Cain to Piers Morgan: I’m anti-abortion yet pro-choice

posted at 10:40 am on October 20, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Maybe Herman Cain is trying too hard to be likable. He doesn’t need to enter attack mode or anything, but it would help if he didn’t pander to lefty media hosts, either. I have to assume that’s what this is — unless Cain really doesn’t think it’s the government’s business to ban abortion?

Last night, Cain told Piers Morgan that “life begins at conception” and said he opposes abortion “in all cases.” But when Morgan pressed him with typical questions about whether Cain would want his daughter or granddaughter to have a child conceived by rape or incest, Cain dodged. First, he told Morgan he was confusing two separate matters (apples and oranges, perhaps?). But, then, he said this, apparently still in reference to what he thinks about cases involving rape:

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.

Watch:

Huh?

This isn’t the first time Cain has seemed to contradict himself on the abortion issue. In an interview with John Stossel earlier this month, Cain circled around and around Stossel’s frank questions, defaulting to stock phrases like “I’m pro-life” and “life begins at conception” — but also “that’s her choice.” When Stossel asked him if abortion should be legal, though, he flat-out said “no.” That suggests that, in general at least, he does think it’s the government’s role to “make that decision.”

And in an interview with Meet the Press’ David Gregory, Cain said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest because “the percentage of those instances is so minuscule that there are other options.” But “if it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”

If you put all the pieces together, at best it seems Cain believes abortion is wrong “in all cases,” should be illegal in most cases and should be a choice in some cases.

But it’s also possible he meant what he said to Piers Morgan, when he used pretty sweeping language to supposedly address exceptional cases: “It’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision.” It seems possible he’s bought into the idea that a complete government ban on abortion would somehow be an encroachment on individual freedom, rather than the most fundamental protection of it possible. Without life, what is liberty?

Yet, in 2003, he said he would support a Human Life Amendment, which would ultimately completely ban abortion. And, again, he told Stossel he thinks abortion should be illegal.

Quite confusing — and we can’t turn to his executive or legislative record to see what his actions on the issue have said. Whether his circumlocution should disqualify him with strictly pro-life voters is a matter for debate, but it would certainly help if Cain would clarify this by stating his position unequivocally.

For example (if this is his position), he could simply say: “I think abortion should be illegal and whether a person has a right to life is never another person’s choice to make.”

Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake.”

Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be legal, but, culturally speaking, will work to oppose it because I personally believe it is wrong.”

Whatever it is, Mr. Cain, just spit it out.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Man, Tina…good job at throwing out the red meat for the CONCERN TROLLS of Ha!!! My hat is off to you! Guess the president is the president of only one set of people…can’t have his/her own convictions but have to abide by the law of the land…nope.

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

DOES ANYONE ELSE SEE WHY I DO NOT TRUST THIS MAN????? HE IS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING REALLY REALLY REALL STUPID!!!!

I am supporting Perry…. Romney & Cain are idiots!!!

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Right – see – you get it.

It’s one thing to be Pro-Choice – it’s quite another thing to give incoherent statements about what you think the real role of government should be in the case of abortion.

This is the problem that Cain just created for himself – no one here knows if he’s pro-life or pro-choice. The best I can see here – he may hold Harry Reid’s view of abortion (personally against it / but would allow it as a choice) … and that’s not a feather in his hat if that’s the position he’s taking.

But then – I can’t even conclude that that’s really his position – because he also said he’d support a PRO-LIFE AMENDMENT (before he said that government shouldn’t be involved).

Of course – the Cain fanbois – all this crazieness is further evidence of why Herman Cain would be a GREAT President.

Ignorance is Strength!

WTF?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

LOL – I love cultism!

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

We know…

tinkerthinker on October 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM

If society can’t decide when life begins (and it can’t) – then society shouldn’t destroy a fetus at any stage of development.

I’m sorry – but this is the only intellectual position on the matter.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Sorry HondaV65, but I just attended a pro-life conference where a top ethicist (a PHD in molecular Biology, plus a long list of credentials) tells of the full scientific acceptance of life begining “at conception” -only to be shifted by political pressure by the abortion lobby to the (flexible legal)phrase of “upon implantation” of the embryo, which allows legally for chemical abortificants to destroy the innocent human.

I guess it’s just more emanations from penumbras or Obama’s psot abortion survivor game of kill them because of “intent.”

