Fenderputty
Banned
He's doing well with the evangelicals oddly enough. He's going to have to take a far right stance on this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GOP Candidate Rubio opposes Rape and Incest Exemptions for Abortion
- Thread starter NYCmetsfan
- Start date
- Status
He's doing well with the evangelicals oddly enough. He's going to have to take a far right stance on this.
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
A Link to the Past
Banned
I love how he says that women can't do whatever they want with their body as if bodily autonomy doesn't exist. There's a really good reason why men are disproportionately behind legislating women's bodies.
LostCaress
Member
Makes sense to me. If abortion = murder, then it's always murder. What's the other option? Only children born out of non forced relations are blessed and therefore non-abortable? Well if that's the case are we allowed to kill someone who was actually born out of a rape situation?
(I'm pro-choice)
(I'm pro-choice)
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, I can't believe he brought that up himself. But most people didn't get reference . . . he just said something about being pro life with 'end of life' matters.
But that whole Terry Schiavo thing was a complete debacle. It was right during the height of GOP overreach when they were fighting a stupid war in Iraq that would soon become a clusterfuck, they were debating a flag-burning amendment, they were rushing special Terry Schiavo legislation through Congress, and they were pushing the anti-gay marriage amendment.
But hey, both parties are the same, right?
By all means, please proceed Governor.
AstroNut325
Member
Any of the GAF Rubio supporters want to chime in? There are a bunch of you based on the ISideWith.com thread.
not really, considering that you have to supporting families with government money(of said rape/incest). Which republicans are 100% against.
Its just shaming women. Thats literally it.
Banana Aeon
Member
So to reduce abortions, you want to defund Planned Parenthood, not allow abortions, even if the mother's life is at risk, or if they had been raped?
Genius, Marco Rubio isn't.
GOP is such a complete joke. Women shaming at it's finest.
Genius, Marco Rubio isn't.
GOP is such a complete joke. Women shaming at it's finest.
uncelestial
Member
balladofwindfishes
Member
I don't understand the "even if the mother's life is at risk"
So, he believes the fetus is a human being with rights. Okay, whatever. But if the mother's life is at risk... he'd rather have two humans die than just one? That doesn't even make sense. That's not being pro-life anything. If he truly believes there's two humans in the equation, he'd rather two die than one??
That literally makes no sense at all and just sounds like he's being so petty and "by the book" that he'd rather more lives are lost than break some imaginary code he invented in his head...
So, he believes the fetus is a human being with rights. Okay, whatever. But if the mother's life is at risk... he'd rather have two humans die than just one? That doesn't even make sense. That's not being pro-life anything. If he truly believes there's two humans in the equation, he'd rather two die than one??
That literally makes no sense at all and just sounds like he's being so petty and "by the book" that he'd rather more lives are lost than break some imaginary code he invented in his head...
Fenderputty
Banned
I've said this as well. With the exception of a mothers death, pro lifers aren't consistent if they allow abortion post sexual assault or incest. There's argument to be made for compassion, but it's not consistent.
It's just grandstanding. Like "tough on crime" but for the cute little babies. People who are so far removed from thinking they'd ever be in a situation where they'd need am abortion love looking down on anyone who might consider it. Growing up in Oklahoma, I've known a handful of people who are pro-life except for when they had their abortion because "c'mon, that was different! Don't talk about it you're a terrible person for bringing it up!"
People like that will only take their principles as far as they can until said principles inconvenience them.
Because Miracles exist and God might save the baby (read: a team of highly skilled doctors)
Speaking of by the book, Rubio would love for you to buy his!
I agree it makes sense for incest. But it's different in the case of rape because the woman never consented and therefore isn't obligated to give up her body's resources to the fetus. A child conceived out of rape who has already been born is no longer infringing on the mother's bodily autonomy.
RustyNails
Member
He really stepped in it. Way to corner yourself and get defined by one issue.
Meus Renaissance
Member
How can you be Pro-Life and argue on the basis of innocent life and then agree that such a life can be ended if it was conceived by cruelty? In some cultures, women are raped (as well as their future child) are ostracised because of the manner of conception. It's a morally bankrupt stance to have if you're Pro-Life; it is not consistent.
Only exemption that fits is if the mothers life is threatened by the pregnancy.
Only exemption that fits is if the mothers life is threatened by the pregnancy.
speculawyer
Member
I'm imagining a couple campaign strategists:
1) okay, we need to some web pages on policy things.
