The LA Times understands the consistent pro-life position

In a recent Meet The Press interview Presidential candidate Herman Cain said, “I do not believe in abortion under any circumstances.  Not for rape and incest.”  This is very refreshing especially in a time when many self-described “pro-life” politicians believe abortion should be legal or permissible in cases of rape, incest and / or life.

The exceptions position is inconsistent and is not pro-life.  Even the LA Times Opinion page recognized it as illogical.  Although the LA Times doesn’t agree with the pro-life position they at least understand the consistent pro-life position, even noting that if you accept abortion in one hardship circumstance it opens the door to all other ordinary circumstances.


What do you think?


3 Responses to The LA Times understands the consistent pro-life position

  1. Lotti says:

    Being rigidly unyielding does not count as “refreshing”.

    • Lotti, so we should allow for exceptions when it comes to protecting human life or any other attacks against the dignity of the human person?

  2. Cliff says:

    I agree that it is inconsistent to allow for exceptions. If a fetus’ right to live can be trumped in some circumstances than it is hard to argue that it cannot be trumped in all circumstances. I held this position secretly for quite some time in college before I actually heard someone else express it. (I wasn’t sure if even one other person held this view.) On the down side, while I’m glad to see Cain expressing this view without apology, I think Cain is a terrible presidential candidate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: