Video: Abortion debate holds risks for GOP

posted at 2:41 pm on January 23, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday’s anniversary of Roe v Wade and the March for Life had both sides of the abortion debate fully active, and once again raised the question of whether this will work as a major campaign issue for the pro-life Republican Party. The RNC took time to proclaim the issue as one of its priorities, and proved it by postponing their conference so officeholders could participate in the demonstrations. National Journal’s Sophie Novack points out the rewards and risks in that strategy:

After their failed 2012 bid to retake the Senate, Republicans vowed to talk about Obamacare, jobs, and the economy—and to keep abortion out of the spotlight. It’s easy to see why. Talking about abortion doomed Republican runs in two states: Missouri, where Akin’s “legitimate rape” verbiage ignited a national firestorm; and Indiana, where candidate Richard Murdoch sealed his fate with controversial comments about rape and pregnancy.

And so while Republican-led state legislatures have worked aggressively—and successfully—to push state-level abortion restrictions, the national party has preferred to focus its rhetoric elsewhere.

2014 isn’t 2012, however, and national Republicans are now wading back into the fray. But this time, they hope to talk about the issue in a way that paints their opponents—rather than their candidates—as the extremists.

With a complete overturning of Roe v. Wade unlikely, Republicans’ messaging shift aims to highlight some of the more contentious aspects of abortion, in a bid to appear moderate on the issue, and to depict Democrats’ position as extreme and harmful to women and young people—two groups the GOP has struggled to hold. …

Of course, devotion to the cause is one thing, political strategy is another, and wading deeper into issues of women’s reproductive rights ahead of midterm elections is definitely risky for the GOP. Yet Tobias says she is confident that candidates will receive training and talking points on the issue, to avoid another Akin-like debacle.

Let’s hope that’s the case, although that could be … tricky. Many candidates will come not from lower office, where rhetorical skills and political instincts have already been honed, but also from grassroots novices and/or wealthy self-funders looking to take some pressure off of national resources for a race. The RNC will have to catch these very early, because trackers are everywhere now thanks to the low technological barriers to hi-fidelity recording, and a bad answer in March might end up costing dearly in October — even if training came in May.

As far as painting opponents into the extremes, that will go in both directions. Take for example last night’s Crossfire on CNN, where my friend Lila Rose squared off against Sally Kohn on CNN. Kohn and NARAL’s Ilyse Hogue cornered Rose on the question of pregnancies caused by rape — which accounted for less than 1% of all abortions in 2004, according to the CDC, and 1% according to the abortion-friendly Guttmacher Institute in 2005. Cases of incest accounted for even fewer abortions in both reports. And yet, this is the ground on which Kohn and Hogue want the fight to take place:

“Are you really telling women that they should be forced by the government to carry their rapists’ babies?” Kohn asked her.

Before clarifying that rape is a “horrible injustice” against women and that the rapist should be “held to the fullest extent of the law,” Rose reiterated her original point. “Abortion doesn’t un-rape a woman,” she said. “An abortion just adds more violence on top of that first violence that she endured.”

Hogue jumps in at this point and declares abortion an expression of religious liberty:

Soon, Hogue jumped in to counter Rose’s assertions. “Isn’t it great that we live in a country where Lila Rose could decide that she would decide to carry her rapist’s pregnancy to term but her version of morality doesn’t dictate what I can choose to do,” she said. “And that’s what religious liberty is about. It’s about you getting to choose what would be right for you in that circumstance, but I don’t get to tell you what to do and you don’t get to tell me what to do.”

I guess … if you’re praying to Moloch.

Lila gives a spirited defense of children conceived in rape, and she’s right — from a theological and biological point of view, and those victims are the ones for whom Lila needs to fight. Republican politicians should not allow themselves to get pushed into this extreme, narrow ground, though, and this is what happened in 2012. When this gets tried, it’s time to cite those statistics and say, “Why don’t we talk about the 99% of abortions that take place for elective convenience? If you have to justify abortion through just these extreme circumstances, aren’t you admitting that it’s indefensible in all but 1% of all cases?” And when they continue to get pressed for an answer for those cases, refuse to discuss that until their opponents justify the other 99% of abortions that take place.

If they do get pushed into that territory, though, the answer is easy. “I’ll be glad to compromise on the 1% of cases involving incest or rape, as long as we agree to bar abortions in all other cases.” If we can save 99% of the children killed in abortion clinics each year, I’d take that deal — and hope to save the rest through changing of hearts and minds. Since we won’t get that deal, we will need to keep up the fight so that we can eventually change 100% of the hearts and minds by forcing pro-aborts to confront the fact that every abortion kills a human being, fact of science regardless of religious perspective, and they need to explain how one human being can kill another just out of convenience.

That’s where we’ll win. Not on the law in the immediate future, unfortunately, but by changing the culture.


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

In 2008, the estimated number of forcible rapes (89,000)…
 
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html

rogerb on January 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Always bank on the Rs to be stupid.

Schadenfreude on January 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM

That Jamu (or some such) on Fox, is way stupid and really callous.

How come Fox puts such on display?

Schadenfreude on January 23, 2014 at 2:44 PM

“I’ll be glad to compromise on the 1% of cases involving incest or rape”

Ed, they won’t say that. That’s why it’s easy pickings for the liberals.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Lila gives a spirited defense of children conceived in rape, and she’s right — from a theological and biological point of view, and those victims are the ones for whom Lila needs to fight.