2) no problem, what policy?
1) abortion.
2) Ugh.
1) Abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest.
2) Uuuuuugh.
1) you said no problem!
2) okay. .. well let me think.
1) well, what they like on this interwebs?
2) cat videos & pictures
1) well there you go!
2) A cat video about abortion?
1) Just shut up and do it, there's play-off game tonight
2) *grumble*
speculawyer
Member
You're thinking too logically and rationally.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
This is amazing
by which I mean horrifying
by which I mean horrifying
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
being against those things and being pro-choice like Rubio is, is essentially saying women should be forced to breed.
its pretty awful.
Cheesehead9099
Neo Member
I get where he's coming from with the whole "another tragedy does not fix the first tragedy". The issue is that aborting a mass of a few cells isn't really a tragedy in my books, or in the view of most liberals. I don't think republicans actually understand what rape victims go through either.
LiquidSword
Member
Don't a lot of Republicans have this view?
And_Gignac
Member
They are all just trying to outtrumping The Donald.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
I think you misheard Walker. He said in cases where the mother will definitely die if she gives birth, there are definitely alternative procedures to save the mother and child.
You know, like magic.
OrlanisWorks
Banned
What an irrational person.
Frankly I don't understand people who say they are pro-life but allow for rape and incest exceptions. If you're pro-life, then you believe that's what inside a woman from the moment of conception is a living baby. Period. What does it matter if it's a product of rape or incest? In your eyes it's still killing a child; who the father is, or the conditions behind their conception, don't change that (perceived) fact.
My only way of understanding why pro-life people would support rape/incest exceptions is out of consideration for the mother's feelings. But that also makes no sense to me, because I thought the whole point was that the mother shouldn't be allowed to choose -- her feelings don't come into at all. So the government gets to decide when the mother's feelings matter and when they don't? The same big scary federal government that we should be slashing and defunding at every possible turn?
My only way of understanding why pro-life people would support rape/incest exceptions is out of consideration for the mother's feelings. But that also makes no sense to me, because I thought the whole point was that the mother shouldn't be allowed to choose -- her feelings don't come into at all. So the government gets to decide when the mother's feelings matter and when they don't? The same big scary federal government that we should be slashing and defunding at every possible turn?
DragonSworne
Banned
Better arrest every single woman alive that has had sex since their bodies have undoubtable aborted children naturally.
Can't allow for exemptions, not even natural ones!
Can't allow for exemptions, not even natural ones!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
just don't have sex!
DragonSworne
Banned
Children of rape are more likely to rape I bet. There is a rape gene or something. If not, it's probably not heathly growing up knowing that you are the product of rape.
Admiral Woofington
Member
To this day it surprises me why a woman's choice with what she does with her body is such a hot political issue.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
sure, doesn't change that statement, though.
there are also varying degrees of pro-life, such as allowing for exemptions in "extreme" cases which is certainly less abhorrent than not. also allowing for contraception so that it doesn't even get to that point to begin with.
pro-life shouldn't mean "force everyone to have babies no matter what"
pmuch
Unless I read that part wrong, that wasn't Rubio who said that.
Anyways, Catholic man has anti-abortion views. Not a surprise.
The Albatross
Member
Well. That's that. I was actually leaning towards voting for Rubio in the primary as "A capable person I generally agree with on most, but not all, stances..." But, forget it.
Sticking with 0.1% Pataki.
I'm pro-choice, but it's because many people believe that once conception has been achieved, the bundle of multiplying cells is a human life, and therefore, it should be protected like any human life. Or, a weaker perspective, is that you can't identify a time after conception when that bundle of cells becomes a human life, so the law should err on the side of caution.
Sticking with 0.1% Pataki.
I'm pro-choice, but it's because many people believe that once conception has been achieved, the bundle of multiplying cells is a human life, and therefore, it should be protected like any human life. Or, a weaker perspective, is that you can't identify a time after conception when that bundle of cells becomes a human life, so the law should err on the side of caution.
The dude voted against HIS OWN immigration bill. He's never been level headed.
In fact, there's no such thing as a level headed Republican. Because even if you see one that doesn't have completely insane views, given enough time, they'll backpedal with the speed of any frothing teabagger..
speculawyer
Member
Well . . . they either backpedal or they are tossed out of office like Bob Inglis who made the mistake of actually listening to the scientists about climate change.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
yea, everyone has been trixed
Unknown One
Member
To keep woman below men I'm guessing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked