constitution.
Show me a single situation where a mother’s life is in danger, and only an abortion (as opposed to a c-section) will save her.
I was thinking the same thing. I keep hearing this thrown around, but have never, ever heard of one such case. I’m all ears (proverbially).
“Show me a single situation where a mother’s life is in danger, and only abortion will save her”.
The only exception that I could see is an ectopic pregnancy. Some can debate it is an abortion; however, I would disagree. For one, the fetus is usually deformed beyond any sort of viability. Secondly, it can’t be transplanted into the uterus. Third, the fetus will die no matter what so the surgery is done to prevent the death of the Mother as well. That is the only case that I can think of and it shouldn’t be banned.
“Show me a single situation where a mother’s life is in danger, and only an abortion (as opposed to a c-section) will save her.”
The “Life of the Mother (Murderer) Exception is a loophole so large that a pregnant mother at eight and a half months could walk straight through it to get a Partial Birth Abortion.
And what you will see if there is a Life of the Mother Exemption is women saying “If I have my baby, I will commit suicide.” and doctors will then assist these women in having abortions.
See post #9... it is the only one that I can think of...
How about a mother needing chemo from cancer? Should she be banned from chemo because it would harm the baby? Should the govt be involved with making this decison?
“Should the govt be involved with making this decison?”
Should the government be involved the decision of a woman who wants to strap her two babies is a car seat and push the car into a lake?
Should the government investigate every miscarriage as if it was a potential murder?
Government doesn’t (rightly) make decisions for people (at least it’s not supposed to), but it does provide consequences.
They are still misrepresenting his previous position.
The left loves to present false dilemmas. I lived in Germany in the 1980s and my German wife told me that abortion there at that time was supposed to be only to protect the mother’s life. This stipulation got stretched to psychological well being and meant that, in practice, if the mother said that the thought of having a baby depressed her she could get an abortion. That is exactly how the mother’s life in danger canard will be stretched anywhere it is accepted.
“Should the government be involved the decision of a woman who wants to strap her two babies is a car seat and push the car into a lake?”
Of course!
Now to the issue at hand: The few situations where a mother’s life and the baby’s life are directly at odds. What do you do? Is there a solution? I don’t have one either. I’m looking for ideas.
“Should the government investigate every miscarriage as if it was a potential murder?”
When a five year old child dies, we investigate first via a medical examiner and then if need be by homicide detectives.
Why should we we treat the death of a five year old child differently than we treat the death of a child at three months gestation?
Why are the babies in that car seat more valuable to you than a baby in the womb?
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.