Media

Fact Check: Did Paul Ryan Have An ‘Akin Moment?’

In a breathless fit, The Raw Story is reporting that Paul Ryan called rape “just another ‘method of conception’” in an interview with a local TV station:

Vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan says that he personally believes that rape is just another “method of conception” and not an excuse to allow abortions.

During an interview with WJHL this week, Ryan was asked his view about Rep. Todd Akin, who recently asserted that women could not get pregnant from “legitimate rape.”

“Specifically where you stand when it comes to rape, and when it comes to the issue of should it be legal for a woman to be able to get an abortion if she’s raped?” WJHL Josh Smith wondered.

“I’m very proud of my pro-life record, and I’ve always adopted the idea that, the position that the method of conception doesn’t change the definition of life,” Ryan explained. “But let’s remember, I’m joining the Romney-Ryan ticket. And the president makes policy.”

Watch the clip here:

Now, do note that nowhere in the clip does Ryan in any way demean the seriousness of rape, nor does he suggest that it’s morally equivalent to any other method of conception.

But don’t tell Steve Benen, one of Rachel Maddow’s bloggers, who is already doing his best to turn this into a statement on par with Todd Akin’s infamous “legitimate rape” comment:

In this case, when Ryan says “the method of conception” is irrelevant, he’s talking about rape. In other words, the Republicans’ vice presidential nominee clearly believes the government should force women to take their pregnancy to term if they are impregnated by a rapist. Republicans can only distance themselves so much from Todd Akin before we realize they share his views.

Now, there is no doubt that Paul Ryan’s position is comparatively uncommon, with only 20 percent of Americans holding it. But to compare it to Akin? There, The Raw Story and MSNBC have a bit of a problem. For one thing, Ryan pretty clearly admits in the clip that he is prepared to accept the rape and incest exceptions advocated by his running mate – something Akin never did.

Moreover, even if you take Ryan’s statement of personal preference against rape exceptions as more relevant, there is still a problem. Even the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein admits that this particular idea is not unique to Ryan or Akin, nor did it start with them:

Opposition to rape exceptions is not unusual among the party’s most prominent members. Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum endorsed banning abortion without exception during his run for president as did Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

So why aren’t Santorum and Perry Akins in the making? Political expediency is probably involved, but there is another reason – namely, that neither Santorum, nor Perry, nor Ryan holds that position because of a belief in demonstrably false, junk science. Nor did Ryan imply, at any point during this clip, that rape could ever be legitimate, or morally acceptable. He was simply making the case that many pro-life activists wish Akin had been able to make – that is, that even in situations where a child is conceived by morally repugnant means, the culprit is not the unborn child, who did not choose to be born, and therefore, it is unjust to punish that unborn child for someone else’s mistake.

In other words, MSNBC and The Raw Story are taking Akin’s widely mocked gaffe and pretend that the problem with it is the philosophy behind it, rather than the evidence and logic used to support that philosophy. If every statement to this effect counts as an Akinism, then one could almost feel sympathy with the position advocated by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

However, the fact is that even if Akin himself made an inexcusable gaffe, it does not follow from this that every statement of the same principle must also be inexcusable. Ryan should be warned – the silly season is apparently not over.

Comments (70)

1 2
  • robroy33
    Posted on August 25, 2012 at 7:42am

    Wow, You finally made the point near the end of the article, abortion “rights” should consider the unborn child, that is the point of all the non-exception argument, you could have (should have) started the article on this point. This debate is simply Pro Abortion (ehm, no choice for the unborn child) vs those who place the concern and “right of choice” in the unborn child. The mother (and father) have a “choice” at the front end of the decision tree, except of course in a situation of rape or when serious complications to the mother arise during the pregnancy. It s funny how the left can’t argue or debate any topic and I mean any, topic without it degenerating into ignorant rants.

    Report Post »  
  • JuliaKiss
    Posted on August 25, 2012 at 7:26am

    The congress and senate will never pass a bill against ALL abortions – now can we talk about Jobs…

    Report Post »  
    • dwf1
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:23pm

      Humm…. Progressives TELL women they can decide what they can insert between their legs but not what they can insert in their mouth? This is redickuless and jobs will be created when the government stops banning them.

      Report Post » dwf1  
  • drgermain
    Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:32am

    Both the left and right wingnuts need to change how they react to women who conceive out of wedlock, the left calls them sluts, the right calls them welfare moms ( mabe justifiable), or the church fires them from the job for not aborting. Keep them in school, in college, in jobs, get rid of the scarlet letter and allow them the choice of a normal life with a child or have to get an abortion to have a normal life

    Report Post »  
  • christhefanatic
    Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:30am

    Too bad life isn’t just”Do this…that’s good…Do that…that’s bad” More often life is a choice between what is bad and what is worse. Have to say that if pregnancy threatened my wife’s life I would go for abortion…Not a “good” choice…but I love my wife. Not in favor of war…but if my country is threatened…I love my country.
    Mainly, I agree that this abortion stuff is just another smoke screen to cover up Obama’s utter failure as a president. He takes a hike in Nov.

    Report Post »  
    • Homeschoolmama
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 3:25am

      If pregnancy threatens a woman’s life, then it falls under the category of self-defense, such as in a tubal pregnancy.

      Report Post »  
    • Deborah
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 9:06am

      Thanks, Homeschoolmama!!

      Nice to see clear thinking. What you have described is called the “principle of double effect.” Saving a mother, e.g., in the case of a tubal pregnancy, is a direct intention to save a life, with the side effect of not saving a child. We always try to save both, but unfortunately, it’s not always possible.

      Believe me, liberals don’t understand this simple concept. I’ve seen their lack of understanding in healthcare. They also can’t make a distinction between “lying” and “misinforming.” Example, “Bush ‘lied,’ people died. Very disappointing.

      Report Post » Deborah  
  • Verceofreason
    Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:07am

    It’s IS a religious belief.
    ‘I” do not belief life begins at conception.
    A zygote has no rights.
    Biologically it’s a parasite.
    Only the host has rights.

    Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • llenyaj
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 7:28am

      Dictionary.com: Parasite “an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.”

      The zygote of which you speak is of the same species as it’s host, and therefore can’t be a parasite.

      FYI, it’s only a “zygote” for 4 days. Most abortions take place between 6 and 10 weeks gestation. I realize by calling it this, you can cheapen it inside your own mind, but really, it just makes you look stupid. Try “fetus”, if saying ‘baby’ makes you shudder inside.

      Report Post »  
  • RNR2012
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:21pm

    This is a non-story. Ryan was simply stating that a baby is a baby, life is life, conception due to consensual sex or rape is still conception. It’s not like we have bigger problems like huge deficits, high unemployment, open borders, looming war or anything… oh wait… yeah we do. Let’s not get distracted by the Libs smoke screens. R&R 2012!

    Report Post » RNR2012  
    • FREEDOMoverFEAR
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:30pm

      It’s still an extremely stupid belief.

      Report Post » FREEDOMoverFEAR  
    • jhaydeng
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:40pm

      I don’t care if Ryan used to eat babies!!! Get us out of this freaking mess!!!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • Homeschoolmama
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 9:48pm

      Freedomoverfear, why is the belief that it is wrong to murder a child extremely stupid? I think it is completely right and moral. The belief that abortion is fine can only be held by a person with no belief in God or a belief that God is wrong and that that person is smarter than God.

      Report Post »  
    • christos
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 10:58pm

      To FREEDOMOVERFEAR – Your saying a Living being is a stupid belief – Wrong it is a Fact at the point of conception a living being is formed,many like you are ill informed by choice,just as +JESUS+ told the devil to get behind +HIM+ exactly like the liberals are behind the Kingdom of +GOD+ not leading the Kingdom of +GOD+ ..

      Report Post » christos  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 11:48pm

      It’s a Catholic belief.
      Most American are not Catholics.

      Zealots like Ryan and Santorum and Akin wipe
      their backsides with the constitution with every word they utter.

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • lwillis59
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:53am

      thank you !!!!

      Report Post »  
    • taderby
      Posted on August 27, 2012 at 2:48pm

      Libs smoke screen? Please, who keeps bringing up abortion? I believe the republicans have a bad habit of making this a hot topic when there are other more important issues to discuss. While I do not believe abortion should be used as a form of birth control, nor would I ever counsel a women to have an abortion, A woman should have the right to do with her body what she wants. Men…do you want the government to tell you what you can and cannot do with YOUR bodies? If you have ever been violated in ANY way, your tune would change.

      Report Post »  
  • PatriotDadOfSix
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:19pm

    My wife terminated all six of her pregnancies. Once they were born, the pregnancy was over, and thereby terminated. All of the pregnancies were also legitimate, in that the conceptions actually took place; not just made up out of remorse. Now, we could’ve eased our lot in life had we used some birth control, but it wasn’t in our budget. We opted for flat panel tv’s, cell phones, so there just wasn’t enough money left over for that $9 a month prescription. Just sayin’

    Report Post » PatriotDadOfSix  
  • PatriotDadOfSix
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 7:44pm

    Yada yada etc..I could go on all day asserting 95 percent of the views here as being my own, but I won’t. MY personal beef is with the article itself. Mytheos, you‘ve taken to hackery in your assertions of Rep Akin’s beliefs and statements. You’re committing the same infractions here, that we decry from the leftist press. NOwhere did Akin charge that a woman ‘ could not get pregnant from legitimate rape.‘ Nor did you bother to diffuse the word ’legitimate’. You simply jumped on the popular Big Republican band wagon and piled on. I expected better from a blaze contributor. Wise Up~!

    Report Post » PatriotDadOfSix  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:15am

      Yes he did.
      We must have heard different interviews as did all his critics.

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
  • lukerw
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 7:37pm

    Anyone can State FACT… where the Context can be given Multiple Interpretation… resulting in Defense & Attack!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • ImaCracker
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 7:01pm

    Liberals think it‘s just fine to vacuum out a baby’s brains or pull it apart to kill it, we think that’s wrong.

    Report Post » ImaCracker  
  • right field
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:56pm

    Repeat after me: “I will shut up about abortion because this issue is a loser issue and will help Obama and the Marxist get re-elected.” AND . . . ” I will shut up about abortion because people who vote on this one issue will not vote for any Democrat.”
    Got it, say it, live it or we lose it.

    Report Post »  
    • FREEDOMoverFEAR
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:31pm

      Exactly Right Field! Exactly!

      Report Post » FREEDOMoverFEAR  
    • christhefanatic
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 11:55pm

      Or just tell the reporter to go f—himself. Pols who tell reporters to f—themselves always score points with me. Just something about reporters.

      Report Post »  
  • Female
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:54pm

    New strategy:

    Everytime media asks about:

    abortion
    ans: school choice

    troops
    ans: peace by strength

    racism
    ans: generosity to all nations and peoples freedom, medical, money, food, and peace keeping.

    Report Post »  
  • RNR2012
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:47pm

    Ryan is simply saying the a baby is still a baby – life is still life – no matter how the life is conceived. Seriously folks… this is another NON-STORY being trumped up by the press. We have bigger fish to fry here (i.e. monster deficits, jobs, etc.). But, I get it… Mr. Obama needs the distractions. Let’s not get distracted. R&R 2012!!!

    Report Post » RNR2012  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 11:52pm

      Wrongo!
      He’s inflicting HIS religious beliefs on non Catholics.
      He has no place in government,

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 11:55pm

      ANd he’s 100% incorrect.

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • Belwraith
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 3:12pm

      Seems as thought this issue hits a sensitive spot with verse…eh?

      When life begins is not a religious belief, it is medical/scientific fact. Life begins at conception. The fertilized egg meets every one of the criteria used to determine life.

      Report Post »  
  • ScoobyCheese
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:21pm

    Rape and abortion are sad enough already.

    Another sad part of all of this is that, thanks to the wonderfully “unbiased” and “non-partisan” moderators we will have for the debates (PBS’s Jim Lehrer, CBS’s Bob Schieffer, CNN’s Candy Crowley and ABC’s Martha Raddatz) THIS will be what they will spend the most time on, rather than the economy.

    Report Post »  
  • Larry E
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:19pm

    How many people know that Obama voted to kill babies that survived abortions when he was an IL legislator? Oh, let’s see abortion at any time, even after birth if the child is inconvenient, is okay so for the Demorats anything said against abortion is terrible. What a total crock of crap!