Yes, she is. Rebecca Kiessling was conceived in rape and fights for the victims too.

rukiddingme on January 23, 2014 at 2:47 PM

OT: another Christie qotd tonight……nj ag subpoenas campaign

cmsinaz on January 23, 2014 at 2:49 PM

That’s where we’ll win. Not on the law in the immediate future, unfortunately, but by changing the culture.

You’ll also win on the new technology, exposing the 26 weeks and after…I know you fight for 100% no abortions, but this one is a seller with the maj. of the public, and the stats should not be omitted. It’s not criticism, it’s reality. The pendulum has swung against the pro-abortionists, in all cases.

Schadenfreude on January 23, 2014 at 2:50 PM

Democrats accuse Republicans of wanting to kill old people while taking “choice” away from women. Okay, we seemed to have ran into a little logic circle. At this point I think we’ve won.
But then logic was never a strong point with the progressive. Like arguing with a drunk. Or a Hutu.

onomo on January 23, 2014 at 2:50 PM

I like it….talk about the 99%

cmsinaz on January 23, 2014 at 2:53 PM

Yeah, there’s NEVER any risk to leftists…

gee, why is that?????????????

ToddPA on January 23, 2014 at 2:53 PM

You fight for the right to life and that’s a losing argument????

vityas on January 23, 2014 at 2:53 PM

That’s where we’ll win. Not on the law in the immediate future, unfortunately, but by changing the culture.

Of course you’re correct Ed but that don’t play in GOP primaries where you have to testify.

rhombus on January 23, 2014 at 2:56 PM

I agree, Ed – I’ve been saying this for years, I just never get asked on television!

Rape, incest and situations where the life of the mother is clearly threatened are the reasons for abortion? OK, let’s restrict abortion to those hard cases, and thereby eliminate the vast majority of abortions which don’t fall under the “hard case” category. I’d take that deal in a minute. The pro-abortion side won’t because it’s all about the money generated by the billion-dollar abortion industry.

dkmonroe on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Ed, they won’t say that. That’s why it’s easy pickings for the liberals.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Uh, yes we do.

We even push for measures that fall way short of 99% – like preventing abortions in most cases after 20 weeks. But liberals still freak out.

gwelf on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Lila Rose is teh awesome.

Rose reiterated her original point. “Abortion doesn’t un-rape a woman,” she said. “An abortion just adds more violence on top of that first violence that she endured.”

That may be the best pro-life argument against abortion in the case of rape that I’ve ever heard.

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

My commment on the headline thread:

If we bring RAPE into it, even if we have a sensible rationale for it that it’s not the fetuses’ fault, we’re going to lose most of the elections.

It doesn’t matter so much whether a candidate is as inarticulate as Akin et al, it’s the position itself. It makes us look Obsessed with rape for whatever reason, that we got to dote on rape, and dote on incest, despite… less than ~ 1% of abortion cases involving rape / incest.

A lot of conservative leaners just shake their heads, even if they are upset about Obamacare and sprawling govt, I guess they are not that religious and they shake their heads when we obsess over rape, and they walk to Democrat side, or at least Independents.

Just make an exception for rape.
Because about 80% of voters are repulsed by the no exceptions for rape position. Religious people are good righteous people, but when we are obsessing on rape and incest, it makes us seem more like religious nuts.

anotherJoe on January 23, 2014 at 2:59 PM

Sorry Ed but you are just wrong on this. How conservatives feel is how the majority of Americans feel. We cant allow ourselves to be dictated to us by leftists about what we can say and stand for out of fear of “public” black lash…which isn’t actually public or backlash but simply the leftist media in full shark feeding frenzy on conservatives mode. No matter what conservatives do or say it WILL be lied about and spun to be portrayed in the worst possible light….Evil republicans give puppies to orphans on Christmas Eve….caring Democrats burn down orphanage on Christmas Eve providing warmth to the homeless children…. That’s how it’s gonna be no matter what so full steam ahead..

Caseoftheblues on January 23, 2014 at 3:01 PM

gwelf on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Don’t try to argue with Marcus on abortion. He only believes in the MSNBC caricatures of conservatives.

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 3:01 PM

Guns don’t kill people.
Abortionists kill people.

davidk on January 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM

If we bring RAPE into it, even if we have a sensible rationale for it that it’s not the fetuses’ fault, we’re going to lose most of the elections.

It doesn’t matter so much whether a candidate is as inarticulate as Akin et al, it’s the position itself. It makes us look Obsessed with rape for whatever reason, that we got to dote on rape, and dote on incest, despite… less than ~ 1% of abortion cases involving rape / incest.

A lot of conservative leaners just shake their heads, even if they are upset about Obamacare and sprawling govt, I guess they are not that religious and they shake their heads when we obsess over rape, and they walk to Democrat side, or at least Independents.

Just make an exception for rape.
Because about 80% of voters are repulsed by the no exceptions for rape position. Religious people are good righteous people, but when we are obsessing on rape and incest, it makes us seem more like religious nuts.

anotherJoe on January 23, 2014 at 2:59 PM

It’s not “WE” that bring rape into it.

It’s the democrats and the media (buy I repeat myself.)

Republicans have to learn to stop answering the media’s questions. Newt really ought to hold a seminar. Begin every question by attacking the motive of the questioner and answer the question they should have asked.

When they try it again, do the same thing over and over. The media are ADVERSARIES, they are not impartial referees.

makattak on January 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM

The comeback about the 99% I always get is: “but it is cheaper for the government to allow the abortion than to pay for the baby / mother who can’t afford it”.
It’s a dumb comeback. And it’s wrong. But the lie has been repeated so often, it just won’t go away.
Any ideas to counter without going way off topic?

SnowSun on January 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM

I see this headline thread has been promoted to the front page. That’s great! Too bad none of the over one hundred comments were brought over with it. If I may, I would like to add my 2 cents. To do that it will require me copying and pasted my comment over to here from the other thread. Hope that is okay.

Seems to me the key is to enlighten rather than force. To help our fellow humans to understand the significance of life and to value the preciousness of life. This is of course very difficult. We live in a disposable society construct. We may not enjoy success in our short lifetimes, yet to me it is worth the effort. The pro abortion crowd is all to willing to use force to have their views foisted on others. We should never adopt the techniques employed by them. I will stand by my belief that at conception, life begins. I base this largely on the fact that if it were not so, that life would not need to be extinguished. Seldom does any pro abortion person challenge that basic premise. When they do, they have generally argued themselves into a untenable philosophical paradox. One need not have religion to value life. The arguments for a pro life stance can be made without direct religious overtones. Our culture has largely become one of selfishness. This can be changed. One mind at a time. Much hard work lay ahead in accomplishing these goals. There is promise however.

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM

My feeling is that if “government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed,” then women should be the ones to set limits on abortion: it doesn’t govern men to say they can or can’t have an abortion. In practical terms, this means male Republican legislators promising (probably with a secret sigh of relief) to vote only as directed by their female constituents.

PersonFromPorlock on January 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM

If they do get pushed into that territory, though, the answer is easy. “I’ll be glad to compromise on the 1% of cases involving incest or rape, as long as we agree to bar abortions in all other cases.”

Sell out! Moloch worshipper!! Sacrificing innocent lives for political expediency!

fadetogray on January 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM

Why are the R’s even discussing abortion? It is not very high on the list of things that we are all interested in getting fixed in the next election. And BTW, abortion is not one of the issues in the TEA party. It has been inserted in the name of the TEA party but it is not one of the tenets of the party. This is so predictable and the msm and the DNC will use it in every election that is close as part of the fake “War on women”.

inspectorudy on January 23, 2014 at 3:06 PM

The leftist freaks always want to save the rapists’ lives…just like they are pro dope, but against cigarettes, Coke, food, and all sorts of non-of-their-business items.

Schadenfreude on January 23, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Until maybe 12-18 months ago, I supported abortion in cases of rape/incest-until that one day. one that day it occurred to me, that by holding such a view, I was ‘saying’ that the preborn were worthy of life-but only if the said lives came into being under certain conditions.
Wrong.
The unborn are ALWAYS innocent and deserving of life.
No exceptions.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 23, 2014 at 3:09 PM

Sorry, meant to include a link to the headline thread as well. Here.

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:09 PM

It’s interesting, the first person I heard use the term “carrying a rapist’s baby to term” was Ann Coulter who was stating 85 percent of Republicans feel that termination should be an option in rape cases. But we have the 15 percent here apparently all on board with even banning OCPs, depo, Mirena and Nexplanon because they also prevent implantation after conception. Good luck at the voting booths.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Why are the R’s even discussing abortion?

inspectorudy on January 23, 2014 at 3:06 PM

I believe it is in the news because of the anniversary of Roe v Wade. You might want to add Drudge to your daily reading to stay current.

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

It’s not “WE” that bring rape into it.
It’s the democrats and the media (buy I repeat myself.)
makattak on January 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM

Exactly right. But nonetheless, as Dukeboy said on the headline thred:

The abortion in the case of a rape is going to be accomplished by the use of Plan B or other pills. Given the extremely low percentage of abortions that are performed as the result of rape, trying to outlaw them at this point in the struggle against abortion as a whole is to walk right into a trap that allows Liberals to rhetorically beat us over the head. This is a point where pro- life forces can’t allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good.
Dukeboy01 on January 23, 2014 at 12:44 PM

anotherJoe on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

I’m sorry but if a woman is raped – my daughter is raped – or her life is in danger then the government shouldn’t be involved. This is a lose lose situation and the GOP would be smart to stay away from that bomb shell.

MoreLiberty on January 23, 2014 at 3:11 PM

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Conceived in rape.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 23, 2014 at 3:12 PM

Good luck at the voting booths.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Marcus you are a broken record with little to nothing new to add. Some things transcend the voting booths. Do you understand?

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:12 PM

But we have the 15 percent here apparently all on board with even banning OCPs, depo, Mirena and Nexplanon because they also prevent implantation after conception. Good luck at the voting booths.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

As I said earlier

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 3:14 PM

Regarding Sophie’s point about Akin and Murdoch, their statements were very smart, but those statements alone should not have pushed them out of their races. the left and the media (same thing??) overblown attack is what really did them in. if it had not been stupid comments on abortion, it would have been something else.

