• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

GOP Candidate Rubio opposes Rape and Incest Exemptions for Abortion

Status
Not open for further replies.
speculawyer said:
Oh really?

I guess you then support sex education strongly and Title X. The easier it is for people to get birth control, the fewer abortions that will take place.
Click to expand...

Yeah, very hypocritical. And another poster noted above, once the baby comes out of the womb they dont care about it anymore. It's really sad.
 
Walpurgis said:
Doesn't sound like it's very important then.
Click to expand...
The bible condemns killing of innocents and children in strong terms. The conception of what a child is changed with science though. Up to the 16th century or later, the fetus was thought to be like a plant until quickening happened at 40 or 80 days into the pregnancy. So destroying it was still a sin (contraception) but not murder until it began to move.

Once medical science advanced knowledge of what fetal development was, it became clear that there was no exact point at which the developing child became a human being, so most Christians at the time (including the Catholic Church) began to consider it killing a human being when performed at any stage of the pregnancy.
 
speculawyer said:
But what else can the social conservatives talk about?

Guns are pretty much out. The Dems have again dropped it from the agenda since they couldn't even get anything passed when 20+ children got killed.

Gay bashing is out. They are in the military and gay marriage is legal. And worse (for the GOP), majorities approve of those things. This wedge issue has flipped against them.

Transgendered people? Sure, I guess they could bring that up but it is such an obscure issue with a very small percentage of the public that it seems pointless to even talk about. Bruce Jenner is a woman? Who cares?


So that kinda leaves them with abortion.
Click to expand...

That's why I think the GOP leadership should tell every candidate for president (and probably even congress) that if they talk about basically any social issues they will do what they can to end their political career. Of course they can't make such a threat overly public, but the establishment part of the GOP (and the big business donors) that in the end mostly care about economic issues have to do something drastic if they want a chance to be in the White House again.

I especially don't get why Rubio is the one making these statements. His appeal is that he seems close to being electable in a general election, by seeming like a breath of fresh air with his youth and more optimistic, future oriented message. Now he has just become as unelectable as most other republican candidates.
 
"I'll support any legislation that reduces the number of abortions," Rubio said Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press.
Click to expand...
So then you should probably support funding Planned Parenthood and evidence-based sex education you fucking fuck.
 
Makes sense, let's not forget that doctors generally agree if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.
 
Seth Enosh said:
The bible condemns killing of innocents and children in strong terms. The conception of what a child is changed with science though. Up to the 16th century or later, the fetus was thought to be like a plant until quickening happened at 40 or 80 days into the pregnancy. So destroying it was still a sin (contraception) but not murder until it began to move.

Once medical science advanced knowledge of what fetal development was, it became clear that there was no exact point at which the developing child became a human being, so most Christians at the time (including the Catholic Church) began to consider it killing a human being when performed at any stage of the pregnancy.
Click to expand...

I guess that makes sense.
 
Truthfully I always thought that this was the logical conclusion of the belief that embryos count as human. After all, I wouldn't be in favour of killing babies because they were conceived from rape.
 
CornBurrito said:
That makes sense. If you believe abortion is murder and that a fetus is equivalent to a baby, why should you get to murder an innocent baby just because it was the product of rape or incest?
Click to expand...
I think at some point, even crazy religious people can't deny their own empathetic sensibilities. They understand it is a horrible imposition on a mother and a family.
 
aTTckr said:
I especially don't get why Rubio is the one making these statements. His appeal is that he seems close to being electable in a general election, by seeming like a breath of fresh air with his youth and more optimistic, future oriented message. Now he has just become as unelectable as most other republican candidates.
Click to expand...

He's feeling boxed in. He can't seem to break out of the pack in the polls and he needs to get something going in Iowa. The other early primaries are not favorable to him without a big splash in Iowa.
 
aTTckr said:
That's why I think the GOP leadership should tell every candidate for president (and probably even congress) that if they talk about basically any social issues they will do what they can to end their political career. Of course they can't make such a threat overly public, but the establishment part of the GOP (and the big business donors) that in the end mostly care about economic issues have to do something drastic if they want a chance to be in the White House again.

