In response to:

The Republican Rape Dilemma

HornIt Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 12:44 AM
Here's an idea. Why not back up our positions using a reason and logic based argument to either replace or supplement the faith based one? Few, not even many delusional liberals, would argue that life if a gift, regardless of where you believe the gift comes from. If one believes that life begins at conception, which is actually the the most logical point of demarcation, then all the other pro life arguments can rationally follow. Just explain it that way. The argument that God says so isn't enough, but that doesn't matter since a pro life position is the one consistent with reason and logic. Why don't Republicans ever argue it that way? It is frustrating
lemonfemale Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 7:10 AM
Im argue it that way. First, that it IS a baby must be presented as science, not faith. Then for rape- I don't include incest- I say this is the one place the woman had no part in creating the baby. It was foisted on her. I liken it to finding a baby on your doorstep. Can you leave it there to die? Morally, no. I might well acquit a woman on trial for a rape abortion just as I might have acquitted the woman who doused her batterer with gasoline and burned him to death in his sleep, but neither one should be legal.
Nunya8 Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 9:48 AM
Hard to refute your logic there. You only remind me that man cannot legislate morality, only behavior.

Curious how 'legal' and 'ethical' don't always walk in lockstep in America, eh?
Dollysboy Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 3:03 AM
Perhaps because it is based on the inane presumption that life is a "gift." It is no more a gift than war is a gift or oranges.
Nunya8 Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 9:44 AM
"Perhaps because it is based on the inane presumption that life is a "gift." It is no more a gift than war is a gift or oranges." don't value human life above oranges?
HornIt Wrote: Oct 28, 2012 11:30 PM
Inane presumption? It's not a presumption at all. It's a verifiable truth, though that doesn't mean people like yourself so inclined to ignore and deny truth for the sake of convenience see it as such.

Never the less, as I said, only total nutbags would argue life is not a gift, no matter where you believe it came from, so it would be a winning premise politically.

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...