If no R politicians talks about abortion, the left will try to get them on something else and the media will gladly help…

jetch on January 23, 2014 at 3:14 PM

In 2008, the estimated number of forcible rapes (89,000)…

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html

rogerb on January 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM

And I suspect many rapes are not reported. Or the victim is not believed.

Are there any statistics that reveal how many prgnancy occur due to rape?

And what’s up with the term “forcible” rape? Isn’t that redundant?

davidk on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Ed rightly states that the goal of the pro-life movement ought to be changing the hearts and minds of abortion advocates. The fact is, however, that opinions on the subject are little changed since 1975. Roughly one-quarter of the electorate opposes all abortions, the same number oppose any abortion restrictions, and one-half wish to allow abortion under some conditions, largely meaning the first twelve weeks. Under these circumstances, advocacy of criminalizing abortion is a certain losing strategy.

wbcoleman on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

I’m stealing this from a commenter at Mediaite so hat tip to him but he said, and it agree that if a woman is raped and decides to have an abortion, murder charges should be filed against the rapist on top of the rape charges.

jawkneemusic on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Compromise:

How about “We’ll grant the absolute right of rape victims (who have reported their rape and have agreed to testify against their violator in court) to a government provided abortion, if that victim so chooses, if you’ll agree to ban elective Third-Trimester abortions which have no medical necessity.”

Another Drew on January 23, 2014 at 3:17 PM

Only a tiny minority of abortions happen after the first trimester. Doesn’t stop the pro-life cult from ranting nonstop about late-term abortion even though it’s almost as rare as abortions of pregnancies caused by rape.

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:18 PM

And what’s up with the term “forcible” rape? Isn’t that redundant?

davidk on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

There can be unforced statutory rape.

fadetogray on January 23, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:18 PM

You do realize you are ranting, right? Or does the irony escape?

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:21 PM

Only a tiny minority of abortions happen after the first trimester. Doesn’t stop the pro-life cult from ranting nonstop about late-term abortion even though it’s almost as rare as abortions of pregnancies caused by rape.

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Yes, the “the exceptions are so rare we can ignore them” argument is profoundly illogical, and no one on the other side ever buys it.

fadetogray on January 23, 2014 at 3:22 PM

I think the focus is a little off here. When an LSM reporter asks the question (you know he will) about rape victims and “legitimacy,” have the candidate respond by “ask the other candidate if 55 million abortions can be construed as ‘legitimate murder.’”

That’s the question the LSM will never ask.

Turtle317 on January 23, 2014 at 3:22 PM

Sorry Ed but you are just wrong on this. How conservatives feel is how the majority of Americans feel. We cant allow ourselves to be dictated to us by leftists about what we can say and stand for out of fear of “public” black lash…which isn’t actually public or backlash but simply the leftist media in full shark feeding frenzy on conservatives mode. No matter what conservatives do or say it WILL be lied about and spun to be portrayed in the worst possible light….Evil republicans give puppies to orphans on Christmas Eve….caring Democrats burn down orphanage on Christmas Eve providing warmth to the homeless children…. That’s how it’s gonna be no matter what so full steam ahead..

Caseoftheblues on January 23, 2014 at 3:01 PM

This is simply not true. Only one-quarter of the voters hold a strong “pro-life” position. Not enough to win elections.

wbcoleman on January 23, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Until maybe 12-18 months ago, I supported abortion in cases of rape/incest-until that one day. one that day it occurred to me, that by holding such a view, I was ‘saying’ that the preborn were worthy of life-but only if the said lives came into being under certain conditions.
Wrong.
The unborn are ALWAYS innocent and deserving of life.
No exceptions.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 23, 2014 at 3:09 PM

I agree with you, but consider for a moment–for the moment– that we leave that as a political sidebar, as the exception that it actually is and outlaw abortion in the 99% of all other cases. Now we have a culture of life. Suddenly deciding death for children of rape and incest is shown for all its macabre gruesomeness. Anyone who fights for it then is left arguing for death straight up.

That’s why the left MUST MUST MUST cling to this 1% statistic to support the entirety of its evil platform. They have nothing to stand on otherwise.

Let the exception prove the rule by fighting for the rule first. Abortion is murder.

somewhatconcerned on January 23, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Only a tiny minority of abortions happen after the first trimester. Doesn’t stop the pro-life cult from ranting nonstop about late-term abortion even though it’s almost as rare as abortions of pregnancies caused by rape.

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:18 PM

And yet you and like abortion defenders go frothing at the mouth crazy whenever we suggest (or succeed) in banning those “rare” late term abortions.

E.g. Texas and Abortion Barbie.

makattak on January 23, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Marcus you are a broken record with little to nothing new to add. Some things transcend the voting booths. Do you understand?

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:12 PM

If you’re looking for a political or legal solution to a given “problem”, as pro-lifers are, then you can’t argue that it transcends the voting booth.

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:24 PM

If they do get pushed into that territory, though, the answer is easy. “I’ll be glad to compromise on the 1% of cases involving incest or rape, as long as we agree to bar abortions in all other cases.”

If the answer was that easy then why isn’t it working? Both McCain and Romney gave that answer and the next question is always: “So you support traumatizing rape victims by making them prove to the government that they were raped before they can “terminate their pregnancy?”

