Skip to comments.Herman Cain to Piers Morgan: Iím anti-abortion yet pro-choice (Watch Video)
Posted on 10/20/2011 10:01:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Maybe Herman Cain is trying too hard to be likable. He doesn’t need to enter attack mode or anything, but it would help if he didn’t pander to lefty media hosts, either. I have to assume that’s what this is — unless Cain really doesn’t think it’s the government’s business to ban abortion?
Last night, Cain told Piers Morgan that “life begins at conception” and said he opposes abortion “in all cases.” But when Morgan pressed him with typical questions about whether Cain would want his daughter or granddaughter to have a child conceived by rape or incest, Cain dodged. First, he told Morgan he was confusing two separate matters (apples and oranges, perhaps?). But, then, he said this, apparently still in reference to what he thinks about cases involving rape:
No, it comes down to is, its not the governments role or anybody elses role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, youre not talking about that big a number. So what Im saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldnt try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
This isn’t the first time Cain has seemed to contradict himself on the abortion issue. In an interview with John Stossel earlier this month, Cain circled around and around Stossel’s frank questions, defaulting to stock phrases like “I’m pro-life” and “life begins at conception” — but also “that’s her choice.” When Stossel asked him if abortion should be legal, though, he flat-out said “no.” That suggests that, in general at least, he does think it’s the government’s role to “make that decision.”
And in an interview with Meet the Press’ David Gregory, Cain said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest because “the percentage of those instances is so minuscule that there are other options.” But “if it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”
If you put all the pieces together, at best it seems Cain believes abortion is wrong “in all cases,” should be illegal in most cases and should be a choice in some cases.
But it’s also possible he meant what he said to Piers Morgan, when he used pretty sweeping language to supposedly address exceptional cases: “It’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision.” It seems possible he’s bought into the idea that a complete government ban on abortion would somehow be an encroachment on individual freedom, rather than the most fundamental protection of it possible. Without life, what is liberty?
Yet, in 2003, he said he would support a Human Life Amendment, which would ultimately completely ban abortion. And, again, he told Stossel he thinks abortion should be illegal.
Quite confusing — and we can’t turn to his executive or legislative record to see what his actions on the issue have said. Whether his circumlocution should disqualify him with strictly pro-life voters is a matter for debate, but it would certainly help if Cain would clarify this by stating his position unequivocally.
For example (if this is his position), he could simply say: “I think abortion should be illegal and whether a person has a right to life is never another person’s choice to make.”
Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake.”
Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be legal, but, culturally speaking, will work to oppose it because I personally believe it is wrong.”
Whatever it is, Mr. Cain, just spit it out.
Link to the VIDEO without the SPIN:
Herman Cain and Piers Morgan interview
He said that he is personally against all types of abortion, but that the government does not have the authority to impose his opinion on everyone else.
If only some government workers would try that with smoking, drinking, environmental issues, zoning, building licenses, taxation, free speech against homosexual marriage, and the list goes on and on.
There are a lot of people who are against abortion who would make an exception for rape or incest.
Very deceptive title and spin. Cain didn’t say he was ‘pro-choice’ regarding abortion but regarding the people having a choice to raise the child versus adoption. He was very clear if you read the full transcript he is pro-life in ALL incidences, even rape and incest, something all of our candidates except probably Santorum can’t say.
Good job of deciphering liberal-speak.
It makes me so angry that people refuse to look at context. Morgan asked Cain specifically if he would want his raped daughter/granddaughter to KEEP the baby, and Cain’s comments were in direct response to that scenario - whether a woman should KEEP (versus GIVE UP FOR ADOPTION) a child conceived through rape.
His “government shouldn’t tell people what they have to do” comment was in response to Morgan suggesting that whatever Cain would want his daughter to do in the KEEP VERSUS PUT UP FOR ADOPTION situation is automatically what he would LEGISLATE. Cain said that those social decisions should not be made by government.
Nothing Cain has said (at least that I’ve seen so far)indicates that he supports abortion on demand in any case, including the cases of rape and incest.
AS far as I know, he has implied that if the mother’s life is in danger it is up to the family or the woman to decide what to do. That is entirely consistent with the pro-life view.
But to get to the truth we have to look at the entire context of what was said. Those who are against Cain - whether they are liberal media members or whether they are campaigning for Cain’s opponents - will try to take quotes out of context, and those who don’t bother to look at the entire context will be deceived and/or confused. We must not let that happen.