There is no other truth then we are chosing to kill innocent life and in numbers far more than the millions taken by the great despots of the twentieth century. Like it or not -we have become the evil nation that we once would have considered gravely evil!

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Plus, we have the best sweet tea.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

We also have pretty good music, too.

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Man, Tina…good job at throwing out the red meat for the CONCERN TROLLS of Ha!!! My hat is off to you! Guess the president is the president of only one set of people…can’t have his/her own convictions but have to abide by the law of the land…nope.

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

So you support Roe V. Wade as the law of the land?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Cultism

HondaV65

Yes you are displaying it, then projecting it onto others like me.
Again YOU made the claim about the “soul”, it’s on you to prove it.

I see we have a few loons here that demand the candidate be every bit as much against abortion as they are. They want a purer than pure candidate. FYI, that won’t happen as long as we have humans running.

Aborting a baby that is the result of rape is murder? That is a sick way to think.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM

and don’t tell me that the courts do that

Yes, the courts do that. Lines like that are drawn for many aspects of society. Why are you a senior at 65, but not the day before? Why are you an adult at 18, but not the day before? Courts make those determinations. They have to because if they don’t, every baby is an adult. In fact, every baby would be a senior citizen if they didn’t.

You social cons have to watch what you wish for. There is also a view that meat is murder. Or hunting is murder. Or capital punishment is murder. You will scoff and say that is stretch. Not to them. They would say claiming an embryo is a human being is also a stretch. Would you like somebody to try to make those things illegal because it morally offends millions of people who feel just as passionately as you do? If you don’t want others’ strong moral views to be imposed on your universe, don’t be so quick to use federal law to impose your moral views on others. And, as a post script, as a conservative, you are supposed to be against Washington passing more laws to tell Americans how to live.

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Big Orange, see my response to Hondah above. There is a time when it isn’t a fetus and it isn’t murder. Period. Again, science and facts.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

An individual is an organism with an independent genetic make up (IE. not a skin cell). At conception, the fertilized egg becomes a genetically differentiated individual compared to the mother. At every point past that moment, it becomes more complex. But the individual is formed at conception. I really don’t see how someone with a basic understanding of biology could dispute this.

Come to think of it – WHY NOT just make the other side happy and adopt ALL of their positions – including socialism, neo-feminism, anti-war, etc?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Oh yea, the horror of adopting an “anti-war” position.

Rainsford on October 20, 2011 at 12:25 PM

There is no other truth then we are chosing to kill innocent life and in numbers far more than the millions taken by the great despots of the twentieth century. Like it or not -we have become the evil nation that we once would have considered gravely evil!

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Thanks for that post – it was extremely enlightening.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Moral perversion and self-righteousness go hand in hand down South.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Plus, we have the best sweet tea.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Bwahahahaha! Good one.

kg598301 on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Here’s something else, how about we focus on saving the people that are here now, as opposed to potential future humans?
If we let Romney or obama win, there will definitely be less of us around.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Man, Tina…good job at throwing out the red meat for the CONCERN TROLLS of Ha!!! My hat is off to you! Guess the president is the president of only one set of people…can’t have his/her own convictions but have to abide by the law of the land…nope.

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

I think the issue is that when someone says “I don’t think the government should tell you what to do, but should make that action illegal” it just shows that they either A) Have no idea what the word illegal means or B) Are an idiot.

Rainsford on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Man, Tina…good job at throwing out the red meat for the CONCERN TROLLS of Ha!!! My hat is off to you! Guess the president is the president of only one set of people…can’t have his/her own convictions but have to abide by the law of the land…nope.

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

We’re still trying to figure out Mr. Cain’s convictions — they seem to change every hour on the hour depending on who is interviewing him.

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

I am outraged that, as conservatives, we allow progressive/liberal/Democrats to lay claim to the expression “pro-choice” to describe their pro-abortion position. Dems are the party of no choice.

Conservatives are the true proponents of choice. And it is possible to be both pro-life and pro-choice because being pro-choice doesn’t have to mean you accept abortion as a legitimate choice.

Here’s an interesting expression of “Pro-choice Conservatism”.

Ordinary American on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

This is the single issue that drives me insane about the right. Cain’s position is the same as Giuliani. He personally opposes abortion but also recognizes that it is a personal decision, not the government’s decision. What is so hard to understand about that?