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 3:25 PM

I’m stealing this from a commenter at Mediaite so hat tip to him but he said, and it agree that if a woman is raped and decides to have an abortion, murder charges should be filed against the rapist on top of the rape charges.

jawkneemusic on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Perfect.

fadetogray on January 23, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Wtg Lila. Ilyse is mute, she is not getting cues in her earphone on how to respond to Lila as Hogue is. It is very clear Hogue is getting real time cues from oppo-research talking points by production people behind the camera.

jake49 on January 23, 2014 at 3:27 PM

That’s where we’ll win. Not on the law in the immediate future, unfortunately, but by changing the culture.

You’ll also win on the new technology, exposing the 26 weeks and after…I know you fight for 100% no abortions, but this one is a seller with the maj. of the public, and the stats should not be omitted. It’s not criticism, it’s reality. The pendulum has swung against the pro-abortionists, in all cases.

Schadenfreude on January 23, 2014 at 2:50 PM

20 weeks

davidk on January 23, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Lila Rose is an excellent communicator. But even if our politicians were as good as Lila ,at making the prolife case, it would still be political suicide to argue against abortion in the case of rape. Our culture is too hedonistic and “confused”.

But there is a HUGE upside in making the case against abortion after 20 weeks (or even 16 weeks). As stupid as it is, when the fetus starts to look like a little person then most(the vast majority) do not condone abortion. Certainly after 20weeks when it is OBVIOUSLY a baby there is little stomach for abortion rights rhetoric. Make the Dems defend late term abortion – Even most liberals will squirm.

Of course run on Ocare repeal, NSA curtailing … But tying the dems to late term abortion is also a winner.

BoxHead1 on January 23, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Talking about abortion doomed Republican runs in two states: Missouri, where Akin’s “legitimate rape” verbiage ignited a national firestorm; and Indiana, where candidate Richard Murdoch sealed his fate with controversial comments about rape and pregnancy.

Wrong,
wrong,
wrong,
wrong,
wrong!

How can pundits be so stupid?

It was ignorant statements about rape, not abortion, that ended their electoral prospects.

itsnotaboutme on January 23, 2014 at 3:28 PM

I’m stealing this from a commenter at Mediaite so hat tip to him but he said, and it agree that if a woman is raped and decides to have an abortion, murder charges should be filed against the rapist on top of the rape charges.

jawkneemusic on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Perfect.

fadetogray on January 23, 2014 at 3:26 PM

Make Rape a capital crime. Whether it results in abortion or not.

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Lila Rose is an excellent communicator. But even if our politicians were as good as Lila ,at making the prolife case, it would still be political suicide to argue against abortion in the case of rape. Our culture is too hedonistic and “confused”.

BoxHead1 on January 23, 2014 at 3:28 PM

Yup.
We live in a wicked, perverse generation.
So we’ve got to push back on this holocaust incrementally.

itsnotaboutme on January 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Why are we always talking about abortion in the context of rape and never in the context of late-term elective abortions? Because Democrats always frame the argument that way, and our people walk right into that trap.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Only a tiny minority of abortions happen after the first trimester. Doesn’t stop the pro-life cult from ranting nonstop about late-term abortion even though it’s almost as rare as abortions of pregnancies caused by rape.

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:18 PM

So, banning abortions after the first trimester should be no big deal. It happens rarely, right?

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Lila Rose is teh awesome.

Rose reiterated her original point. “Abortion doesn’t un-rape a woman,” she said. “An abortion just adds more violence on top of that first violence that she endured.”

That may be the best pro-life argument against abortion in the case of rape that I’ve ever heard.

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

If not, then it’s this:
http://www.feministsforlife.org/img/cop/ads_PDF/03DeathPenalty.pdf.

bmmg39 on January 23, 2014 at 3:33 PM

OT: another Christie qotd tonight……nj ag subpoenas campaign

cmsinaz on January 23, 2014 at 2:49 PM

Not the NJ AG, it was the DEMOCRAT U.S. Attorney. Who is not supposed to be revealing who has been subpoenaed or even investigated.

rockmom on January 23, 2014 at 3:34 PM

It’s interesting, the first person I heard use the term “carrying a rapist’s baby to term” was Ann Coulter who was stating 85 percent of Republicans feel that termination should be an option in rape cases. But we have the 15 percent here apparently all on board with even banning OCPs, depo, Mirena and Nexplanon because they also prevent implantation after conception. Good luck at the voting booths.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

If one believes that abortion is the murder of an innocent, as many here believe, then it is logically (and morally) inconsistent to make an exception for cases of rape and incest.

My view is that females who have been raped should have the option to take a “morning after” pill that prevents implantation of an embryo, if that is what they choose to do. One can certainly argue, correctly, that the embryo is innocent of wrongdoing, but then, so was the rape victim. We have to balance the equities somehow, and the person best suited to do that is the rape victim who will either have to abort the rapist’s baby, or carry it to term. It should be her decision, IMO.

AZCoyote on January 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Why sure you can, I just did.

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM

I’m tired of losing on this issue.

Why? Because as we lose elections on it, we lose in so many other areas. In particular, we lose Senate seats in states that should be red. And while the GOP loses Senate and House seats over this issue, we find ourselves done in by amnesty, in which case we’ll become a country allowing abortion almost to the date of birth–nationwide.