I especially don't get why Rubio is the one making these statements. His appeal is that he seems close to being electable in a general election, by seeming like a breath of fresh air with his youth and more optimistic, future oriented message. Now he has just become as unelectable as most other republican candidates.
Click to expand...
You can't win the republican primary by running away from the base, and being pro life hasn't stopped any previous republican candidate as long as they don't mess up and say something weird like Todd Akin

Around 50% of Americans are pro-life. 11% of all registered voters told Gallup they only will vote for a pro-life candidate (8% said they only vote for pro-choice candidates.) it's not really a losing issue to take a stance on. http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx
 
Seth Enosh said:
The bible condemns killing of innocents and children in strong terms. The conception of what a child is changed with science though. Up to the 16th century or later, the fetus was thought to be like a plant until quickening happened at 40 or 80 days into the pregnancy. So destroying it was still a sin (contraception) but not murder until it began to move.

Once medical science advanced knowledge of what fetal development was, it became clear that there was no exact point at which the developing child became a human being, so most Christians at the time (including the Catholic Church) began to consider it killing a human being when performed at any stage of the pregnancy.
Click to expand...

Psalm 137:9
How blessed will be the one who seizes and dashes your little ones Against the rock.
http://biblehub.com/psalms/137-9.htm
 
Seth Enosh said:
The bible condemns killing of innocents and children in strong terms. The conception of what a child is changed with science though. Up to the 16th century or later, the fetus was thought to be like a plant until quickening happened at 40 or 80 days into the pregnancy. So destroying it was still a sin (contraception) but not murder until it began to move.

Once medical science advanced knowledge of what fetal development was, it became clear that there was no exact point at which the developing child became a human being, so most Christians at the time (including the Catholic Church) began to consider it killing a human being when performed at any stage of the pregnancy.
Click to expand...

So its not black and white so they choose the extreme position. That seems common for social conservatives. And I don't know why we keep pointing out what the catholic church thinks. Most Catholics seem to disagree at least in the US, and they also hold backwards views on women and divorce that the rest of US politics doesn't hold on to
 
I'll never understand why people don't want education about safe sex and preventing pregnancies. Is it the "preservation of a child's innocence" thing? Are parents that repulsed by the idea of their children having sex?
 
I consider myself to be conservative I guess, but I am not affiliated with any political party (I don't think anyone should be, but that is another discussion). I just don't understand why politicos feel like they need to make these things a part of their platform. Even my religion, which is fairly conservative on most social issues and believes that abortion is wrong essentially has "exemptions" or considerations for rape, incest and issues that might put the mother's health or life at risk. I just think this is a very extreme position.

Maybe its because I am jaded by politics but I feel like candidates take extreme positions like this just to garner votes from one very extreme side even when they don't personally believe or feel that strongly what they are saying. This is a really stupid "strategy" for lack of a better word because the other party will just destroy you with it in the general election even if every other position in your platform is sound. Sometimes I wonder who is advising these candidates.

The most frustrating is that this topic is so extremely low on the list of what people care about which is jobs, economy and education last time I checked.
 
ArkhamFantasy said:
Some of these guys are scary. I was genuinely terrified when Walker (in front of 24 million viewers) proudly proclaimed that he would rather see a woman die than see her have an abortion.

I dont know how else to describe it other than scary.
Click to expand...

i was going for disgusting but scary is pretty good too.

As a male I can't even imagine this man telling someone I care about who was raped that they had to give birth to and raise the child whether they wanted to or not, let alone being that person. Or if a woman with a life risking pregnancy, which isn't even that rare. It's infuriating, actually.
 
Seth Enosh said:
You can't win the republican primary by running away from the base, and being pro life hasn't stopped any previous republican candidate as long as they don't mess up and say something weird like Todd Akin

Around 50% of Americans are pro-life. 11% of all registered voters told Gallup they only will vote for a pro-life candidate (8% said they only vote for pro-choice candidates.) it's not really a losing issue to take a stance on. http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx
Click to expand...

Sure a lot of people say they are pro-life in a poll, but I doubt that many of the voters that are attracted to candidates who make statements such as the one Rubio made, would not vote for the republican candidate in the general election anyway. It may help in the primary but the republican candidates never just say yes I'm pro-life, they take the most extreme stance possible, and make statements like we "can't allow a woman to do whatever she wants with her body", which make matters even worse for the general election.
 
danm999 said:
November 5th next year, a whole bunch of Republican strategists will be sitting around again asking themselves "where did we go wrong?"
Click to expand...

Their strategists know exactly what it would take to become more competitive; it's the primary voters who are the problem. Many of them believe that they are literally commanded by God to enforce these positions. As a result, compromise is not an option.

The Democrats lost for a long stretch between 1968 and 1992, when Bill Clinton triangulated/adjusted/moderated in order to become more nationally competitive. Democratic voters got hungry after being out power for so long, and they were willing to adjust to better fit the electorate's positions. The GOP has now lost almost every popular vote between 1992 and now - winning 2004 due to 9/11 - and they haven't yet shown the slightest willingness to adjust.

