In response to:

The Republican Rape Dilemma

Dave3678 Wrote: Oct 26, 2012 2:06 PM
I agree that a baby produced by rape is a miracle and should not be made an "exception" for abortion. But let's remember where we are: Abortion is legal in the United States. 40 million babies have been killed. If you were president in 2012, and a bill came to your desk that outlawed abortion except in the cases of rape, would you not sign it just to get the country going back in the right direction? Would you not eliminate 99% of abortions that go on today, or would you veto it because of the less than 1% of abortions associated with rape? So, given that we are currently living in a culture of death, I would, today, gladly support a platform that includes the rape exception.
Paul218 Wrote: Oct 26, 2012 2:33 PM
Well, you couldn't sign such a bill -- it would take a case before the Supreme Court to be decided before such a bill were even written. Even if we elect 535 pro-life members of Congress (+1 in the Executive Branch), they couldn't overturn a decided case. Only liberal Democrats do that.
Jack2894 Wrote: Oct 26, 2012 2:45 PM
They could certainly pass an amendment to the COnstitution. Of, that's right. EVen when Conservatives have been in power they haven't done a thing.

As Richard Mourdock’s Indiana Senate fate hinges on how voters absorb his views on rape, all conservatives have an opportunity for a look in the mirror.

Just how pro-life do we want to be?

The Mourdock controversy is nothing like Todd Akin’s self-inflicted wound in Missouri, the result of an embrace of just plain bad medical information.

Mourdock is in hot water for accurately (if not particularly skillfully) articulating what God instructs about the life of the unborn.

If he is on politically shaky ground, it is because he had the courage to stand on the...