In response to:

Pro-Life Conservatives Divided over Condoleeza Rice

NewAgeOfReason Wrote: Jul 13, 2012 10:26 PM
WHAT? Abortion was not even an option in the 1700's. Infant mortality was so high and the lack of children growing into adulthood was low that is part of why they had so many children. The Right to Life identified in the founding documents was not an anti-abortion stance. You have to be thick to think that.

Reason number one Romney shouldn’t – and honestly, won’t – pick Condoleeza Rice? Reactions like this. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of pro-life advocacy group Susan B. Anthony List, expressed strong disappointment in the rumor that Romney has Condi under consideration, issuing this statement via email:

Former Secretary Rice's position on the sanctity of human life makes her an unqualified candidate for Governor Romney to choose as a running mate. Throughout the campaign, including at the Palmetto Freedom Forum last September, he has pledged to us in no uncertain terms that he would choose a pro-life running mate. We have...