This flip-flopping coward has topped himself when it comes to ridiculous mental gymnastics. He is on record as originally being in favor of a woman’s right to choose. However, now that he’s running for President and being confronted with that by the right wing base, he’s changing his tune.
What he “meant” by “pro-choice” was really “pro-life”, and this is why: He believes it should be a crime to have an abortion; no matter what. However, if a woman chooses to break that law and have an abortion (and subsequently suffer the legal consequences of such an action), well then that is her choice.
So when he said he was “pro-choice”, that was really what he meant. :smack:
Are you fucking kidding me? This clown is taken seriously? And leading the polls? I’m not sure what statement that makes of the Republican Party, and our country as a whole; but it’s abysmal whatever it may be.
ETA: this should probably be put in “Elections”, I didn’t think of it when first posting.
Yeah, but it’d be their “choice” to have that illegal abortion. :rolleyes:lol
So, if you are a woman who finds herself sitting in prison for the rest of her life because you would have suffered permanent injuries if you had brought your baby to term; don’t blame Hermain Cain; blame yourself. Blame yourself.
And I was reading the thread title in terms of the Book of Genesis, thinking Cain’s definition was “It’s my right to choose whether to kill my brother”.
I think Cain was perfectly clear in his statement. What he is saying is, “I am a self promoting motivational speaker who wants to sell more of my books and have no serious interest in the highly unlikely event of becoming President but look at me on the national stage getting all of this free publicity!”
He’s definitely pro-choice on murder, theft, rape, etc. then too, right? I mean, how could you not be? Obviously everyone has a choice as to whether to do these things, and, well, gee, we acknowledge that choice.
Can we have some cites to back up the OP’s claims? Not saying I know them to be wrong, it’s just that I think it’s bad debate strategy to make an unsupported claim.
Watch this video. Starting at 3:45 is his abortion stance. Pretty clear right? Granted confusing John Stossel isn’t that hard, but it was ridiculous. ‘Women should be able to choose but the government should remove that choice.’
That clip does not support what the OP asserted. Cain was certainly less clear than he could have been, but he did wrap it up with words to the effect that a woman should not be permitted legally to have an abortion, not even the “rape or incest” exception.
Is this the clip that triggered the OP? Cause if it is, it’s a miss. I don’t see him backtracking on a prior position on abortion (though there’s a proud tradition of that on both sides of the aisle). I see him stepping on his own tongue and mangling his thoughts. I think he had a brain fart and the “big government is evil and should mind its own business” side of his cranium collided with the “no abortion is ever permitted” side. He communicated this horribly, but I don’t see the hypocrisy or waffling or whatever evil thing the OP saw–I never saw him back off of the position that no abortions, not for any reason, should be permitted. Unless there’s something more…
If he did, I missed it. He did a shitty job of explaining himself, but I never heard him come to any conclusion that was something other than, “no abortions, not for any reason.”
Agreed. That doesn’t show that he was once pro-choice but changed his stance when he started running for president. It shows that he’s oblivious to what it means to make something illegal but still allow a person to “choose” it. It shows that he’s at least a little nutty in his political views and/or his ability to express them.
