Allow me to stipulate a few things before proceeding, with the complete understand that this note will annoy my more conservative readers:

  • I am pro-choice
  • I am against Roe v Wade and against government funding of abortion
  • I believe that debating another Republican on whether or not abortion is murder is worse than pointless because the only possible outcome of the debate is anger between two people who likely agree on 80 percent of policy issues

Herman Cain has an abortion issue problem. But so does the Republican Party.

In an interview with John Stossel Mr. Cain gave answers which seemed contradictory saying on the one hand that he is pro-life but on the other hand that the decision of a woman to have an abortion if she is raped is "her choice. Not the government's choice."

And more: "I don't believe government should make that decision." Followed by "No, people shouldn't be just free to abort."

Mr. Stossel was justifiably confused by Cain's remarks, but I think I understand them. Cain did not say that a woman should be prevented from having an abortion, but simply that he believes a woman should choose not to have an abortion.

Please read the entirety of my article for the American Spectator here:


# [Member]   on 10/27/11 at 10:21
I like Mr. States Rights position on abortion even better. He prefers states to make the choice. If abortion is murder then it should be decided by states as to penalties. For example, if someone "commits an abortion" after being raped, then the state finds them guilty of abortion and gives them a hug and counseling. If someone is a serial aborter then they could experience more serious penalties including fines or jail. More likely it will be a state-by-state choice that will make some states similar to Nevada for divorce in the 60s - about the only place to go to get a quick divorce. If murder of an unborn child is frowned on but not penalized to a significant extent it will be less frequent and that would be a good thing. We can all look at killing of another adult person and say that should be always be a capital penalty, but you can always find the judge or jurisdiction that lets someone walk because of extenuating circumstances. It could even be decided at county level. I would always prefer to have community values and morals decided at the lowest unit of government possible and that should be the Republican position. When the Rs decide to intrude at a national level (making murder a national / federal crime) then we have lost the Constitutional little r republican form of government. Then its katie-bar-the-door for the democrats to do whatever they want to legislate economic morality.
# [Member]   on 10/27/11 at 13:48
Anyone who makes an issue out of abortion this time around is foolish. A president has no power to change it either way. To sink a candidate at this time based on this issue will give you a president (Obama) who is radically pro-abortion, so how much further ahead will you be?
I Am John Galt
Politics, economics, current events, philosophy and more, with a focus on free minds, free markets, and free people.

Following Obama's Economic Policies

Following Obama
October 2015
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
 << <   > >>
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

  XML Feeds

powered by b2evolution CMS