« Tom DeLay Brings Good News for Democrats | Main | Happy Albanian Crowd Steals Bush's Watch »

Brownback Would Deny Abortions to Rape Victims

Houston Chronicle story:

Sen. Sam Brownback, campaigning for president on Saturday before the National Catholic Men's Conference, questioned whether rape victims should get abortions.

"Rape is terrible. Rape is awful. Is it made any better by killing an innocent child? Does it solve the problem for the woman that's been raped?" the Kansas Republican asked at the St. Joseph's Covenant Keepers gathering.

"We need to protect innocent life. Period," Brownback said, bringing the crowd of about 500 to its feet.

I don't believe in abortion on demand for any reason, but by definition, rape is non-consentual, and so this completely denies the self-determination of women, making them a slave to the fetus that was imposed on them by a criminal. It's remarkable to me that so many people would grant a single cell superior rights and protections than they would to a post-birth human being.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 3.7/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)

Comments (9)

U.P. Man:

Please explain how an abortion would help a rape victim?

How does the taking of a life, help the rape victim?

Is there a study on rape victims that had an abortion versus rape victims who kept the child and the well being?

If there are none then side with life.

Paul Hamilton:

Nice strawman. Abortion wouldn't be mandatory, of course, but as I said above, to deny them the option of terminating the pregnancy is a complete denial of self-determination of the worman. If the pregnancy came as the result of non-consentual sex, she should be able to end the pregnancy if she chooses.

U.P. Man:

There is no strawman. I asked a question.

If there is evidence that shows that giving birth to a child is better for a rape victim then it should be presented. If the evidence show that abortion is better for a rape victim that should be presented.

If both are equally good for the rape victim that should be presented.

Informed consent would take this into account.

My perspective is everything being equal or unknown choose life.

I believe most woman that have not had an abortion, if given full and accurate information would not choose and abortion.

Paul Hamilton:

For the sake of *this* argument, though, we need to limit the situation to women who became pregnant as the result of non-consentual sex. Self-determination is about as fundamental as it gets, and if a woman is pregnant as the result of a criminal act, there should be no restrictions to her self-determination; her right to choose whether or not she wants to carry the child to term.

You wouldn't tolerate this sort of "informed consent" for gun rights even though it's a fact that in the hands of a law-abiding person, a gun is more like to cause accidental harm than deliberate good. And that's because there is a right to bear arms and the risk is a part of the right.

Yes, there is a chance that if a woman has an abortion even from a non-consentual sex act, there might be trauma as a result, but you can't deny a woman's rights on the possibility that she might be emotionally harmed as the result of the decision.

Rights are rights. They don't have to be justified because they are inalienable to begin with.

Whose life?:

My perspective is everything being equal or unknown choose life.

Your perspective is to remove choice entirely, regardless of circumstances, based on ignorance (i.e. I have neither sought out nor seen any evidence either way, therefore I reach the conclusion I am most comfortable with.)

Suppose you were presented with data that showed that impregnated rape victims who had abortions were better off, physically and psychologically, than those who saw their pregnancies to term. What would your position be then? Would you still choose life?

U.P. Man:

Whose Life?

Where is the study? I have not been able to find one. Would you show me where I can find the study?

You right, in my ignorance I choose life. Where is the fault in that. Would you rather have the default choice be death?


I do tolerate this when it comes to gun owners rights. I think it is prudent before buying, using a gun that you know the basics. Why do you object to the same level on knowledge when it comes to abortion ?

Also, there is a slight but serious difference. A gun MAY cause injury or death an abortion does.

U.P. Man:

In this discussion, I have never once stated that a woman has the ability to choose or say that she should not have that ability.

I have stated that it should be an informed choice. Using the most up to date information available.

Paul Hamilton:

UP, I really doubt that there is any woman of sound mind who does not fully realize the meaning of pregnancy. That being the case, what you call "informed consent" is actually nothing more than the imposition of a last-ditch attempt to talk the woman out of a decision she has made. And to that, I would have to ask by what legal or moral authority anyone should be able to do that. If the woman has made a choice, society should respect it even if individuals do not happen to agree with her choice.

U.P. Man:

Really, then why do clinics that do an ultrasound on the mother prior to her decision have a decrease in abortion by about 50 to 60 percent?

Maybe, because it is not just a blob of tissue? That it is a life....

Since, it is a life that that should be a clear cut case for moral authority .

What happened to your strawman of the gun debate?

You are willing to remove guns from peoples hands because they might hurt or kill somebody by accident. I just want to give information to hopefully prevent death.

Whats a half-hour or hour time to become more educated?

I call you on hypocrisy, wait 3 days to buy a gun but do not get informed before an abortion.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.