In response to:

The Republican Rape Dilemma

NV1 Wrote: Oct 26, 2012 6:10 PM
The problem is that not everyone considers an embryo to be a baby. To me, that is largely dependent upon your faith and spiritual view which we cannot legislate. Once again, I'm against abortion, but I don't feel that I have the moral authority to tell other citizens that my viewpoint is the absolutely correct and therefore women who don't believe the same way should be forced to carry a baby to term against their will and their beliefs. By now Republicans should have learned 2 obvious lessons, 1) We will never overturn Roe v. Wade and 2) The rape and incest case arguments are such a small % of abortions performed that it is almost inconsequential. If you want to protect unborn children, we need a better plan to educate and support women.

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...