Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Sunday, October 23, 2016

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Florida Senator Marco Rubio on Sunday defended his stance against abortion without exceptions for rape or incest that he was asked about during a debate among Republican presidential candidates on Thursday.

“I personally and deeply believe that all human life is worthy of the protection of our laws. I do. And I believe that irrespective of the conditions by which that life was conceived, or anything else, and for me to be consistent on that belief,” Rubio said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

During Thursday night’s debate, Rubio said he never advocated for exceptions on abortion. However, Rubio co-sponsored the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act in 2013 that aimed to ban late-stage abortions and included exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

On Sunday, Rubio denied any inconsistency. He said that while he does not support such exceptions, he would not rule them out if the overall result is fewer abortions.

“I recognize that in order to have consensus on laws that limit the number of abortions, a lot of people want to see those exceptions,” he said on NBC.

Rubio said he recognized that women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, but that clashes with “the right of a human being to live.”

“I don’t say it’s easy,” Rubio said. “But when asked to make a decision between two very hard circumstances, I personally reached the decision, if I’m going to err, I’m going to err on the side of life.”

For Rubio, taking a bold stance against exceptions could hurt his standing with women. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee have also said they do not support abortion in any cases.

Democrats seized on his remarks in the debate.

“Hey Marco Rubio, the women of the 21st century can hear you,” Democratic National Committee spokesperson Christina Freundlich said. “When you don’t account for rape or incest, the only thing we see is a candidate with outdated, out of step, and offensive policies of the past. Get with the times or go home.”

(Reporting by Megan Cassella; Editing by Doina Chiacu and Lisa Shumaker)

Photo: U.S. Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio speaks at the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, United States, July 18, 2015. REUTERS/Jim Young

  • janis mcdonald

    For those who believe abortion is murder — how could you argue, then, that “murder” is ok in the case of either incest or rape? Why would it be ok to murder THOSE babies? And if the argument is “because it would be too difficult to ask a woman to carry a fetus that resulted from incest or rape” — then it wouldn’t be too hard to argue that you really can’t ask a woman to carry ANY fetus she does not want — difficult or not!

    • JPHALL

      I wonder if these people believe in the death penalty?

      • Grannysmovin

        Or condone torture, or stand your ground, or shooting unarmed individuals,or end of life directives.

        Rubio “I personally and deeply believe that all human life is worthy of the protection of our laws.” Does that extend to home grown terrorists and our enemies?

        • JPHALL

          What about the Death Penalty? Those are lives also.

          Subject: Re: Comment on U.S. Presidential Candidate Rubio Defends Stance Against Abortion

      • dpaano

        Maybe not, but they certainly believe in sending our men and women overseas to kill and be killed….but, apparently, that’s different, right?

        • JPHALL

          You are so right. Hypocrites all.
          Subject: Re: Comment on U.S. Presidential Candidate Rubio Defends Stance Against Abortion

  • Women have a right to choose aborting a fetus, not some moronic religious figureheads

  • Independent1

    “I personally and deeply believe that all human life is worthy of the protection of our laws.”

    What an outright hypocrite. Rubio makes this statement about a fetus, but how many times has he voted ‘Yay’ to legislation that cuts the budget for ‘SNAP’ (food stamps) that millions of Americans living below the poverty level need desperately to stay alive? Or voted ‘Yay’ to legislation on a budget that would defund Obamacare, or cut the budget for Medicare or Medicaid that provides the health care that millions of Americans desperately need to live long and fruitful lives? Or how many similar GOP state legislators who say the same hypocritial thing vote to deny the expansion of Medicaid to people living near the poverty level in an effort to deny them the health care they need??

    And when are these outright clueless politicians going to wake up to the fact that “you cannot legislate against abortion”?? Implementing laws that ‘ban abortions’ and end up closing down abortion clinics DO NOT STOP ABORTIONS!! When are politicians like Rubio and so many others going to wake up to this fact.

    Has the war on drugs stopped people from using drugs in America??? Did the government’s prohibition on booze in the 1920s stop people from drinking?? Well, banning abortions not only isn’t going to stop women from getting abortions, it’s only going to make it a little more expensive for the women who can afford to travel and pay for it – and FAR MORE dangerous for women who can’t afford to travel to where abortion is legal and have to seek out someone on the blackmarket to perform the abortion they are going to get whether it’s banned or not.

    Rubio!! Please wake up!! And realize that you nonsensical Republicans’ effort to ban abortions aren’t reducing them, in fact they’re increasing them. And they will also be putting more and more women’s lives at risk who end up getting a blackmarket abortion where the instrument of choice is a coat hanger.

    • plc97477

      The problem with your rant is that they believe that bleeding to death in an alley way is an apt punishment for have sex out of wedlock. The girl should have known better.

      • Independent1

        And here is where these people prove even more their absolute hypocrisy – by then doing everything they can to reduce, especially for women, the knowledge and medications they need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And that’s especially true with the growing trend today of our younger people waiting longer to commit themselves to marriage; because our lives have become far more complex today than they were 50-100 years ago – and so getting married early before a women learns enough to take care of herself (in a world where men will more and more up and leave a marriage), is more often than not, not the best choice for a woman to make.

        In addition to caring little for the lives of women who ‘let themselves get pregnant’, they do everything to deny America’s growing youngsters the sex ed they should have, and they work to enact court decisions and even pass legislation that allows companies to refuse to provide the contraceptives that help prevent pregnancies – and even let pharmacists and pharmacies to choose not to fill prescriptions for contraceptives based on outdated beliefs that have long since been obsoleted by God (the writer of Hebrews tells us at the end of Chapter 8 – that Jesus’ coming made the old testament obsolete and therefore
        it should soon fade away – that verse you quoted earlier about “being fruitful” should have long since disappeared from our minds).

        • dpaano

          Why aren’t they pushing laws against the irresponsible men who impregnate these women and then take off scott free? It should be a crime of some sort for men to do this….after all, why do we women get all the blame? There are such things as condoms, men….try them, and we wouldn’t be having this conversation!

      • Muawiyah

        The greatest single cause of maternal death for most of the last decade has been abortionists mistakes….

        But, we digress. With the invention of modern antibiotics almost all maternal deaths disappeared in the USA and other modern countries.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    The joke is that the plantation states are hot to justice excessive use of the death penalty since it suits their need to cull the herds of minorities in their states. But, abortion?

    It’s beginning to look as if the GOP is a Gestapo Regime. Ramming down their religion, their morals and their “antebellum” values.

    They’ll deny living, breathing humans the right to the best healthcare in one breath and then claim that a fetus is a living breathing human being in the next.

  • John Murchison

    Ah, the slippery slope of moral absolutes. It opens one up for hypocrisy. I personally wouldn’t sentence women to pregnancy.

  • jmprint

    He believes life starts at conception. We should be able to get life insurance and claim them as dependents on our income tax if that’s the case.

    For everyone that cries out “we must save our babies” they should be forced to adopt at least two from the states, as these unwanted children suffer more in the hands of evil people. I would rather have been aborted then raped and beat, and I’m sure that is what Jesus would have felt. Everyday you read about babies dying at the hands of their parents.

    Republicans would rather scorn women, jail children, incarcerate the mentally ill.
    instead of working on the tragedies, the culprits, they target the abused.

    There is so much we could be working on, that would prevent pregnancies, that would prevent child abuse, that would prevent rape the root to abortion, but instead we scorn the women. Those adulterer’s just keep casting those stones, keeps the spot light off their sins.

  • Robert Cruder

    Being genetically human is easy to verify chemically. Eggs, sperm and shed skin cells are human. Whether an egg and sperm once fused is a person is entirely a religious claim not shared by most religions. It cannot be based entirely on future potential since two thirds of these cells are discarded naturally and the same politicians do not care about lost potential of the post-born.

    Rather, it seems to stem from the unprovable religious claim that the cell has a “soul”.

    Just why should I trust someone who would dictate my rights based on his religion with no requirement for any inconvenient facts or logical argument?

    • dpaano

      It has been scientifically said that a fetus is NOT a “person” until it is taken from the womb, is breathing on its own, and moves on its own!

      • Robert Cruder

        Please be careful with the terminology. Humanity and sentience can be tested scientifically but personhood is a philosophical/legal categorization.

        For example, a fetus, an anencephalic newborn and a brain-dead patient on life support (such as Terry Shiavo) can be proved both human and non-sentient.

        There are primates, cetaceans and even birds that are self-aware and more intelligent than a two-year-old human. They can be proved sentient but not human.

        Because religious doctrine holds human genetics separate and superior, it demands that only the former be persons. Because I value sentience, I choose to call the latter persons.

        Whether AI, some unstudied terrestrial species or some alien first makes that religious demand untenable is an interesting wager.

        • dpaano

          You’re most likely correct….I guess this is mainly my opinion and what I’ve been taught in the medical field as being somewhat correct. Thank you for your insight. I’m always open to hear what others have to say…unlike most of the GOP candidate and their ilk.

  • IntelliWriter

    A reminder that Iron-age politicians Rubio and Walker would sentence women to death versus providing a life-saving abortion. That’s all you need to know before you bolt in the opposite direction.

  • dpaano

    When these idiots grow uteri, then, and ONLY then, can they tell a woman how to deal with their pregnancies! Seriously! Don’t we have more pressing problems to deal with in our country than this?