Skip to comments.'I Wish Mitt Romney Would Meet People Like Me,' Rape Conceived Pro-Lifer Says
Posted on 09/16/2012 4:56:25 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rep. Todd Akin's (R-Mo.) recent "legitimate rape" gaffe has brought greater scrutiny to the issue of whether pro-lifers should support abortions for women who get pregnant after getting raped. While the Republican Party platform does not include a rape exception, the Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, supports a rape exception. In a Saturday interview with The Christian Post, Ryan Bomberger, a pro-life activist who was carried to term and given up for adoption after his mother was raped, said Romney and other politicians who hold that view should meet with people like him.
"I wish politicians like Mitt Romney would actually connect with a tangible real-life example of the possibility that resulted from a choice of life instead of a choice of death," Bomberger said.
Bomberger believes that Akin's comments were "unfortunate," because he allowed "himself to get sucked into that typical thing" where "they use the extreme cases to justify all the other cases."
"The reality is," Bomberger added, "I wish Mitt Romney would meet people like me ... and understand that it's more than just a one percent fringe case and we can just immediately write them off, because the assumption is always that abortion is the natural follow-up to a rape."
Bomberger was speaking at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C. While at the conference, he had spoken to three women who shared that they had gotten pregnant after being raped. Two of them gave up the child for adoption while the third kept and parented her child.
"These are stories that are worth hearing, but the abortion activists don't want to hear that side of things," Bomberger argued. "They don't want to hear from an actual woman's perspective who has been through that ... . I'm able to speak from a perspective of someone who was given life despite my mom's traumatic experience."
Bomberger also pointed out that, while there was "uproar" over Akin's "legitimate rape" comments, Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, is based upon an illegitimate rape, because the plaintiff, Norma McCorvey, lied about being raped in order to get the court to hear the case.
"They should be upset about that, but, of course, you don't hear pro-abortion activists being upset about that," Bomberger complained.
Akin's controversial remarks came in an interview aired on Aug. 19. He said that a "legitimate rape" rarely results in a pregnancy because "the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." He later apologized and said he misspoke.
Bomberger is the co-founder of The Radiance Foundation, which is, according to its website, "an educational life-affirming organization that tackles social issues in the context of God-given purpose."
“your GOP has created a monster”
OK, Mitt isn’t the best candidate. I argued rather strongly against him.
But, he is our only chance to get rid of the Obama who is far, far worse on every issue.
AND if he wins we have Ryan in there to help our cause.
President Obama likes to say, Were all in this together.’ Yet how hollow it sounds coming from a politician who has never once lifted a hand to defend the most helpless and innocent of all human beings, the child waiting to be born.
Supporting him is one thing, but trying to create the myth that he is pro-life, or to conceal that he rejects the GOP’s pro-life party platform is the kind of thing that needs to be corrected when that mistake is made.
” Romney never “evolved” on abortion,”
Sure he did. When he ran for Senator and Governor he was totally pro abortion. Now he is against abortion with the exceptions (handy for avoiding the negative ads).
And he picked a great pro-life VP.
Mittens is not the ideal pro-life candidate but a tad better than Kill as many babies — even after they are born alive by mistake — as possible and use tax payer money to do it Obama.
“Supporting him is one thing, but trying to create the myth that he is pro-life”
Then it sounds like we agree. You just don’t say that Mitt is pro-life because of his past position and he support of rape, incest exception.
OK. I was just using the term “pro-life” to mean that his position now is that he opposes the vast majority of abortions. That is all that I meant. Opposing most reasons for abortion is better than Obama and the Democrats.
At some point you need to tell the truth.
You just repeated your falsehood again, we all know that “health of mother” means abortion on demand, and that is Mitt’s position, it is not what you claimed.
Mitt now claims that he openly campaigned on being against the party platform, being pro-abortion for “health”, “rape”, and “incest”, and that the republicans voted for him knowing that position.
You guys have backed a monster of epic proportions.
RE: The pregnancy could well seem like a nine months constant continuation of the attack.
Let’s not minimize the fact -— RAPE IS A HORRIBLE THING. But would it ease the pain of the attack knowing that you killed an innocent baby?
>> supposed pro lifers
That’s not a fair characterization of those deeply troubled by both Obama and Romney.
FWIW, Life and Liberty have better odds with 3 Republican Houses. So voting for the Republican Presidential ticket is a no-brainer in my pragmatic opinion.
Perhaps we are just tired of being lied to by Romney?
I thought you said he was actually prolife. Are you saying that’s not the case?
“Sorry you candidate of choice lost the 2012 GOP nomination. Get over it.”
Right. Unborn children are going to ‘just get over it’.
My wife’s biological mother was raped by her step father. She carried her to term and gave her upmfor adoption. I thank the Lord everyday for my wife. She is a wonderful woman of God, wife and outstanding mother. I could not imagine my life without her.
Your post indicates you oppose Romney because of his religion.
“we all know that health of mother means abortion on demand”
You know I had thought he was for rape incest exception only — even after reading his statement. Health means anything since it is defined by the abortionist and includes “mental health.”
I had assumed that Romney would take the exception position like Dole, Bush and McCain did. Now he adds health, which basically means any reason.
Wow. I stand corrected. Dang. We are stuck with a candidate who is weak on pro-life issue.
I am sorry but as a mindless mouthpiece of a candidate who is going to get maybe 50000 votes nation wide, your rantings around here are just so much useless noise.
Thanks, read post 25 again.
Now Mitt is telling us that we all knew this during the campaign, that he was openly campaigning on his being against the party platform on abortion, and for returning to his pro-abortion position.
In other words, just as he has spent 5 years creating the myth that Reagan was “adamantly pro-choice”, now Mitt is giving us a Bill Clinton embrace and making us accomplices, and claiming that we chose him knowing his position.
Mitt is not only changing his position, and the platform’s position, he is trying to convince us that we have change OUR position.
This is the horror conservatives feared.
thanks for your reply and clarification.
I would rather Romney belonged the Church; but, I’m not going to oppose voting for him because of that.
Further, IF I were to determine my vote based on religion, I’d still prefer Romney by a very wide margin.
Hey ansell. Why do you think that National Right to Life endorsed Romney? That is why I was calling him pro-life. I know RTL leaders in my state that supported Romney in the primary, even after I questioned them about this. They said they were convinced that he was sincerely against abortion now and that he stood the best chance to win.
If he is now taking the “health of the mother” position — code for any reason — that is serious.
I had thought he was for rape, incest exceptions only.
Did NRTL know Romney was for “health of the mother” when they made the endorsement in April?
It is now time for pro-life Americans to unite behind Mitt Romney. For the sake of unborn children, the disabled, and the elderly, we must win.
Mitt Romney has taken a strong pro-life position and is committed to implementing policies to protect the unborn, the medically dependent and disabled, and the elderly. Romney opposes abortion and has called the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, “a big mistake.” Romney has expressed his support of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion.
Didn’t you support Herman Cain?
No, they didn’t know, no one knew, but Romney now claims that everyone knew.
Those organizations are extraordinarily ‘flexible’ and easy to placate, you can look at all the money that Mitt spread around in 2008 to see the effect that it has on organizations.
Romney says in this Huckabee interview of October of 2011, that he would “absolutely” have supported a Massachusetts constitutional amendment outlawing ALL abortion.
*”Would you have supported the constitutional amendment that would have established a definition of life at conception”* ? Mitt-””absolutely””.
The people who voted for Romney have to confront their own reasons for having allowed him to deceive them on the life issue. They also need to decide what they are going to let him do to the pro-life movement now that he has come out against the GOP pro-life party platform.
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.