Skip to comments.
Herman Cain to Piers Morgan: I’m anti-abortion yet pro-choice (Watch Video)
Hotair ^
| 10/20/2011
| Tina Korbe
Posted on 10/20/2011 10:01:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-109 last
To: Meet the New Boss
There are mothers who have babies by incest/rape and love their children. 2 cases immediately come to mind.
Fritzl in Austria and Dugan.
101
posted on
10/20/2011 1:41:52 PM PDT
by
mel
(There are only 2 races decent and undecent people)
To: struggle
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.I recall John F'n Kerry trying to dance on the very same pinhead in 2004.
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.
Supreme court has already ruled on that. You DO have a constitutional right to have an abortion, anytime, anywhere. You DO NOT have a constitutional right to do any of those other things. Period.
102
posted on
10/20/2011 1:49:55 PM PDT
by
ichabod1
(Nuts; A house divided against itself cannot stand.)
To: normy
"He has a hard time being clear for some reason. It's not that hard."
I think it was pretty clear if you read the actual transcript and follow the sequence of the discussion, rather than lift a particular quote out of context.
103
posted on
10/20/2011 4:05:32 PM PDT
by
rob777
To: rob777
I watched both the Morgan interview and the Fox interview. The whole question was about abortion in the case of rape or incest.
He needs to be clear on how he would govern. What does "leave it up to the states mean?"
It was obvious he wasn't talking about adoption. Now maybe he was confused or maybe he doesn't want to be pinned down.
It reminded me of the debate and his "apples and oranges" comment. Perry said "in Texas they will pay 17.5 percent when you tack on your 9% sales tax" and all he could say was "your comparing apples to oranges". Mitt simplified it and said "Are you saying the people wouldn't have to pay the state tax?"
"No, that's the apples this is the oranges"
Either he is ignorant or he just is trying to have it both ways. I think he wants it both ways.
He is a politician and a preacher, if he were only a lawyer too we would have the trifecta. His personality can only take him so far.
104
posted on
10/20/2011 5:11:12 PM PDT
by
normy
(Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
To: normy
Yes, the statements you specifically mentioned were not clear. The part that I thought was clear was when he said it would should be the woman’s choice and not left up to the government. That answer followed a question about whether a woman who was raped would be expected to raise a baby. This question followed his assertion that he made no exceptions for allowing abortions. It was quite clear that the right to choose in this context referred to whether the family would raise the child themselves.
105
posted on
10/20/2011 5:59:01 PM PDT
by
rob777
To: rob777
Maybe I'll have to watch it again, but why on earth would that even be an issue? No one was asking him if he thinks adoption should be a government decision. It goes without saying that adoption or keeping the baby is up to the family. I didn't think there was ever any question about that.
The question was should the woman be FORCED to keep the baby and it was inferred "or should they have a right to abort"
he knew the score but I think he was just worried about having something come back and bite him.
106
posted on
10/20/2011 6:45:38 PM PDT
by
normy
(Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
To: normy
There is a transcript posted in response #12, it shows the exact wording and sequence of the questions and answers. Before saying it was not the government's role to determine whether the women should raise the child, Cain suggested that Morgan was mixing two things. Perhaps he could have been more explicit about what those two things were, but from the context of the questions and answers, I though that it was clear.
Again, I am not denying that Cain sometimes is rather vague in expressing his comments, but I do think that the context of this particular comment made it clear. I do think that he may have been trying to come down on both sides of the issue with the electrified fence comment, but not this time.
107
posted on
10/21/2011 8:08:56 AM PDT
by
rob777
To: frposty; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; Lesforlife; ...
An individual or a governmental body can believe something is bad, but that doesnt mean a law needs to be made forbidding it. I see you have an established history of pushing abortion on Free Republic.
108
posted on
11/20/2011 1:24:20 PM PST
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: wagglebee; frposty
There’s a difference between “killing an unborn baby is bad” and “lying is bad”, or “over eating is bad”.
Sheesh, they just have a lower grade of trolls nowadays.
109
posted on
11/20/2011 1:31:06 PM PST
by
little jeremiah
(We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-109 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson