In response to:

The Republican Rape Dilemma

Timaeus Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 3:10 PM
Mourdock's exact words were “I struggled with myself for a long time but I came to realize life is that gift from God, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape. It is something that God intended to happen.” How can any reasonable person interpret these words as meaning that God intended rape to happen? “It” obviously refers to the beginning of a new life. Seriously, no one who pretends that Mourdock meant anything else is being honest. Mourdock was explaining why the exception for rape is not acceptable. If taking God out of the explanation will make it easier for some people to understand, a new human life is never a mistake, and so destroying that life does not correct something that should not have happened.
Mark1369 Wrote: Oct 28, 2012 2:34 AM
The only ones to misinterpret his words were democrats and the media. When I read what he said I was appalled, I am voting for him, until I found the transcript and read his exact words. Those words were far different that what the article and his opponent said they were.
MG formerly minnesotagrandma Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 4:56 PM
I don't think most DO interpret it that way. I think they PRETEND so they can demonize pro life.
DHE Wrote: Oct 27, 2012 3:47 PM
You are right, Timaeus, of course. But as long as both sides insist on misinterpreting each other on purpose, they both get what they deserve.

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...