Posted on 08/18/2015 7:22:32 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The editors of the National Review are advising Marco Rubio to revise his pro-life position to make an exception for rape and incest. They reason that failure to allow such an exception marks him as an extremist and only serves to alienate a public that may be attracted to other aspects of the pro-life platform such as opposition to late-term abortion and taxpayer funding of abortion.
This is their advice to Rubio and other pro-life presidential candidates:
What then should a candidate say if he believes that in an ideal world, unborn children conceived in rape should be protected? Asked about abortion in the case of rape, the first thing that candidate should do is to express sympathy for the woman who was brutalized and put in a terrible position. It would be perfectly honorable for that candidate to say next that restricting abortion in that case is not part of his agenda -- because in no serious sense is it part of any Republican’s agenda; and to say that by the end of his presidency abortion will be just as available in cases of rape as it is today -- because that is true.
Senator Rubio would be well-advised to ignore the second half of this counsel.
To begin with, it is rarely wise to allow political expedience, rather than principle, to determine one’s stance on an ethical question of fundamental importance. If you believe the answer to this question is yes, then have the courage of your convictions to say so. Senator Rubio, reasonably enough, believes we are talking about living human beings; these unborn children are not capital to be traded away for a bump in the polls.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I'm very pro-life. What I wouldn't mind is a 24 hour window to report a rape. With that early reporting, those who've raped a woman are more likely to be caught and convicted. And assuming we become a moral society again, that likelihood of conviction will reduce rape and more women will accept any pregnancy that might occur.
National Review = Liberaltarian Rag.
Do we put rapists to death? No.
So why do we punish the rapist’s child with death, for the crime of his/her father?
I didn’t say we put the rapist’s child to death. I said we create an environment where rape will be immediately reported, become more rare, and more women will move toward accepting a pregnancy which occurs. In a world where morning-after pills are available over the counter, it’s the most realistic and effective way to deal with rape exceptions. A 24 hour window is workable.
If Trump says he’s for those abortion exceptions then we must be for them too(apparently) .
He is up in the polls.
He wont take crap from journalists, not even FNC.
Only he has the guts, smarts and $$$ to kick their butts, and we are mad as hell and wont take it anymore.
We at Nation Rinoview ask all candidates to abandon their principals and follow our advice, because the ends justify the means. Play ball like our great Republican leaders, Boehner and McConnell!
Could you elaborate? Do you mean after the 24 hour Window a woman would not be allowed to report the rape?
GOP candidates should avoid nitpicking over exceptions when talking about abortion, it’s lose/lose. I assume Fox asked Walker and Rubio stupid abortion questions cause they just wanted to hurt them.
That's OK as long as they don't ask Trump those questions.
If they ask Trump then its a GOPe conspiracy.
Kelly obviously works for Reince Priebus.
That is why Trump keeps going on NBC’s Meet the Press for interviews, because NBC is fair and balanced,
Aren't other violent crimes expected to be reported immediately?
NR long ago jumped the shark....
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.