    Report Post »  
  • myway
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:02pm

    Why in the Hell is he talking about this? Walk away it will grow legs again and again.

    Report Post » myway  
  • Individualism
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:58pm

    how can you be pro war and pro life, that doesn’t make any sense.

    Report Post » Individualism  
    • Gup20
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:07pm

      Pro life saves the life of innocent people. Pro war saves the lives of innocent people. Pro-choice kills innocent people. Anti-war kills innocent people. War isn’t perfect… innocent people do often get killed, but in the long run many more lives are saved because the bad guys who would kill many more if left unchecked are removed. The USA’s war efforts for the last 20 years have been primarily in a role more like World Police. Do you think pro-life and pro-police are compatible points of view?

      Protecting innocent life is the commonality.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:15pm

      You ever notice how dictators & other people starts wars by licking off smaller countries.

      Hitler started with Czechoslovakia not France. There is nothing like seeing a Czech made Panzer 38(t) deep in France during 1940, knowing it was built in the Skoda works, knowing that it was superior to the Panzer I or II and knowing that Neville Chamberlain & people like Individualism handed it to Hitler on a silver platter.

      The British could not have stood on their own. They had to have allies & they had to draw a line in the sand even though their homeland was not attacked. The Blitz nearly wiped out the British & they had a superior air defense system. Only a lucky bombing of London by a lost bomber started the chain of events that led the Germans to stop bombing the China Home radar system, the airfields.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:20pm

      You ever notice how dictators & other people starts wars by licking off smaller countries.

      In ancient Sumer, I believe Sargon had a smaller city when he decide to war against Lugal. So what did he do? He such north conquering cities, then he struck east against the mountain tribes of the Zagros.
      Finally with a larger & more veteran army. he fought against Lugal & won.

      Why should Lugal have allied with the cities north of Sargon. Well in hindsight it is obvious except to a die hard isolationist like Individualism.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:24pm

      You ever notice how dictators & other people starts wars by licking off smaller countries.

      Saddam struck Kuwait. It wound not have been his last stop if he had succeeded.

      Yes Saddam Iran which had 3 times a summary people. He expected to win because the Ayatollah had degraded so much of the Iranian military with purges. The Iranian air force was grounded somewhat due to lack of spare parts. Sometimes countries attack large countries but that is after calculation of the integrity of the opposing political system & the strength of their military.

      You need allies & you need to come to their aid.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:28pm

      Another way to look a this. There are things called just wars. What those are are much disputed.

      You can kill in a just war & be pro (innocent) life just as you could hang a serial killer, kill an intruder in your home or kill someone shooting at you for no good reason & still be pro life.

      Killing is not the same as murder. If it were we would not need two separate words for the same concept.

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:33pm

      Gup20

      Pro life saves the life of innocent people. Pro war saves the lives of innocent people. Pro-choice kills innocent people. Anti-war kills innocent people. War isn’t perfect
      ***
      That is pretty good. Short than my explanation so in all likelihood better.

      I know it probably didn’t convince his because of his mindset, but it will convince some.

      Report Post »  
  • soybomb315_II
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:57pm

    Its funny how the republican VP overshadows the nominee…..AGAIN!

    Report Post » soybomb315_II  
    • FREEDOMoverFEAR
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 8:33pm

      They don’t. It’s just what the media is showing. If you watch Romney speak online I believe you will find him to be presidential and eloquent.

      Report Post » FREEDOMoverFEAR  
  • Carborendum
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:55pm

    I wish they’d make up their minds. Either you can conceive by being raped or, you can’t. Akin’s comment said that it is extremely rare to conceive via rape. Ryan said it is a method in which sperm and egg can meet.

    Yet they would have you believe these are equivalent statements?