How long the GOP takes to finally break, and how such a break manifests is going to be absolutely fascinating.
 
I like how he doesn't have the guts to say "I support banning abortions in the case of rape and incest" as one sentence.

He fucking dances like a puppet around directly saying it in one go.
 
If you oppose abortion for the reason that he claims to oppose abortion, there really isn't another logical position. If a fetal life has just as much value as a baby or child or adult, you cannot make exceptions for rape or incest because the fetus's life has that value regardless of its origins. So this isn't a terribly surprising thing to hear an anti-abortion politician say.
 
Htown said:
If you oppose abortion for the reason that he claims to oppose abortion, there really isn't another logical position. If a fetal life has just as much value as a baby or child or adult, you cannot make exceptions for rape or incest because the fetus's life has that value regardless of its origins. So this isn't a terribly surprising thing to hear an anti-abortion politician say.
Click to expand...

In the case that an abortion saves the mother's life, it's equivalent to those wackos that refuse medicine because sickness is god's will.
 
I deeply disagree with him but kind of respect his shedding of the rape and incest bullshit. Not to go all legitimate rape but what % of abortions are in response to rape or incest? Can't be higher than 5. Bet it's closer to 1. It's a bullshit qualifier that lets anti choice politicians hedge their bets. To hell with that. A to choice is all or nothing. We all know this. Don't let pols pretend otherwise.
 
Htown said:
If you oppose abortion for the reason that he claims to oppose abortion, there really isn't another logical position. If a fetal life has just as much value as a baby or child or adult, you cannot make exceptions for rape or incest because the fetus's life has that value regardless of its origins. So this isn't a terribly surprising thing to hear an anti-abortion politician say.
Click to expand...

But most people have nuance and clearly don't believe fetal life is equal to birthed life.

The fact that most people don't come to this conclusion should say something, that most people aren't anti-abortion. Because as you said the "logical" thing is to oppose all exemptions which most people see as on its head farcical because they understand a women should have agency over her body despite the anti-choice people claiming people are on their side.

When they win is when you make the issue late term abortion which is when peoples desire to have people face consequences (of course disregarding circumstances) overweighs their thoughts on bodily autonomy
 
Fragamemnon said:
If anyone wants a super depressing read, go dig up a decent unbiased history of the Southern Baptist Convention in the 80s and 90s. How they went from Jimmy Carter to what they are now is a very interesting (and sad) story.
Click to expand...

Ah, the Moral Majority. I went to Falwell's school for two years. The insanity is real.
 
Every republican candidate is hardcore anti-abortion until the day after the primaries are decided when they suddenly swing to the middle and say "I am pro-life but believe there are more important things to deal with like the economy blah blah blah Obama blah blah blah we need to unify the country not divide and thats what I will do blah blah blah".

Its classic republican strategy, focus solely on the fringe primary voters and veer sharply as soon as they are locked to you. The primary process forces this, since its mostly the far right that votes in primaries so if you don't actively court them there is almost no chance of winning the primary in the early states.

The same applies to immigration and Iran/Israel.
 
Republican presidential candidates at work... Because GOD. Im sure most of these stances are fueled by fear of losing votes to the good ol christian groups. Funny how even though politics and religion are not to be mixed it is pretty much a given that if you are Republican you will chant God this and that, hell, the debate with Fox even gave them all a chance to say "JESUS TAKE THE WHEEL", oh and also "WE MUST PROTECT ISRAEL... BECAUSE!"
 
TomShoe said:
I'll never understand why people don't want education about safe sex and preventing pregnancies. Is it the "preservation of a child's innocence" thing? Are parents that repulsed by the idea of their children having sex?
Click to expand...
But they teach you about abstynency and maybe even ovulation cycle. What else you need?
You have to understand, sex for fun is mortal sin.

/s
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Uber Held Liable, Ordered to Pay $8.5 Million in Driver Rape Suit
2
50
415
xrnzaaas replied
Dats Rape Drugs... WTF guys
37
1K
wondermega replied
Anthropic: "No Claude for lethal weapons and surveillance". Pentagon: "That's a deal breaker"
7
125
Roni replied
CES 2026 robots and ai for everyone! But at what expense ?
21
404
Melon Husk replied
Major and notable theatrical film releases for 2025, 2026 and 2027
7
687
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
Top Bottom