How can we as conservatives/libertarians whine and moan about too much government intrusion in our lives yet demand that the government be involved in probably the most difficult decision a woman can make? The two don’t jive.

This issue is the main reason conservatives are not united. Drop it like a hot potato and focus on the economy for Phase I. Once we have our government we can go into Phase II on educating people about birth control and the right to life.

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Goddamn, you’re a despicable slimeball.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Now them ain’t church-going words, junior. Maybe it’s time for you to go outside for a walk and take this board a little less seriously?

Plus, we have the best sweet tea.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Now that’s a gracious comment. Good on you. And yes, it’s true. Moral perversion and righteousness have led to some pretty amazing things in the South, too, in addition to sweet tea: Moon Pies, Flannery O’Connor, buckets of spicy crawdads, and the continuing wonder called Mississippi blues.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

I see we have a few loons here that demand the candidate be every bit as much against abortion as they are. They want a purer than pure candidate. FYI, that won’t happen as long as we have humans running.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Wait … why don’t you tell that to Hermie Cain? He’s been attacking Rick Perry as a non-pure conservative.

I submit you need to grow a thick skin – because the same rules that Herman Cain applies to others – others will hold Herman Cain to!

Get used to it – I have a crying towel for you if you need one but the vetting of Herman Cain continues.

Much to his disappointment I might add.

Now flip the race card at me and tell me that I dislike him because he’s black.

That’s the way you guys are. If you can’t win by twisting an argument – you resort to victimhood.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Nice having our side tear apart our side over issues the other side doesn’t care about other than to tear our side apart over.

DanMan on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Here’s something else, how about we focus on saving the people that are here now, as opposed to potential future humans?
If we let Romney or obama win, there will definitely be less of us around.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

So you’re advocating that we go ahead and put “future humans” in massive debt so that we can fix today’s problems? GOT IT.

Rainsford on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

And Rainsford? Like I said, it’s life, but not a human or a fetus. Until it’s a fetus ending the pregnancy is hardly murder.
Sorry, but the absolutest view others have on life/conception is hardly based in science.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:29 PM

Maybe someone should ask Cain if we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

Physics Geek on October 20, 2011 at 12:30 PM

This is the single issue that drives me insane about the right. Cain’s position is the same as Giuliani. He personally opposes abortion but also recognizes that it is a personal decision, not the government’s decision. What is so hard to understand about that?

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Omigod — an outbreak of sanity on Hot Air today. Next you’re all going to be wearing Mitt buttons.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:30 PM

He said he wants to change the law by supporting a PRO-LIFE amendment to the Constitution.
But then he says a woman should be able to choose?
Seriously – he’s bat shirt incoherent on this. Ed Morrissey and others are right.
Cain is all over the place on this issue – and it’s not the first issue for him to be out in left field on.
HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Jumping to conclusions that’s what you do best, yesterday you twisted his answer that he could see himself “making” the decision of releasing prisoners from GITMO once he had all the data, to he wants to release prisoners from gitmo. You obviously have issues with him but you spin what he says. So what if he wants to add a pro life amendment to the constitution. Will that amendment prohibit ALL abortion? Neither you nor I know, but somehow in your mind you have it all figured out that it will. We can explain his statements to you but we cannot comprehend it for you.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Here’s something else, how about we focus on saving the people that are here now, as opposed to potential future humans?
If we let Romney or obama win, there will definitely be less of us around.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Is this sarcasm?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Now them ain’t church-going words, junior.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

I’m agnostic, you creep. Your anti-religious garbage is still foul.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Maybe someone should ask Cain if we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

Physics Geek on October 20, 2011 at 12:30 PM

a doubleplusfunny comment.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Now I remember why I’m a Libertarian…

Hongqi on October 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

So you’re advocating that we go ahead and put “future humans” in massive debt so that we can fix today’s problems? GOT IT.

Rainsfor

Jeez, another person I must use small words with.
There must be some rule that anti-abortionists must distort what others say in order to believe what they do.
If we let romney or obama win, the FUTURE is screwed. Let’s fix things now.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

This is the single issue that drives me insane about the right. Cain’s position is the same as Giuliani. He personally opposes abortion but also recognizes that it is a personal decision, not the government’s decision. What is so hard to understand about that?

Yup, just likes it’s a personal decision whether I pay a hooker or strangle her. Government out of my bedroom!