I don’t see any inconsistency in being the party of life, while conceding an abortion exception and even conceding the public has demanded the availability of abortion, but for only a limited period of time. Why aren’t we pointing out more often that most (all?) of the European countries forbid abortions after 12 or 14 weeks? So, for now, work on getting the state laws to 20 or 24 weeks. Work it back as the science improves, and the left can increasingly be shown to be the party of ghouls.

Beyond that, work an all the other areas–parental consent/notification; conscience protections; clinic regulations, and the like. Champion compassion and adoption.

In the meantime, make a joke of Planned Parenthood in that its only response to pregnancy is abortion, citing the amount of money they make off procedures.

BuckeyeSam on January 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Abortion = dog whistle for GOP male candidates. They absolutely will say something stupid on the topic although the severity of the stupid varies greatly. Akin and Murdoch it could be argued said something stupid about rape, but the stupid was within the context of abortion. No talking about abortion no aborted senate hopes.

That the GOP decides time and time and time again to die on the hill of abortion related matters just boggles my mind. The whole friggin’ basis of this country is crumbling around us and GOP people are more worried about whether some 18 year old chick in Detroit gets an abortion than if Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer stay in majority leadership positions. Way to prioritize!

deepdiver on January 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM

If they do get pushed into that territory, though, the answer is easy. “I’ll be glad to compromise on the 1% of cases involving incest or rape, as long as we agree to bar abortions in all other cases.”

Offer the trade to illustrate the point that they’re using the extremes to define the middle? I like your thinking.

The Schaef on January 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM

So, banning abortions after the first trimester should be no big deal. It happens rarely, right?

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 3:32 PM

The pro-life cult probably could achieve that goal if not for the fact that everyone knows by now that it’s only the first move in a strategy of political incrementalism, starting with the “easy” stuff and working their way to the eventual banning of all abortion at any stage of pregnancy (and from there, who knows what else they’d target).

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

BuckeyeSam on January 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Exactly. Texas passed an elective abortion law that is nearly twice as liberal as the standard in Western Europe. Factoids like that really add context to the kind of extreme bloodlust we see from the ghouls on the left

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Make an exception for rape and you can be assured the number of reported “rapes” will increase.

slprice on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

That the GOP decides time and time and time again to die on the hill of abortion related matters just boggles my mind. The whole friggin’ basis of this country is crumbling around us and GOP people are more worried about whether some 18 year old chick in Detroit gets an abortion than if Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer stay in majority leadership positions. Way to prioritize!

deepdiver on January 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM

I’ll put up with Harry Reid for six more years to save six million lives. I’ll take that trade any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

The Schaef on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

deepdiver on January 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM

None of the other issues are going to matter if one isn’t even allowed to be born.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

So, your concern over the execution of near fully developed, viable babies is exceeded by your concern about the slippery slope argument. Do I have that about right?

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:42 PM

The pro-life cult

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

You use this derogatory term constantly. Does it apply to the pro abortion side as well for you?

Bmore on January 23, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Ed rightly states that the goal of the pro-life movement ought to be changing the hearts and minds of abortion advocates. The fact is, however, that opinions on the subject are little changed since 1975. Roughly one-quarter of the electorate opposes all abortions, the same number oppose any abortion restrictions, and one-half wish to allow abortion under some conditions, largely meaning the first twelve weeks. Under these circumstances, advocacy of criminalizing abortion is a certain losing strategy.

wbcoleman on January 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Honestly, I think the actual position the vast majority of people have is “I really hate abortion and think it is gross…55 million since 1973 kind of makes me sick…but if my daughter/sister/self/son’s girlfriend gets knocked up by accident, I damn sure want it to be legal THEN.”

This is the problem. All those polls are worthless because when it comes down to it, most people actually facing an unwanted pregnancy will at least want to have the option to terminate it. And if they can’t, they will feel oppressed and put upon by people who have never been in their shoes.

rockmom on January 23, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Make Rape a capital crime. Whether it results in abortion or not.

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 3:29 PM

I’m good with that, especially in regards to violent, forcible (non-statuatory) rape.

dkmonroe on January 23, 2014 at 3:45 PM

The pro-life cult probably could achieve that goal if not for the fact that everyone knows by now that it’s only the first move in a strategy of political incrementalism, starting with the “easy” stuff and working their way to the eventual banning of all abortion at any stage of pregnancy (and from there, who knows what else they’d target).

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

“Pro-life cult”.

*giggle*

Yeah, how dare we want to save the lives of human babies. If that was meant as an insult, I’ll accept as a point of pride.

Nonetheless, you prove the point that infanticide is okey-dokey with you because we don’t dare put any restrictions on the the “pro-death cult”.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Comments on the HotAir Headline story…
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2014/01/23/lila-rose-an-abortion-doesnt-un-rape-a-woman/#comments

ITguy on January 23, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Make an exception for rape and you can be assured the number of reported “rapes” will increase.

slprice on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

That’s true. The law would probably need to include a requirement that the rape was reported as such to police — and there would need to be more severe penalties for falsely reporting a rape, to discourage women who try to make the exception swallow the rule. That previously happened with the “mental health” exception for late-term abortions. Abortion doctors would routinely claim that an abortion was necessary to preserve the mother’s mental health — because being inconvenienced with a baby would get on her nerves!

AZCoyote on January 23, 2014 at 3:47 PM

“Pro-life cult”.

*giggle*

Yeah, how dare we want to save the lives of human babies. If that was meant as an insult, I’ll accept as a point of pride.

Nonetheless, you prove the point that infanticide is okey-dokey with you because we don’t dare put any restrictions on the the “pro-death cult”.

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 3:46 PM

Historically, there sure have been a whole lot more pro-death cults than pro-life cults, that’s for sure.

dkmonroe on January 23, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Make an exception for rape and you can be assured the number of reported “rapes” will increase.

slprice on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

You’re not going to stop women from lying about the circumstances about how their baby was conceived. You could try to require a police report, but that would never fly politically.

What you can do is stop the gratuitous 2nd and 3rd term elective late-term abortions. That would be an tremendous victory. Amazing that we need to fight tooth and nail to safeguard against such egregious barbarism, but those are the circumstances we face.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:48 PM

That the GOP decides time and time and time again to die on the hill of abortion related matters just boggles my mind. The whole friggin’ basis of this country is crumbling around us and GOP people are more worried about whether some 18 year old chick in Detroit gets an abortion than if Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer stay in majority leadership positions. Way to prioritize!

deepdiver on January 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Way to stick your head in the sand and let the other side define the terms of the argument. We don’t die on the hill of abortion. We die on the hill of media booby traps. We die on the hill of dancing to the left’s melody of bullshit emotional tactics instead of saying our side is on the side of science because we know medically when life begins, because there is a heartbeat at 18 days and that “glob of cells”, if it survives in the womb, turns into a human being 100 times out of 100. We die on the hill of making the exception to the rule some holy grail of morality when we can point to the 99% of other abortions as straight-up murder. We die on the hill of never challenging the media for being the willing assassins they are.

Those are the stupid hills the right dies on.

somewhatconcerned on January 23, 2014 at 3:49 PM

I think the point needs to be made that the only people sympathizing with rapists are liberals. Conservatives are the ones fighting for severe legal consequences and minimum sentencing.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:53 PM

If the GOP doesn’t win they don’t have control over the long term debate and legislation on abortion or anything else. So losing by saying stupid crap on abortion loses any chance to do anything about abortion or any other thing in this country. So that direction doesn’t save one single life. Who thinks that Akin and Murdoch losing gimmee GOP pickups in the Senate furthered anything pro-life anywhere?? It didn’t. Instead of staying even after ’12 we netted a 2-seat loss.

See, this is what pundits are always talking about when they say that the left takes the long view while conservatives show up every two years, yell and scream about the particular things that are morally reprehensible that year and then go back home leaving the lefties to indoctrinate another generation.

*sigh* I’m pro-life but the same way I don’t buy the “if it can save one life” argument on 2A matters, I don’t buy it on abortion matters either. Rome is burning and if the GOP base is willing to let it be destroyed over this issue then the GOP can’t be fixed either.

deepdiver on January 23, 2014 at 3:54 PM

It’s interesting, the first person I heard use the term “carrying a rapist’s baby to term” was Ann Coulter who was stating 85 percent of Republicans feel that termination should be an option in rape cases. But we have the 15 percent here apparently all on board with even banning OCPs, depo, Mirena and Nexplanon because they also prevent implantation after conception. Good luck at the voting booths.

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Who wants to take them all away? Names, please. Actual politicians trying to get rid of the birth control pill and those other things you listed.

Please note, not wanting to pay for something is not the same as wanting to outlaw it. Also, wanting people to know the mechanism behind how a product works is also not the same as wanting to outlaw it.

cptacek on January 23, 2014 at 2:45 PM

cptacek on January 23, 2014 at 3:55 PM

somewhatconcerned on January 23, 2014 at 3:49 PM

Word.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Make an exception for rape and you can be assured the number of reported “rapes” will increase.

slprice on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

That’s true. The law would probably need to include a requirement that the rape was reported as such to police — and there would need to be more severe penalties for falsely reporting a rape, to discourage women who try to make the exception swallow the rule. That previously happened with the “mental health” exception for late-term abortions. Abortion doctors would routinely claim that an abortion was necessary to preserve the mother’s mental health — because being inconvenienced with a baby would get on her nerves!

AZCoyote on January 23, 2014 at 3:47 PM

If the woman actually was raped, then more rapes being reported would be a good thing. The rapist needs to be caught and punished, which starts with the woman reporting it.

If the woman wasn’t raped and lied, then when found out she should be charged with a false police report…and murder, since it wasn’t a rape.

cptacek on January 23, 2014 at 3:59 PM

What you can do is stop the gratuitous 2nd and 3rd term elective late-term abortions. That would be an tremendous victory. Amazing that we need to fight tooth and nail to safeguard against such egregious barbarism, but those are the circumstances we face.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:48 PM

I think you’re fooling yourself. People that support abortion are not going to compromise. Their “lifestyle” (or the lifestyle they fantasize about via Hollywood) is impossible without abortion.

There’s just no way to finesse that fact.

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Make an exception for rape and you can be assured the number of reported “rapes” will increase.

slprice on January 23, 2014 at 3:40 PM

As I said on the headline thread:

Maybe so. BUT now we are really heading into an electoral trap.

