Replies

Good questions. Here are my replies, briefly.....

1. Oppose: It's not the baby's fault his/her father was a monster.

2. I don't know enough about the case to really comment, but let me say that if the 9 year old could not have safely carried the child to term, then I would support any medical treatment necessary to save her life. Note, I don't reguard a medical procedure used to save the life of a woman, if said procedure does have a SECONDARY affect of killing the baby, as an "abortion". That's because the primary goal is to save the life of the woman in such instances; the primary goal is NOT to kill the baby.

3. Expert medical opinion, supported by science and agreed by most in the profession is sufficient for me.

4. Yes, I do. See #1.

Asking these questions of potential candidates is a good idea. Like I said, they're good questions.

Here is a helpful article on Rape and Abortion in the US Political Context.

Rather than summarize, I'll provide the URL:

http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/abortion/rape-and.htm

The site has several other reasoned perspectives on Abortion and good thoughts on the usual "Hard Cases" objection which pro-legal-abortion persons often bring up. The bottom line is that these "hard cases" are an extremely tiny number of abortions, I believe those who demand answers on these topics before addressing ways to reduce or stop the significant numbers of 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions are using this as a delaying tactic.