    Report Post »  
    • Belwraith
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 3:15pm

      Actually, in the 1970‘s it was taught in medical schools that a woman’s body could shut down due to the trauma of rape and prevent pregnancy. Given how old Akin is, he might have actually learned that and just never kept up with more recent studies…

      Report Post »  
  • Gup20
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:53pm

    If there were a 5 year old child who was conceived by a rape, would it be ok for a mother who decided she no longer wanted her child to kill her 5 year old? It seems Mr. Ryan believes that life begins at conception. To him, a newly conceived embryo is just a much a person as a 5 year old child. His statements are consistent within this view. So rhetorically, I would ask – how old before it is no longer ok to murder a child? 5 years? 3 Years? 1 year? 2nd trimester? 1st trimester? To Paul Ryan, a baby is a person deserving of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness from the moment of conception onward.

    The GOP needs to get ahead of this and frame the debate. They need to ask “at what age does it become morally acceptable to murder an innocent child because you don’t want to take care of them?” Start and 5 years old and work your way down until you get an answer, and then ask the liberal what moral basis do they have for arbitrarily deciding upon that age. It’s not a “women’s rights issue.” It is a constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That newly conceived child is stripped of their constitutional rights because someone in Washington DC arbitrarily decided their rights don’t count until — when? No mother has the right to kill their 5 year old, and we’d call that mother morally reprehensible if she did… regardless of whether that child was conceived by rape or not. It’s no different for a fetus.

    Report Post »  
    • Duddio
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 10:03pm

      Gup,

      Excellent point, well played. To condemn a man for his view of life, held by millions of Christians and even other faiths worldwide, is bigoted and small-minded. Especially when Ryan deferred his personal beliefs to the policy that a President Romney would make. Personally, I would rather err on the side of the life of innocent babies, than to allow a massacre to continue.

      Ryan is very well spoken and clear in his beliefs. I am proud of him. Looking forward to his Presidential campaign in 2020, right about the time we become energy independent……

      Report Post »  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 11:55pm

      Your idiotic post assumes “facts’ not in evidence -
      that the LAW and 100% of all Americans consider a zygote a child.
      Why waste the time posting such drivel?

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
  • Verceofreason
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:51pm

    What Akin ‘moment’?
    His views are exactly the same. 100%

    Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • toiletclogga
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:25pm

      Yeah, 100%. Life begins at conception. We must protect the innocent. To the left, this is a radical notion. To normal people, babies deserve the right to live. Rape, incest, unforeseen pregnancy? Women should do the right thing! Deliver the baby, and give it up for adoption if they do not want it. I’m sick of Americans traveling to China to adopt babies!

      Report Post »  
    • Komponist-ZAH
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:48pm

      Well, except that Akin is a fount of the most ridiculous, monumental idiocy this side of Joe Biden, while Paul Ryan is making the simple, rational moral point that life is life, no matter how it begins.

      But I understand that whole “Principle of Identity” thing is difficult for lefties to grasp, along with all the other basics of Logic.

      Report Post »  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:02am

      THe Left.
      No, to non CAtholics.

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 12:09am

      No woman should be forced to go through a full term pregnancy, certainly no 12 year old.
      What a selfish callous man you are.
      WOMEN ARE NOT BABY MAKING MACHINES FOR CHILDLESS COUPLES.

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
  • Gup20
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:43pm

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ethicists-argue-in-favor-of-after-birth-abortions-as-newborns-are-not-persons/

    I would rhetorically ask the question – at what age does it become wrong to kill a baby — 5 years old? 3 years old? 1 year old? 1 month old? second trimester? first trimester? How old does a person need to be before killing that innocent person becomes morally wrong, and upon what standard of morality do they base their answer?

    I think Paul Ryan’s point is that if you believe that a person becomes a person at the point of conception – as many Americans believe – then all abortion is the murder of an innocent life. I would ask the question then – would you agree that it is wrong to kill a 5 year old person, no matter how much the parent may not want them? What if the 5 year old was the result of a rape? Would it be ok for a parent who no longer wanted the 5 year old to kill the 5 year who was the result of a rape? Does the fact that the 5 year old is the result of a rape have any bearing on whether it is wrong to kill that 5 year old? Why? Because everyone accepts that 5 year old as a person. Well many Americans see a newly conceived life as a person as well… and the murder of someone conceived 3 days or 3 weeks or 3 years ago is just as morally reprehensible as the murder of a 5 year old. It wouldn‘t matter in the 5 year old’s case if that child were conceived by rape, and it shouldn’t matter to a newly conceived embryo either.

