In response to:

Legitimate Rape Arguments

IAdmitIAmCrazy Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 8:42 PM
Reading this thread I almost got the feeling that my ungodly, agnostic ways are the reason for my pro-choice position. Therefore, it almost took me by surprise to read a diversity of opinions on the issue by different and within different religions. ( You should also note that Romney's position does allow for exceptions in case of rape and incest. Ryan has adapted to his new position as No 2 on the ticket. From my knowledge of U.S. history, presidents, once elected, let party platforms be party platforms. I think I recently heard Reince Priebus say something in this respect ...
Dogs for Romney_TX Chair Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 9:25 PM
There are atheists and agnostics who embrace the pro life position.

Nat Hentoff is a leftist, a liberal and a card carrying member of the ACLU. He founded the Village Voice. Yet he argues that abortion is the ultimate violation of human rights, and he's gotten a lot of grief from his leftist buddies for his stance.

S.E. Cupp is a pro-life female conservative pundit. She too is an atheist. She was the subject of a vile Hustler graphic. It was odd that all those who were screaming about Limbaugh's comments and Akin's comments were silent about this piece of "art".

Here's a link about another pro-life atheist.
Todd Akin’s grossly irresponsible remarks about “legitimate rape” and conception have received much media attention. As well they should. The sheer weirdness of the remarks calls into question both his intelligence and his personal integrity. How could someone conclude logically that a rape victim’s body has the capacity to prevent conception in the wake of sexual assault? And why would someone assert that the conclusion had been supported by doctors with whom he had spoken? Clearly, Akin contrived the idea on the spot and then contrived the claim that there were doctors who had informed and/or supported his assertion. All of...