How can we as conservatives/libertarians whine and moan about too much government intrusion in our lives yet demand that the government be involved in probably the most difficult decision a woman can make? The two don’t jive.

Because it’s not just someone making a decision about their life, but someone making a decision to END THE LIFE OF ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. Sorry, government was instituted for the specific purpose of controlling that kind of behavior, which is why there’s no conflict in a conservative or even a libertarian objecting to government intrusion but supporting a ban on abortion.

BTW, I’m pro-choice too, which is why I believe that people should not be allowed to force an innocent third-party to pay for their own poor choices.

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Wait … why don’t you tell that to Hermie Cain? He’s been attacking Rick Perry as a non-pure conservative.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:28 PM

So far as I can tell, Cain’s initiated all of one attack on a fellow candidate, and that was the weaksauce Wall Street hit on Romney, his alleged co-conspirator.

Whereas Bachmann, Santorum, Paul, Romney, and especially Perry have been making several political and personal attacks on one another. Cain didn’t even jump in on the Romneycare dogpile.

KingGold on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Is this sarcasm?

HondaV65

It’s clearly beyond your intelligence.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Jumping to conclusions that’s what you do best, yesterday you twisted his answer that he could see himself “making” the decision of releasing prisoners from GITMO once he had all the data, to he wants to release prisoners from gitmo. You obviously have issues with him but you spin what he says. So what if he wants to add a pro life amendment to the constitution. Will that amendment prohibit ALL abortion? Neither you nor I know, but somehow in your mind you have it all figured out that it will. We can explain his statements to you but we cannot comprehend it for you.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 12:31 PM

If Herman Cain has some kind of odd mixture of a legally pro-life/pro-choice position …

Like maybe an amendment that says … “Life begins at conception – but what does the government care?”

Then Okay – he should come out and say that.

This is the most bizarre statement(s) from him we’ve seen to date. Okay – well maybe not but pretty close.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

I’m agnostic, you creep. Your anti-religious garbage is still foul.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Where does “creep” come from, sweetheart? I’m all for religion: just not yours.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Imagine…all these “conservatives” suddenly want the government to tell them what to do…amazing.
Cain: I don’t approve, but I will leave it to the individual.
Conservative: What? He isn’t telling us what to do…I am blind, I can’t see without the government.
Obama: You will buy the health care I deem fit.
Conservative: You can’t tell me what health care to buy,it is my body.
*
Conservatives are getting confused…if you like Perry, than you accept the gov. telling you what to do now?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Prove it to us – that it’s not murder.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM
Go to an abortion clinic. See if the women who have abortions, or the abortion doctors, get arrested for murder.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Sorry HondaV65 -I support your intent, but murder is a legal term. What we do is worse -we slaughter innocent life by the millions and(diabolically) call it a good -”a woman’s choice” to slaughter a helpless precious human.

Obama has made all that hogwash permenantly laughable(or cryable) when he dismissed all the lies about “when life begins” and the ludicrous, “it’s my body, by insisting, as an Illinois Senator, that post-abortion born babies should be starved and dehydrated to death, if the “mother?” intended to slaughter it, rather than let it continue doing what it was doing -living and growing.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Here’s something else, how about we focus on saving the people that are here now, as opposed to potential future humans?
If we let Romney or obama win, there will definitely be less of us around.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Sorry man – but this is absolutely the stupidist thing I’ve read since Michelle Bachmann’s mental retardation comments.

I gave you a chance a to ad /sarc – but apparently you believe this tripe.

Others can judge …

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:35 PM

I’m willing to give Herman a chance to explain further on this, but his “apples and oranges” response to every one of his vague positions is getting old.
He may be too much of a rookie to win. If he were a real candidate like Romney, he would have simply said he’s pro-life. Period.
I’m more interested in what kind of judges he’d appoint.

cartooner on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Explain to me where I said he shouldn’t work towards that goal. Or better yet, tell me where I said we shouldn’t period.