    Report Post »  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:50pm

      Those are HIS religious beliefs.
      Not everyone else’s.
      Period.
      What don’t YOU understand.
      I’m not Catholic.
      Can I terminate a pregnancy?

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • Verceofreason
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:52pm

      You’re not too swift are you.
      What rights do NON Catholics have in the is country.?

      Report Post » Verceofreason  
    • Tracker3
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:00pm

      You are so very right, and very well put because you didn’t put the people down that do not believe as we do. You made a very valid point. Thank you for having some good old fashioned “horse” sense. A liberal is a liberal. They believe, for the most part, that anything goes. That is there right as an American. Let’s pray we all manage to keep America the land of the free……

      Report Post »  
    • Female
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 6:44pm

      verse

      terminate baby not just pregnancy

      Report Post »  
    • PatriotDadOfSix
      Posted on August 24, 2012 at 7:58pm

      VERCE..I’m not a Catholic either. But it‘s not a ’religious’ belief, It‘s a ’Life’ belief. Any constitutional conservative w/libertarian stripes will hold this same position regardless of a religious aspect. Life is life, and life comes with rights..including the right to not be murdered out of convenience.

      Report Post » PatriotDadOfSix  
    • flipper1073
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 9:15am

      @ GUP20
      While I Agree with your Premise that life begins at conception.
      The sad Fact is that in America Today we are moving in the
      Other Direction.
      Post Birth Abortions although very rare are Legal
      Partial Birth Abortion are Legal. Late Term Abortions are Legal.
      All of these are Infanticide / Murder an should be Prosecutable Crimes.
      But They’re Not. All due in large part to Roe vs Wade.
      An Taxpayer Funded Planned Parenthood.
      So if your Goal is the same as Mine to get to the Fewest Abortions
      possible. You’re never going to get to Zero.
      Before Roe vs Wade Abortions happened (back alley,coat hanger)
      I no way in hell want to go back to those days.

      So how to we change the direction we’re going ?
      First You have to change the Hearts an Minds of Americans.
      Babies are Wonderful an bring Joy to your life.
      Not something you dispose of because it’s inconvenient.

      On the Political Side We need Supreme Court Justices who
      will have the Backbone to Overturn Roe vs Wade.
      Which was really Stupid Law in the first place.
      Send it back to the States to Enforce Reasonable Restrictions.
      (26 weeks viability,Parental Consent are just a couple)
      If you make this Black or White NO abortions or Unlimited Abortions.
      The Pro Choice Crowd Wins.

      Note to Republican Politicans; Say You’re Pro Life
      with exceptions for Rape, Incest or Life of the Mother.
      An move On to the Bigger more Important Issues !

      Report Post » flipper1073  
    • Belwraith
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 3:28pm

      Verse, you are highly mistaken that it is just a Catholic belief. We grow tired of your juvenile remarks which only prove your uneducated, self-absorbed bubble that you reside in. Life beings at conception. It is scientific fact proven many years ago. It doesn‘t mean you’re a Catholic because you believe in scientific fact. You can choose not to believe scientific fact, but that wouldn‘t mean that you’re not a Catholic either. It is not a religious issue. It is a human issue. Why would I be charged for destroying the egg of a Bald Eagle…it is just an egg after all. No, it’s not just an egg, it’s a life. It’s sad that society places more worth on an animals life than it does on a humans life.

      Report Post »  
  • West Coast Patriot
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:34pm

    The comments on here should be very interesting!!

    Report Post » West Coast Patriot  
    • Belwraith
      Posted on August 25, 2012 at 3:31pm

      Here’s one…I’m pro-choice…I choose life…why do I get screamed at from the libs when I say that?

      Report Post »  
  • GoodStuff
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:31pm

    Well, technically speaking, rape is a method of conception. This is news?

    Report Post »  
  • rhaedge
    Posted on August 24, 2012 at 5:26pm

    Anyone who says life begins only if the life is desired, might as well support “after birth abortion”. Your either believe in life at conception or you don’t. And if you do… then you are killing a living being. Just because you can’t see it yet, doesn’t remove that God has created and loved that little child. Congrats to Ryan for these personal CONSISTENT beliefs!

    Report Post »  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love