Does that include the unborn?

Does that include the unborn?

3. If the death penalty is appropriate for rapists, it must also hold for armed robbers, drunk drivers who kill, women who drug their husbands and cut off their genitalia, women who commit paternity fraud, people guilty of assault, people guilty of attempted murder, negligent homicide, abortion providers (YES, admit it! If you support the death penalty for rapists to illustrate your concern for the fetus, you must logically support the death penalty for abortion providers. Go ahead and run for public office on THAT platform!) and embezzlers.

Reasons why executing the rapist is not as clear cut as Mike Adams thinks: 1. The rapist now has an incentive to murder his victim (no witness) and no incentive to spare her life (he will still get the death penalty). 2. We already punish rapists. If abortion did not exist, would there still be a moral case for executing rapists? If the answer is yes, then all this time we have had insufficient laws punishing rape, and conservatives have been sandbagging.

Reasons to support the development and implementation of artificial wombs: 1. Artificial wombs simultaneously allow a woman to terminate her pregnancy AND protect the life of the fetus, thereby satisfying both sides of the abortion debate and settling the issue forever. 2. See reason #1

Reasons to support curing aging: 1. Aging ends the life of an innocent 2. See reason #1

Automation is not the reason for job loss. Companies refuse to train new workers. Companies refuse to hire the unemployed or individuals with different skill sets. Companies refuse to invest in the long term. And of course, increased government regulations and taxes are not helping matters any.

Conservatives have stayed silent on the issue of paternity fraud, which is far more destructive to the institution of family than no-fault divorce or gay marriage could ever be. In the nearly 13 years that I have read columns on Townhall and Jewish World Review, I have counted THREE articles written about the topic of paternity fraud. This is moral malpractice on the part of conservatives. Surrender on gay marriage and go scorched earth on paternity fraud. You will reestablish the credibility of the Republican party.

Or get sterilized.

Here we go again. Another conservative getting into a huff because those big bad libertarians are challenging the "wisdom" (I use that term very generously) of the right. Every problem we have with drug addiction today is occurring while drugs are ILLEGAL. So the notion that the War on Drugs is a success is folly, unless one believes that things would be even worse with drugs being made legal, which is unproven. No serious libertarian believes society can function without personal responsibility or civic virtue. Libertarians only claim government cannot be the source of those values. Most libertarians are not libertines or anarchists in their personal lives. Many libertarians are conservative in their lives and conduct.

Rachel Alexander-thank you for being one of the first conservative columnists to write about paternity fraud (in Townhall, only Kathleen Parker and Jeff Jacoby ever wrote about the subject). Further, you are the first to actually use the term "Paternity Fraud". Why are so few conservatives willing to tackle this issue?