Because that’s just where Akin was going with he said that if it was, paraphrasing, “legitimate rape” it would take care of itself (abort itself). Anyway, yes, at least a judge would have to determine whether it was rape, so, perhaps there would be cases where the person wasn’t raped. But even saying the you are raped has the potential for social and other types of stigma, so claiming rape if you weren’t raped wouldn’t be a routine affair, and would be subject to perjury also.

anotherJoe on January 23, 2014 at 4:02 PM

Lila Rose is teh awesome.

Chris of Rights on January 23, 2014 at 2:58 PM

She’s also hot. Assuming she is not married, the guy that gets her will be very lucky.

bw222 on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Way to stick your head in the sand and let the other side define the terms of the argument. We don’t die on the hill of abortion. We die on the hill of media booby traps. We die on the hill of dancing to the left’s melody of bullshit emotional tactics instead of saying our side is on the side of science because we know medically when life begins, because there is a heartbeat at 18 days and that “glob of cells”, if it survives in the womb, turns into a human being 100 times out of 100. We die on the hill of making the exception to the rule some holy grail of morality when we can point to the 99% of other abortions as straight-up murder. We die on the hill of never challenging the media for being the willing assassins they are.

Those are the stupid hills the right dies on.

somewhatconcerned on January 23, 2014 at 3:49 PM

The implication of your post being that if pro-life GOP nominees sidestepped all of these pitfalls, they would win. I ask, then: where are the success stories of no-exceptions pro-life political candidates winning national office?

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 4:00 PM

Poll after poll show that elective, late-term abortion bans are a 70/30 winner for us. We will consistently win the argument if we fight on that turf.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Bitter Clinger on January 23, 2014 at 3:32 PM
The pro-life cult probably could achieve that goal if not for the fact that everyone knows by now that it’s only the first move in a strategy of political incrementalism, starting with the “easy” stuff and working their way to the eventual banning of all abortion at any stage of pregnancy (and from there, who knows what else they’d target).

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Cult?

You tell me. If we don’t really care about unborn babies, what do you think our motivation is to hold on to this issue so tightly. I read your comments sometimes and I believe with the level of emotion you put into it, you’re as much a cultist as you imagine us to be. I know your family pulls down some serious change in the baby banishment biz, so that’s evidentily your motivation.

What’s mine?

hawkdriver on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Honestly, I think the actual position the vast majority of people have is “I really hate abortion and think it is gross…55 million since 1973 kind of makes me sick…but if my daughter/sister/self/son’s girlfriend gets knocked up by accident, I damn sure want it to be legal THEN.”

This is the problem. All those polls are worthless because when it comes down to it, most people actually facing an unwanted pregnancy will at least want to have the option to terminate it. And if they can’t, they will feel oppressed and put upon by people who have never been in their shoes.

rockmom on January 23, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Yes, and the main reason that “pro-life” Republicans win elections anywhere is that voters know that Roe v Wade largely prevents them from implementing criminal sanctions against abortion.

wbcoleman on January 23, 2014 at 4:05 PM

What you can do is stop the gratuitous 2nd and 3rd term elective late-term abortions. That would be an tremendous victory. Amazing that we need to fight tooth and nail to safeguard against such egregious barbarism, but those are the circumstances we face.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Abortion Barbie is for abortion up to the moment a child is born. And that’s why she is getting so much financial support from Feminazis even though her campaign is an abortion and she has little chance of becoming governor.

bw222 on January 23, 2014 at 4:05 PM

And the whole issue of abortion due rape and incest is a joke anyway. We’ve killed close to 50 million now. The vast preponderance because the mother just didn’t want the baby.

hawkdriver on January 23, 2014 at 4:06 PM

The implication of your post being that if pro-life GOP nominees sidestepped all of these pitfalls, they would win. I ask, then: where are the success stories of no-exceptions pro-life political candidates winning national office?

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Which national Democrat will openly and honestly admit that he/she supports unlimited abortions at any point for any reason?

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 4:06 PM

where are the success stories of no-exceptions pro-life political candidates winning national office?

Armin Tamzarian on January 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Are you really willing to kill innocent babies to win national office? Do you really think that’s necessary?

kcewa on January 23, 2014 at 4:07 PM

My view is that females who have been raped should have the option to take a “morning after” pill that prevents implantation of an embryo, if that is what they choose to do. One can certainly argue, correctly, that the embryo is innocent of wrongdoing, but then, so was the rape victim. We have to balance the equities somehow, and the person best suited to do that is the rape victim who will either have to abort the rapist’s baby, or carry it to term. It should be her decision, IMO.
AZCoyote on January 23, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Would you run for office? Maybe manage some campaigns?

Marcus on January 23, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Why are we always talking about abortion in the context of rape and never in the context of late-term elective abortions? Because Democrats always frame the argument that way, and our people walk right into that trap.

crrr6 on January 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Very true. Todd Akin isn’t that smart, but Richard Mourdock was and he walked into the trap. Any conservative republican knows the liberal media is going to try to “deep six” them with “gotcha” questions. They need to be prepared and go through “mock interviews” before facing a hostile media.

bw222 on January 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM

I agree with the 1% argument, but for the sake of winning elections I would take it one step further and begin campaigning on a 12 week cut of date (with exceptions). This would be a very acceptable position for most moderate Americans and, as the candidates could state, is the norm in Europe.

AmeriCuda on January 23, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4