Cain needs to be aware of that situation and always include the frame of reference when he makes comments so that a comment CAN’T be quoted without including the context in it. For instance, in this case he should have said that government shouldn’t be telling people what they have to do in regards to adoption versus keeping the baby or whether to save the mother’s life - rather than just saying “social decisions”.
3 — 2 — 1
His comment about government not telling people what they have to do was not about abortion. It was about whether a raped woman should KEEP the child, or GIVE IT UP FOR ADOPTION. He was asked directly whether he would want his raped daughter to keep the child. His answer was that it would be up to the family to decide that. Morgan said it was important to know what he thinks about this stuff because he would legislate it into policy and Cain said government shouldn’t be deciding those kinds of things for families, so what he would choose (for his own family, according to context) is not what he would force everybody else to choose.
Context is absolutely critical. He was not saying that government shouldn’t tell people whether or not to choose abortion. He was saying government shouldn’t tell people whether to choose ADOPTION.
Cain supporter or not, this is a “trending” line of attack against Herman Cain. I was about to ptost a thread on this article (hit piece by some moonbat tool):
but the thought of having to read it again was making me sick.
He has a hard time being clear for some reason. It's not that hard.
Tell us how you will govern not just what you think.
CAIN: I believe that life begins at conception. And abortion under no circumstances. And heres why
MORGAN: No circumstances?
CAIN: No circumstances.
MORGAN: Because many of your fellow candidates some of them qualify that.
CAIN: They qualify but
MORGAN: Rape and incest.
CAIN: Rape and incest.
MORGAN: Are you honestly saying again, its a tricky question, I know.
CAIN: Ask the tricky question.
MORGAN: But youve had children, grandchildren. If one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?
CAIN: Youre mixing two things here, Piers?
CAIN: Youre mixing
MORGAN: Thats what it comes down to.
CAIN: No, it comes down to its not the governments role or anybody elses role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, youre not talking about that big a number. So what Im saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make.
Cain was chiding Morgan for mixing the two questions of abortion on the one hand and raising the child on the other hand. He then goes on to say it's not anyone's business whether they decide to raise the child or not.
Still going through the interview. First time I've seen Piers Morgan. He's pretty good.
Exactly what source did you read? Just the Hot Air piece, or did you read a transcript of what Cain actually said?
Night and day difference. He was very clear in what he actually said.
Is he personally against murder, robbery, and drunk driving but not wishing to impose these preferences on anyone else? There goes Herman for me.
It’s the old, “Morality can’t be legislated” nonsense. Law is all about legislating morality. It’s just a matter of what morality is being legislated. ...That said, there is very little a president can do to change abortion laws. What he can do as president is work to change policies, or do away federal funding for abortion. Until we elect a Congress with the courage to legislate against murdering children, and a Supreme Court that recognizes the rights of humans who can’t defend themselves, we will suffer human sacrifice.
Cain says least respect for Ron Paul. Wouldn’t be a good president because he wants to eliminate too many things. Cain doesnt want to throw out baby with bathwater. Not trying to eliminate, trying to fix.
Thanks. It looks like Tina Korbe deliberately falsified this story in order to damage Cain.
I’m still not a real Cain fan, but it’s obvious from the transcript that it would be the raped mother’s choice, not to kill the baby but to decide whether to bring her up herself or to adopt her out to someone else. That’s the choice Cain is talking about.
That is perfectly legitimate.
Rick Perry already walked back...
...to 6th place in Iowa.
You have to listen very carefully, because honestly I was fooled the first two times too, but what Cain is actually referring to is whether the government should force a woman to raise a child from rape or incest. He had already stated he was pro life with no exceptions.
But I don’t know anyone who says that the government should force a woman to raise a child that she wasn’t allowed to abort.
The issue was forced parenting not abortion
Funny, I never heard the word “adoption” mentioned, so I didn’t come to that conclusion.
I think the point was more “my own opinion should not be the basis for governmental action, the people’s opinion should.”
People, people, people! PLEASE don’t let some commentary deceive you. Herman Cain has never said that murdering an unborn child should be anybody’s legal choice. All these comments were in the context of Cain being asked directly whether he would want his raped daughter to raise the baby as her own, and Morgan’s suggestion that whatever he would want his daughter to do is what he would FORCE everybody else to do. IOW, these comments were in reference to the KEEP THE BABY v GIVE THE BABY UP FOR ADOPTION issue.