If Im remember right, I beleive the words I used were “unless we change it…”

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

How do run for president and not have a coherent position on maybe the most controversial social issue? Not good.

karlant on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

It’s pretty plain, but scary for you…he has a strong personal opinion that he isn’t willing to make law…so you have to decide what is best for you.
Welcome to the conservative world…it’s scary isn’t it?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Boy, it sure makes the thread go faster when I know to skim over certain trolls. Too bad, I used to read their comments, now not so much…treading thru their garbage leaves a stench on the whole thread…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:37 PM

I’m more interested in what kind of judges he’d appoint.

cartooner on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

If he believes the government has no role in abortion decisions – then why would he appoint Pro-Life judges?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

I think the problem here is that Tina Korbe keeps forgetting to attach dead fetus pictures to her posts. She’s just too damn ambiguous.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Really, the fact that certain people here are all for making a rape victim give birth to the baby is just sickening.
Just because you want to say how great and moral you are, the victim suffers again. There is something very wrong with you.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Good thing for everyone that this election is going to hinge on the abortion issue. Let’s run with that.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

It’s pretty plain, but scary for you…he has a strong personal opinion that he isn’t willing to make law…so you have to decide what is best for you.
Welcome to the conservative world…it’s scary isn’t it?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Sorry – but PRO-CHOICE is NOT a Conservative opinion.

I hope someone is there to greet you upon your entrance to “LibbieLand” … because you just transitioned into it.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:39 PM

If Herman Cain has some kind of odd mixture of a legally pro-life/pro-choice position …

Like maybe an amendment that says … “Life begins at conception – but what does the government care?”

Then Okay – he should come out and say that.

This is the most bizarre statement(s) from him we’ve seen to date. Okay – well maybe not but pretty close.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM

again we cannot comprehend his statment for you.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Good thing for everyone that this election is going to hinge on the abortion issue. Let’s run with that.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Honestly, where are the sane people like you coming from today? This is Hot Air, right?

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:40 PM

Sorry man – but this is absolutely the stupidist thing I’ve read since Michelle Bachmann’s mental retardation comments.

I gave you a chance a to ad /sarc – but apparently you believe this tripe.

Others can judge …

HondaV65

I already explained it to another mental lightweight like yourself. Reading skills not your strong suit? Did we miss Sesame Street today?

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:40 PM

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Petunia, your disquise isn’t working…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Good thing for everyone that this election is going to hinge on the abortion issue. Let’s run with that.

lorien1973

Thank you Lorien!

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Really, the fact that certain people here are all for making a rape victim give birth to the baby is just sickening.
Just because you want to say how great and moral you are, the victim suffers again. There is something very wrong with you

If the baby raped the victim, then sure. But, the baby is innocent, so I don’t see why anyone has the right to carry out the death penalty upon it.

But, that said, I’m actually for letting rape victims abort the resulting pregnancies. The crime will just be added to the list that the rapist is charged with, that’s all.

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Really, the fact that certain people here are all for making a rape victim give birth to the baby is just sickening.
Just because you want to say how great and moral you are, the victim suffers again. There is something very wrong with you.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Why are you punishing the baby for the rape?

Also – if every woman in history had the option to abort a baby out of rape – you would not be here.

Now … go stand in front of the mirror – look at yourself – look at your body – and realize that you are the product of MILLIONS of sexual copulations – many of which didn’t happen under ideal circumstances.

Yes my man – rape and incest is even in your DNA.

It’s in ALL of us.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

So you support Roe V. Wade as the law of the land?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Be a little more obtuse. Damn you continue to prove that you have applesauce for brains…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Really, the fact that certain people here are all for making a rape victim give birth to the baby is just sickening.
Just because you want to say how great and moral you are, the victim suffers again. There is something very wrong with you.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Actually, I think it’s all part of a weirdly perverted focus on sexuality. When you really really want to get down and dirty, the extreme-right (or extreme-left) has all the goods.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Sorry – but PRO-CHOICE is NOT a Conservative opinion.

Pro-choice is the ultimate conservative opinion. Conservatives should realize that government making decisions for them isn’t a good idea. That is what liberals do.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

It’s one thing to be Pro-Choice – it’s quite another thing to give incoherent statements about what you think the real role of government should be in the case of abortion.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:21 PM

That right there bears repeating…

JohnGalt23 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Its the economy stupid.

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Pro-choice is the ultimate conservative opinion. Conservatives should realize that government making decisions for them isn’t a good idea. That is what liberals do.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

So government has no role if you want to kill your spouse because he / she is just inconvienient to you?

WTF?

Again – define when life begins – and you’re free to abort anything before that.

