More Than 40 Republican Candidates Oppose Abortion In Cases Of Rape, Incest

page: 1
7

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Todd Atkins was sacrificed by his own party for saying what many in the GOP believe.
Throwing one of their own under the bus, says alot about the GOP , what says more is how many others in their ranks feel the same as Atkins, ontop of the fact that the GOP added it to their party platform for the convention.
Will Republicans lose the White House but maintain control of the House and win the Senate to push their agenda through and over ride a presidential veto ?






While many Republicans may not have used Akin's blunt wording, his sentiments are not unusual in the GOP. Just two days after he made his remarks, the party voted to incorporate strict anti-abortion language into its platform, with no exception for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.






Additionally, there are more than 40 House and Senate candidates besides Akin -- including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the man who has been tapped as Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate -- who want to ban abortion access even for women who have been victims of rape or incest



www.huffingtonpost.com...

slumz.boxden.com...




posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 


And Obama voted against a bill that would have made doctors provide assistance to babies that were actually alive after botched abortions...

There isn't much sanity on either side. Abortion is engrained into American society at this point, it isn't going anywhere... Agree with it or not.
edit on 24-8-2012 by IsThisThingBugged because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 

I may be misunderstanding you, but the post seems to be a little misleading. It may be the article's fault.


Todd Atkins was sacrificed by his own party for saying what many in the GOP believe.
Throwing one of their own under the bus, says alot about the GOP ,
This is one of the more confusing sentences I've run across, but then again, I'm slow. (Oh, by the way, I assume you're talking about Todd Akin, the Missouri Senate candidate.) You note the party rejected him and his remarks, are trying to get rid of him, and threw him under the bus. Yet the party agrees with him? And you seem to imply that it was a bad thing for him to be rejected? Should he have been praised? Are you opposed to all candidates and parties that throw a member under the bus?

what says more is how many others in their ranks feel the same as Atkins,
How many would that be, and what evidence do you have?

ontop of the fact that the GOP added it to their party platform for the convention.
What did Akin say that was added to their plank? The plank is the same or extremely similiar to the pro-life plank the Republicans have used since 2000.

Will Republicans lose the White House but maintain control of the House and win the Senate to push their agenda through and over ride a presidential veto ?
The quick answer is no, it's impossible. To override a veto, the Republicans would need 67 Senators. At most they will have 52.

the party voted to incorporate strict anti-abortion language into its platform, with no exception for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.
As noted, it's old language. and there was no mention in the plank of rape or incest either way. That is to be left up to the various members.

Additionally, there are more than 40 House and Senate candidates besides Akin -- including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the man who has been tapped as Mitt Romney's vice presidential running mate -- who want to ban abortion access even for women who have been victims of rape or incest
Even if that were true, and I'll explain why it may not be, you've got, what, 8% of the candidates feeling that way? But there is scant evidence to show that's the case. That number refers to the candidates who have filled out a questionnaire on life issues and have been endorsed by a group. There was a question on rape and incest, but there is no evidence that they had to answer that in a certain way to get an endorsement. There were three pages of questions in that questionnaire.

Besides, wasn't the comment that everyone is objecting to was Akin's thought that forcibly raped women weren't as likely to get pregnant? That's not an issue that the Republicans are even considering. (Off-topic, and just for argument's sake, what kind of lab experiment could be set up to test Akin's claim?)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


I know, all this pushing under the bus can be so confusing. Check this out. Apparently, anyone who disagrees with "no exceptions" on abortion is part of the Romney Republican liberal fringe group.


"In calling for Congressman Akin's exit of the Senate race, Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan are throwing a prolife Congressman under the bus over a blunder, and it seems they are doing so because they disagree with his no exceptions position on abortion - a position that is an integral part of the Republican Party platform, the same position that was held by President Ronald Reagan," explained Jennifer Mason, Personhood USA spokesperson. "We are left with Reagan Republicans, who agree with the Republican Party platform on abortion, and Romney Republicans, a fringe group of liberals who compromise on human life."

source


Todd Akin has a long and distinguished record of defending women, children, and families--and unlike the GOP establishment, I refuse to throw him under the bus

So, from the same above source, even Family Research Council says the GOP threw the man under the bus.

Some ruffled feathers of GOP supporters will have to be smoothed, or the convention could resemble a WWF smackdown. IMO the R/R campaign and RNC doesn't want to talk abortion in public, to the muggles, because it will not be the focus of the campaign, off message. Hence, Akin had to go away quickly, made to disappear, pushed under the bus.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by desert
 

Dear desert,

I may be a little confused over semantics, or interpretation of the platform. Yes, I understand that Akin is being rejected by the party. But I don't think it's because of a "no exceptions" clause in the platform. First, of course, because there isn't any such clause in the platform. It isn't addressed and that is because there are so many opinions within the party as to precisely what should be there.

Everyone accepts "life of the mother" as an exception. Some believe in "health of the mother," while others say that health shouldn't include the mental problems normally associated with pregnancy. Rape and incest are usually, but not always, accepted as exceptions. Because of these conflicting opinions, the platform just has the same broad position it's had for a long time. It's up to the individual running, what exceptions he's comfortable with.

As has been pointed out above, aborion is not going away, nor will it change significantly in the next four or eight years. (Roe v. Wade, etc.) The argument is primarily over the Democrat plank which calls for taxpayer paid abortions for any reason at all, without restrictions.

I agree abortion will not be the focus of the campaign, as I said, abortion won't change significantly. And I disagree that Akin had to go because he was "off message." Every politician goes off message now and then. I think he was dumped because of the other comments he made about rape and pregnancy. Is that where we might disagree?

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. As an off-topic aside, I've heard that the Democrats gave him $1.5 million for his primary campaign, figuring that he would be the easiest to beat. - C -



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   
We've got more than enough existing abortion debate threads. Please contribute in one of them Like this thread rather than cluttering the board with yet another battle of repetitiveness.

THREAD CLOSED





top topics
 
7

log in

join