How Rand Paul Turned the Tables on the Abortion Debate
The war on women meme is raging again. It’s like pulling the race card. When you don’t have a substantive argument or when the facts are against you, pull the race card or claim that there’s a conservative “war on women.” Look what happened when presidential candidate Rand Paul dared to challenge NBC’s Savannah Guthrie (see below).
Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd warned Rand Paul that “he’s got to be careful here. This is turning into a habit, particularly over — this is now two prominent women interviewers… Kelly Evans of CNBC, [and] Savannah [Guthrie] now.”
Remember “equal pay for equal work” and the pay gap between men and women? If women want to get paid what men get paid for the same job, then they need to quit complaining when they get challenged for being combative and partisan in their interviews.
Here’s what Megyn Kelly of Fox News said:
“Chuck Todd came out and said you have to be ‘careful’ because you attacked two prominent female interviewers,” Kelly said. “‘The Guardian’ said you were ‘condescending’ toward female reporters. And I, as a female reporter, will say to Chuck Todd and ‘The Guardian’: We don’t need your help.”
Trending: What’s Happened to Ann Coulter?
The war on women trump card has been abortion. Any time a conservative begins to make political progress, Democrats and any number of establishment Republicans pull out the abortion deck and play the “exception” cards: rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
You don’t have to be a woman to know that rape is a violent criminal act that should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I would like to see the death penalty attached to the crime.
And since there have been a number of false rape accusations, there should be some form of legal sanction against women who make false rape claims. Rape is a serious crime. Some men have spent years in prison for a crime they did not commit.
Tawana Brawley falsely accused six white men of raping her. In the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case a student at North Carolina Central University falsely accused three white Duke University students, members of the men’s lacrosse team, of raping her at a party. Most recently Rolling Stone magazine ran a lengthy false rape story,“A Rape on Campus,” that implicated a fraternity at the University of Virginia.
The ramifications of these types of stories are far reaching. Real rape victims are going to be looked at with suspicion because of these false rape stories.
When anti-abortion Republicans answer questions about rape and abortion, they get tongue-tied. They mean well, but they do a terrible job explaining their position. It cost the GOP two Senate seats in past elections. Of course, some Republicans are pro-abortion so their arguments are irrelevant to this topic.
As George W. Bush’s former aide Karen Hughes told Politico, “If another Republican man says anything about rape other than it is a horrific, violent crime, I want to personally cut out his tongue.”
I agree, to a point. More needs to be said, however, about how the anti-abortion issue is argued, especially when the Democrat Party has a monstrous pro-abortion policy statement. In New York, abortion is legal from conception to just right before birth.
Democrat Party Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz defends all abortions no matter how far an unborn baby is in development. Rand Paul has set the pro-abortion Democrats back on their heels with a great argument that’s easy to communicate and understand:
“When quizzed on his about his views on abortion, Republican Kentucky Senator Rand Paul avoided the gotcha game and told NH1 reporter Paul Steinhauser to ask DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz if it was okay to ‘kill a 7-pound baby in the uterus.’
“‘Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a 7 pound baby in the uterus?” Paul reportedly said. “You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s okay with killing a seven pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it’s okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me.’”
Supporters of abortion always bring up rape as a reason why abortion should be legal. If abortion is outlawed, then a woman who is raped and gets pregnant will have no recourse but to carry the innocent victim of rape to term. By the way, many rape victims have carried their babies to term. A baby conceived in rape is not guilty of anything. The rapist is the criminal, not the baby.
The rape card question is a smokescreen, a red herring to keep pro-lifers off balance and turn the pro-abortion media against them.
Here’s how I would deal with the rape question after making it clear that rape is a violent crime that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law:
“Are you saying that the 1.35 million abortions in the United States are performed because of pregnancies that were the result of rape?”
While women do get pregnant after being raped, the number does NOT come near to the number of abortions that take place every year. “[A]ccording to Planned Parenthood’s own statistics, less than 1% of all abortions are performed on women who were raped or were victims of incest. . . . In fact, Roe v. Wade was based on the rape argument – Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff Jane Roe, claimed that she had been gang-raped and needed an abortion. Years later, she admitted that the rape story was false and was made up in order to garner sympathy for the pro-choice cause.”
Let’s say the number of pregnancies from rape and incest is two percent. That leaves 98% of abortions that take place every year that are not the result of rape, incest, and the physical life of the mother.
Now let’s put another question to the pro-abortionists:
“In order to protect a woman’s right to abortion if she gets pregnant as the result of rape, you want to legalize abortion for all women. Let’s say I agree with you and add the rape, incest, and actual physical life of the mother exceptions to legislation, will you join me in opposing all other abortions since it seems it’s these three items that concern you?”
I would go so far as to say, “I’ll support you on these exceptions if you support me on outlawing abortion in all other cases.” Pro-abortionists won’t agree to the offer.
The goal is to shift the content of the debate since, as Mollie Hemingway points out, “Huge majorities support protections on children who have made it through the first three months of pregnancy, with other polls showing as many as three out of four supporting bans on late-term abortion. It’s not that the country is full of consistent pro-lifers, but the idea that the country is as radical on abortion as its most strident supporters are has no relationship to reality.”