"Governor Romney and Congressman (Paul) Ryan disagree with Mr. Akin's statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape," Romney spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg said.
Then we learn that Romney supports abortion not just in rape cases but also in incest cases:
found that while Romney backed abortions in cases of incest and rape, Ryan did not.
Now we know why Romney did not sign that pro-life pledge.
And we also discover that Right to Life, in endorsing Romney, has violated their own standards.
In short, those are loopholes so large that you could drive a fleet of trucks through them. Because it all depends on how you define those words.
Rape: "spousal rape"? "date rape"? Is rape rape just because someone says it's rape?
Incest: a consenting adult practitioners of incest really not responsible for the life of a conceived child? Is incest to be strictly defined as 1st cousin or closer? Or is 4th, 5th, 16th cousins eligible if the claim is simply "incest"?
Ping
So — let me guess — you’re going to vote for Obama instead, because his “all abortion, all the time” is preferable to Romney’s odious views?
Once again, we find that telling the truth is a gaffe.
The problem with Romney is that we really don’t know what he believes. In Mass he took a very different line than he does now on so many things that it is hard to find out what the real Mitt Romney believes. Personally I think he is a Republican Bill Clinton/John Edwards who has no core convictions and will say whatever he thinks people want to hear in order to get elected. I’ll vote for him against Obama but he is an even worse candidate than John McCain.
ping
Unemployment is worse in 44 states! That is my observation.
This discussion is a waste of time.
The return from the abortion culture is in small steps.
And it starts...
Has Obama changed his position on Infanticide?
Oh good, another tangent that diverts attention away from the terrible state of the country under Obama. Thanks Mr. Akin!
So all those ads by Obama are lies, then, right? We in Florida have been barraged with ads trying to scare women telling them Romney opposes abortion EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE AND INCEST.
So Romney-Ryan are liberal on abortion. That isn't going to be decided this presidential term, people! In fact, the States have been doing a much better job of proscribing abortion; there are no more abortion clinics in KY, for example, because of a new law requiring abortionists to have hospital privileges.
We need Romney/Ryan to DISRUPT the Obama regime. We need Romney/Ryan for a very specific set of jobs, related to economic freedom. Overturning Roe v Wade ain't among them. Not now.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
As if this is relevant at all, unless there’s a 50-50 vote in the senate should he become VP.
The "rape exception" is nothing more than another "and then you can kill the baby" laws that is used for allowing unrestricted abortion.
Romney is lying about Ryan’s position. Ryan’s position mirrors the Catholic Church and the Pope’s position. Romney is trying to force Ryan to compromise his core beliefs to put on a united stand against life and in favor of abortion and homosexual rights.
When Ryan himself actually comes out and says he thinks Abortion is OK in the case of Rape or Incest or the “health” of the mother, then we will know that Satan has won over Ryan just as he has won over Romney.
Let us pray that the evil spirit that drove Romney to be a solid supporter of the homosexual lobby and the Abortion industry does not destroy the soul of Ryan.
It’s prudent to point out that RomneyCare in MA covers abortions far more broadly than ObamaCare.
Romney should have told them that the question was below his pay grade. Now, let’s talk about the economy . . .
how long before the 2016 cheerleading of palin/ryan or ryan/palin begins ??? will we even have to wait til november ???
I saw nothing "odious" about what Akin said. His comments re: the rarity of pregnancy in cases of extreme stress (i.e. a rape, famine, and for crying out loud, even someone who is stressed about trying to get pregnant) are correct.
And I happen to agree that we should not punish one of the innocent parties if a pregnancy results from rape. Punish the perpetrator.
I've stated to those who are pro-abort, "Okay, lets keep abortion legal in cases of rape and incest and make it illegal otherwise. The only caveat would be that, starting at the point of requesting the abortion, the victim will be required to cooperate with the police in finding and punishing the guilty person or persons." They always try to change the subject, because that's not really why they want abortion to be legal.
To oppose Gov. Romney because he is insufficiently pro-life because he accepts legal abortion for cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is imminently in danger is to move the goalposts.
As a Catholic who tries to follow the teachings of the Church, I don't accept direct, intentional abortion for any reason whatsoever. Not even Rep. Ryan's exception “for the life of the mother.” There is nothing in Catholic moral teaching that permits an intentional, direct abortion to save the life of a pregnant mother.
The Church does acknowledge the principal of double-effect, where the effort to treat a disease or other physical health problem may have the indirect effect of also killing the unborn child, and has taught that these may be moral choices. Thus, it is morally acceptable for the woman who accepts life-saving cancer treatment that has the secondary effect of killing her unborn child. It is generally held that the removal of an inflamed fallopian tube that results in the death of an unborn child in an ectopic pregnancy has the primary effect of removing a part of the woman that has become diseased, and has the secondary effect of causing the death of the unborn child.
But a direct, intentional abortion - where the abortion is the actual “treatment” performed for the sake of the woman - is not morally acceptable.
Thus, even Rep. Ryan's public position is a little bit of a compromise with Church teaching.
Thus, for ALL OF US CATHOLICS, even accepting an exception for the life of the mother is a compromise of our Church's teaching.
It may not be so for you, since you're not Catholic, but it is for us.
Therefore, whether the compromise stops at the life of the mother, or in the relatively-rare cases of rape and incest, for Catholics, it isn't a question of compromise/no-compromise. It's a question of to what degree we are willing to compromise.
Well over 96% of abortions are NOT about rape, incest or the life of the mother. As a Catholic, I know the Church teaches that it is acceptable to hold political positions and to vote in a way that brings about greater protection of the unborn, even if that protection is not yet complete or perfected, and as long as we publicly acknowledge the principle that all human beings, born and unborn, have a right to life that should be respected and protected in law.
Thus, for all my years as a pro-lifer, I've embraced folks as pro-life that held that abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother.
Perhaps a fifth of folks believe as I do. Perhaps not quite that many. But more than half of folks believe that abortion should generally be illegal, except for the exceptions noted above.
I'm not interested in proving my theological or moral purity. I'm interested in trying to work through our democratic system to achieve a result that saves as many babies as we can save. And then, when we've secured something approaching a consensus on banning 96% of abortions, going back and fighting for the other 4% of unborn children.
MOST PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES PRO-LIFE accept abortion in cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother. Until we ban all the other abortions, these people are all my pro-life allies.
In fact, anyone who wants to overturn Roe, even if they accept a more liberal abortion law regime than I'd like, are pro-life allies. Until Roe is overturned or otherwise nullified. Thus, George Allen of Virginia is a pro-life ally. He's running against Tim Kaine to be the next US Senator from Virginia, and I support him, partly on pro-life grounds. His view is Roe must go!
But he also believes that the law should permit first trimester abortions.
When we get to the day that Roe is overturned, he will go from being our ally to being our adversary (and it will be incumbent upon us to try to win him over to our side).
When we get to the day that all abortions are banned except those where the mother's life is in true and immediate jeopardy, if you stand with those who wish to continue with that exception, you will become my adversary, you will become anti-life.
But until that day, we are allies. I hope even friends.
Let's not move the goalposts out of animus toward Gov. Romney. Traditionally, pro-lifers have counted among themselves all those who wish, at this time, to make illegal the 96% of abortions that are not cases of rape, incest or the life of the mother.
sitetest