But you can’t.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Now if the media would only examine Obama this closely- he mnight be recognized as the culture of death Marxist that he is.

Okay -not Obama? Start with that nearly untouched GOP favorite RINO (Obama-lite) Rahmney.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 12:46 PM

If the baby raped the victim …

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Did I just read this? Or have I just been magically transported to the phantasmagoric world of Hieronymous Bosch or something? Man, I want to wash that comment off my eyes.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Be a little more obtuse. Damn you continue to prove that you have applesauce for brains…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:42 PM

So you DO support Roe V. Wade as the law of the land.

Thanks for clearing that up.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Pro-choice is the ultimate conservative opinion. Conservatives should realize that government making decisions for them isn’t a good idea. That is what liberals do.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Of course, someone at some point, does decide what issues we can be pro-choice about and in which the government should be involved. Abortion? taking someone else’s property? the way we dress? murder? smoking? Is it the majority? if so then you will be OK if the majority decides re-distribution is the way to go?

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Why are you punishing the baby for the rape?

Also – if every woman in history had the option to abort a baby out of rape – you would not be here.
HondaV65

More unsupported conjecture.
Sorry, but I’m for the victim in rape. If she wants to abort it, that should be her choice. Using what happened in history as far as rape goes, hardly justifies making the victim suffer again today. We aren’t running around clubbing each other with rocks anymore. (well most of us aren’t)

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

That’s kind of the “German defense” for holocaust. “Eh, we were against it … what could we do? … we’d have been jailed / killed.”

Over 50 million kids killed in the last 40 years guy.

That’s a holocaust.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:04 PM

By the way our society thinks now, if you worked for me, I’d have to fire you for that comment.

but all joking aside.

I’m not arguing that point with you. I fully agree with you 100%. Abortion is murder and it needs to be illegal. But let’s stop with the semantics and talk facts, is it or isn’t it legal to get an abortion in this country?

Henceforth, if it is legal, is it or isn’t ultimately the choice of the individual or family whether or not they want to have one or not?

We can trump out the “abortion is murder” card all we want, I don’t think a single person on this site will argue against that point, but that doesn’t change the reality. Stop being reactionary and seriously tell me what Cain said that was so wrong? I seriously don’t get it.

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Do any of y’all believe it to be antithetical to conservative, small government types to ban murder?

The rhetorical question above notwithstanding, since Cain holds the conception position should the interest of this topic now be shifted to what constitutes this bizarre premise/conclusion homicide position justifiable?

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Alinsky Rules for Radicals, Rule #5….

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon”.

Herman Cain…….here you go.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_US_AFGHANISTAN_GOP?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

PappyD61 on October 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM

So government has no role if you want to kill your spouse because he / she is just inconvienient to you?

Wow. Strawman, ignite!

Again – define when life begins – and you’re free to abort anything before that.

But you can’t.

Nor can you. Right? We don’t make policy on hypotheticals or made up time tables as to when you think something happens. Again, this is what liberals do.

I think viable is a good time frame. How about you?

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM

But no one can seriously make the argument Romney would be worse than Obama.Zaggs on October 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Anyone who argues that Romney (or any of the others except Paul) would not be a vast improvement over Obama is either grossly uninformed or lying. As for Paul, he is a far left fringer on defense and a far right fringer on the economy. Too weird for me.

Basilsbest on October 20, 2011 at 12:49 PM

So government has no role if you want to kill your spouse because he / she is just inconvienient to you?

WTF?

Again – define when life begins – and you’re free to abort anything before that.

But you can’t.

HondaV65

No. You won’t accept any answer other than conception is when “life” begins.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:49 PM

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

You are an idiot, and I’m surprised you are allowed to cross the street by yourself. That or you aren’t paying attention in your reading comp. class…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

More unsupported conjecture.
Sorry, but I’m for the victim in rape. If she wants to abort it, that should be her choice. Using what happened in history as far as rape goes, hardly justifies making the victim suffer again today. We aren’t running around clubbing each other with rocks anymore. (well most of us aren’t)

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

You will never escape the fact that you are the product of millions of sexual copulations that had to occur (each one) between specifically two people at a precise time on the planet.

And many of those copulations were actually RAPE. And many of those copulations were actually INCEST.

So if this policy had been available throughout history – you wouldn’t be here.

Okay … LOL

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Man, I want to wash that comment off my eyes.

