In response to:

The Republican Rape Dilemma

jfultz Wrote: Oct 28, 2012 6:53 PM
It is easy for all of you to suggest how Richard Mourdock SHOULD have responded. But he didn't have days to think of an answer that would have been SAFE with the voters. He had a matter of seconds. And under circumstances such as this, the integrity of a persom comes out. Mourdock answered with his true beliefs, not one that would necessarily garner him votes. Ask anybody who is a result of rape, and I would guess that most are happy their mother made the decision she did, to carry that child to full term.

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...