People who don’t like Cain want to take his comments out of context. The choice Cain doesn’t want government to legislate is who will RAISE the baby once it is born.
“There are a lot of people who are against abortion who would make an exception for rape or incest.”
I admit to being one of those.
This is an issue forced on us by the RINO’s at HotAir.com... Heck they don’t mind Pro Choice Romney, but they have a problem with this.
Cain is Pro Life and doesn’t believe the government should force the abortion decision on young women, nor does he believe the Federal government should pay for it.
“You have to listen very carefully, because honestly I was fooled the first two times too, but what Cain is actually referring to is whether the government should force a woman to raise a child from rape or incest. “
That makes zero sense because the government doesn’t force one to adopt or not.
Did you hear “Raise the child as her own”?
The ANTI-CAIN Campaigners:
I personally enjoy a good argument
“We besmirch and malign because that’s how we’re defined.”
Cain exemplifies an important distinction. An individual or a governmental body can believe something is bad, but that doesn’t mean a law needs to be made forbidding it.
He was talking about raising the child vs adoption. This is quite clear if you are at all interested in context or truth.
Typical of so many Leftwingtards (e.g. even Biden) he just doesn't know how to leave it alone.
Cain would be well advised to get a prohibitory order against Piers as soon as possible.
Piers badgered him into the phrase he wanted him to say. It in the end had nothing to do with abortion.
Pray for America
ADD to list:
The ANTI-CAIN Campaigners:
independent in tx
We besmirch and malign because thats how were defined.
It's only fair.
THAT'S IT: No confusion. you can't "bring up" a baby you've killed. The real question is: Why is Tina Korbe and HotAit lying about what Cain said and patronizing him for being "unclear"? Are they carrying water for Mittens like RedState has?
Yeah, but if you’ve taught in urban schools like I have, that can also mean “pass the child on to grandma!”
“The ANTI-CAIN Campaigners”
Nope. I like Cain and will consider voting for him. This issue doesn’t bother me btw. I agree with his real intent.
You should not admit to having a liberal opinion like that.
From your FReep page: Libertarian depending on the issue.
See my tagline.
“Yet many FReepers are swallowing this load without...”
They’re not “swallowing the load...”. They’re intentionally besmirching and maligning in an effort to tarnish the candidates reputation and credibility. These anti-Cain’s, Pro-Romney, Pro-Obama, and Pro-Perry groups are singing to the choir.
“People who dont like Cain want to take his comments out of context.”
And people that dare call themselves Freepers are using it to LIE about Mr. Cain in order to help.....Romney? Seriously, do they really believe that Perry is sitting back in 4th, 5th or 6th place “ready to strike?”
It was Morgan who suggested that what Cain would decide for his own family is what he would force everybody else to do as well.
This is how interviewers inject their own suggestion into the dialog and get comments that can be taken out of context.
Cain HAD to say what he did, or Morgan would have said Cain tacitly agrees with elected officials forcing others to make the same choices they make. Cain’s point was that a woman who was raped is not forced to raise the child as her own, and it’s not the government’s job to decide that for her. But he was clear that killing the child should not be an option.
IOW, being pro-life isn’t about forcing parenthood on the mother, as the pro-aborts continuously want to make it seem; it’s about not forcing the child to be dead. There is an option for both a living child and a woman who doesn’t have to raise the child once it is born. In the extremely rare instance that a child is conceived as a result of rape, the woman can let the child be raised by someone else.
And I would add that whoever is allowed to adopt that infant would most probably be thanking God for answered prayers, since there are long waiting lines to adopt even severely handicapped infants.
A lot of us wanted Gov. Sarah Palin to be President. Some wanted Chris Christie. Others wanted Michelle Bachmann or Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan or Jim DeMint or Donald Trump. None of them are going to be President this time. Gov. Rick Perry was another hopeful but he crashed and burned, especially with independents. So now we have the Rockefeller Romney, Federal Reserve Cain and the Bilderberg Perry to choose from.
So, the suicidal GOP has gone from a slam-dunk to a probable defeat.
I don’t give half a damn about your tagline.
I would not force a rape victim to carry her rapists seed to term, sue me.
If a woman is diagnosed that she WILL die if she tried to carry a child to term, you choose that she die? And YOU are pro-life?
Don’t make me laugh.
I would extend capital punishment to cover rape and child molestation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.