What has been seen, cannot be unseen!

And yes, the point was that the reality in which the execution of a baby for the rape of his mother is justified is a twisted and nonsensical reality.

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

It’s not incoherent to believe:
1) Roe and its progeny are terrible law qua law.
2) abortion is wrong as a moral matter in all circumstance
3) the federal government should not pay for any abortion
4) it’s not the federal government’s business as a matter of federal criminal law, whether a woman has an abortion or not.
5) each state should be able to determine the extent to which its criminal law will sanction abortion, and under what circumstances.

CatoRenasci on October 20, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Sorry – but PRO-CHOICE is NOT a Conservative opinion.

Technically, yes it is. If you choose life, haven’t you still made a choice?

Again, the argument needs to be Anti-Abortion vs. pro abortion

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:51 PM

You are an idiot, and I’m surprised you are allowed to cross the street by yourself. That or you aren’t paying attention in your reading comp. class…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Yah – in the Cainlusional world of “anything goes” as long as “Savior Cain” says it’s so …

I suppose I AM an idiot.

And – if Herman Cain did ever become President – I wouldn’t dare try to cross the street by myself because who knows how “President Cain” would F*** up the traffic laws?

LOL

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Cain is saying the government should not be in charge of pregnancy. Just like what the far majority of Americans say.

If you believe abortion is immoral, you have that choice. If someone wants to get an abortion, you have that choice. The government isn’t shoving the choice down your throat.

This is what the far majority of America wants. Anyone that believes otherwise must not go outside much.

Moesart on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Anyone who argues that Romney (or any of the others except Paul) would not be a vast improvement over Obama is either grossly uninformed or lying.
Basilsbest

Funny, I might say that if you do think he’ll be a vast improvement. He’s a democrat with an R next to his name. His record proves it. He cannot be trusted to fight for core Conservative ideals.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

And Rainsford? Like I said, it’s life, but not a human or a fetus. Until it’s a fetus ending the pregnancy is hardly murder.
Sorry, but the absolutest view others have on life/conception is hardly based in science.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:29 PM

And apparently you weren’t listening to the science when it was being explained.

It’s a separate life because it’s cells are differentiated from the mother. How are they differentiated you might ask? That would be the DNA strands within the cells. What else does the DNA tell us? Perhaps, what species this newly formed life might be? Why, indeed it does! The DNA of the newly formed life indicates that it is HUMAN. A HUMAN LIFE. Not a frog or a horse or some other animal. Not a “clump of cells”, as a clump of cells would not be differentiated from the mother. Not merely a fetus, but a fully formed human LIFE. It’s body may not yet be complete, but IT IS HUMAN.

This is simple, basic science. Only evil would try to weasel-word it’s way out of this simple and obvious conclusion that is based on scientific facts we have known for YEARS.

Regarding Mr. Cain’s somewhat nuanced response here, I would say that as a businessman he has had to learn to be circumspect in his answers to sensitive questions and this is a habit that he still retains. Unfortunately, this is hurting him as the political world doesn’t run on circumspection. By being circumspect he appears weak, unsure and insincere. It’s something he’s going to have to un-learn and fast if he wants to remain a top contender.

I still prefer him over Perry or Romney, but he’s going to have to be much more bold and direct on non-economic matters, and he’s going to have to start right away. His margin for error is very small indeed.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Technically, yes it is. If you choose life, haven’t you still made a choice?

Again, the argument needs to be Anti-Abortion vs. pro abortion

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Totally agree. To Conservatives LIFE IS THE FIRST LIBERTY.

If you don’t protect that – then society disintegrates – which is pretty much what’s been happening for the last 50 years.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Okay … LOL

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Ann–is that you???

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Of course, someone at some point, does decide what issues we can be pro-choice about and in which the government should be involved. Abortion? taking someone else’s property? the way we dress? murder? smoking? Is it the majority? if so then you will be OK if the majority decides re-distribution is the way to go?

Interesting that you are comparing big brother liberal confiscatory notions to letting someone choose how to live their life.

Pro-life is more akin to:
taking someone else’s property? the way we dress? murder? smoking? re-distribution

Think about it.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Cain probably couldn’t put together a coherent policy statement on anything, including traffic laws.

Moesart on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Wrong. Gallup had a majority of Americans as pro-life, and this was backed up in other polls. Sorry that you’re still living in the 1970s.

IR-MN on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

And that’s the secret to politics: trying to control a segment of people without those people recognizing that you’re trying to control them

-SCOTT REED, Republican Strategist in the New York Times magazine this past week.

PappyD61 on October 20, 2011 at 12:56 PM

So government has no role if you want to kill your spouse because he / she is just inconvienient to you?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Your emotionally charged straw men are getting more and more wacky.

If someone kills their spouse, they will be charged with murder.

If a woman has an abortion, neither she nor the doctor will be charged with murder.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

If you don’t protect that – then society disintegrates – which is pretty much what’s been happening for the last 50 years.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Yeah, it’s a tough argument to make that abortion is the cause of our debt and growing government.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

The intelligent conservative position is to support life from conception, and not to fund abortion, but at the same time, since we cannot ( and should not want to) round up and imprison hundreds of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens, to acknowledge that real changes to the current culture of death can only come about through moral suasion rather than compulsion.

Basilsbest on October 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

If abortion ever becomes illegal, I certainly hope that we charge everyone who ever had one with murder. Cuz it’s murder and a crime.

That’s a winner.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Ok if this doesnt make him collapse in the polls, I dont know what will. The Perry campaign should send him a gift basket.

nswider on October 20, 2011 at 12:58 PM

This is the single issue that drives me insane about the right. Cain’s position is the same as Giuliani. He personally opposes abortion but also recognizes that it is a personal decision, not the government’s decision. What is so hard to understand about that?

How can we as conservatives/libertarians whine and moan about too much government intrusion in our lives yet demand that the government be involved in probably the most difficult decision a woman can make? The two don’t jive.

This issue is the main reason conservatives are not united. Drop it like a hot potato and focus on the economy for Phase I. Once we have our government we can go into Phase II on educating people about birth control and the right to life.

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

YES. This.

byepartisan on October 20, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Wrong. Gallup had a majority of Americans as pro-life, and this was backed up in other polls. Sorry that you’re still living in the 1970s.

IR-MN on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Different from this Gallup poll, showing it at a dead heat?

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM

You will never escape the fact that you are the product of millions of sexual copulations that had to occur (each one) between specifically two people at a precise time on the planet.

And many of those copulations were actually RAPE. And many of those copulations were actually INCEST.

So if this policy had been available throughout history – you wouldn’t be here.

Okay … LOL

HondaV65

Oh I see, because some women “allegedly” didn’t abort children in the past when raped, that means it’s okay to refuse them the ability to do it now. That makes perfect sense…. to a mindless zealot like yourself.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Pro-choice is the ultimate conservative opinion. Conservatives should realize that government making decisions for them isn’t a good idea. That is what liberals do.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Amen. People have lost focus. Total Gov control is the extreme left. The more you move to the right the less control you want from the government until you get to anarchy, no control is the extreme right position.
Too many people have drunk the coolaid.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

I don’t get it either. I really don’t.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM

The intelligent conservative position is to support life from conception, and not to fund abortion, but at the same time, since we cannot ( and should not want to) round up and imprison hundreds of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens, to acknowledge that real changes to the current culture of death can only come about through moral suasion rather than compulsion.

Basilsbest on October 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Sounds a lot like the amnesty for ilegals argument. Not saying it’s right or wrong, just an observation.

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 1:01 PM

About saying the govt shouldn’t get involved is basically Pro-Choice. The parents have their say, but the kid who gets aborted does not. Let’s give birth to all kids and then if the kids wish they had not been born can commit suicide. This way the libs will be happy too. :)

jeffn21 on October 20, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Really, the fact that certain people here are all for making a rape victim give birth to the baby is just sickening.
Just because you want to say how great and moral you are, the victim suffers again. There is something very wrong with you.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

What is sickening is that you ignore the killing of the baby, who is also a victim, and you also conveniently ignore the guilt of the mother who will live the rest of her days with the memory of killing her own child.

Hiya Ciska on October 20, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Its the economy stupid.

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:45 PM

That is near vacuous in it’s thinking. So we can have Nazi Germany or a Stalinized Soviet state as long as the economy’s fine?

If you really analyse it -the problem with the economy is the (moral) corruption of the government that choses overtaxing and overspending our private property to buy power from special interests of any type. That is a moral problem! You may separate Church and state but you cannot have separation of state and morality.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6