• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Contest: Decipher Herman Cain's Abortion Position

hgc

Penultimate Amazing
hgc
Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Messages
15,892
I don't have anything to offer as a prize, other than recognition of great powers of discernment. Nor any objective standard of success.

But, I would like to know if anyone can figure out Herman Cain's position on abortion. In this interview with English Dude (who replaced Larry King) on CNN, Cain glides effortlessly from affirming his no exceptions for rape/incest stance to something that sounds pretty clearly pro-choice.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/10/cains-abortion-muddle.html

He literally says, "... it's not the government's role, or anyone else's role, to make that decision." Can anyone say: making it up as he goes?
 
I think he first started by saying "no exceptions" and had backed off to stating that in cases such as a threat to the mother's life, a choice by the mother was a valid resolution.

Of course, apparently now he has to back off of that too.
 
gnome said:
I think he first started by saying "no exceptions" and had backed off to stating that in cases such as a threat to the mother's life, a choice by the mother was a valid resolution.

Of course, apparently now he has to back off of that too.
Click to expand...

What I heard was that, yes, at first he said no exception, but then goes on to say that not the state, not the government, and no politician should ever tell any of these women what to do. That, in my mind, is the very essence of pro-choice.
 
I'm waiting for him to say he was just joking when he gave one of his contradictory positions on abortion--you know how he was joking about building a border fence electrified such that it would kill anyone (ha ha--it's a joke) that tried to climb it, and that he was just joking when he said the GOP should groom Tiger Woods for their nominee in 2016.

The rest of us just need to develop a sense of humor.
 
From the interviews i've seen his position is unshakingly pro-life but he can't bring himself to admit it without using evasive language. It seems Cain doesn't have much of a backbone when it comes to asserting his position. But for better or worse he also believes the states should decide the issue and not the federal Gov't. It's seemingly a way to avoid imposing his position without completely alienating either side.
 
Juniversal said:
From the interviews i've seen his position is unshakingly pro-life but he can't bring himself to admit it without using evasive language.
Click to expand...

The latest sound bite didn't seem at all evasive: he sounded solidly and unequivocally pro-choice.

ETA:
 
Last edited:
I stand by my first submission for the contest: he was joking, and none of us understand the Cain sense of humor.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
The latest sound bite didn't seem at all evasive: he sounded solidly and unequivocally pro-choice.
Click to expand...
Sarcasm? :confused: In this recent interview his initial language gave the impression of him being unequivocally pro-life but once he "clarifies" he sounds pro-choice. Talk about a massive flip flop. :boggled:
 
Last edited:
Juniversal said:
sarcasm? In this recent interview his initial language gave the impression of him being unequivocally pro-life but once he "clarifies" he sounds pro-choice. Talk about a massive flip flop.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be contradictory. He doesn't like abortion, under any circumstance, but he prefers that the choice ultimately lies with the women it affects and not with any government or politician.
 
In saying that the government shouldn't have any role in the decision, he's effectively pro-choice. I wonder if this will undo him with the religious conservatives.
 
Ryokan said:
It doesn't have to be contradictory. He doesn't like abortion, under any circumstance, but he prefers that the choice ultimately lies with the women it affects and not with any government or politician.
Click to expand...
Odd interpretation considering he blatantly said he doesn't support abortion under any circumstances. No one is "pro-abortion". The mitigating factor is a woman having the ability to choose or not. You're either pro-right to choose or against giving women the right to choose (usually for apparently moral reasons).

His personal position and his (voter friendly) political position are clearly divergent. Certainly contradictory positions.
 
Juniversal said:
Odd interpretation considering he blatantly said he doesn't support abortion under any circumstances. No one is "pro-abortion". The mitigating factor is a woman having the ability to choose or not. You're either pro-right to choose or against giving women the right to choose (usually for apparently moral reasons).

His personal position and his (voter friendly) political position are clearly divergent. Certainly contradictory positions.
Click to expand...

In European liberalism, which is close to classical liberalism, there is the concept of 'not making something illegal just because you don't like it' - similar to 'I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it'. I think Cain's position, as stated in the video in this thread, is a good example of that.

An example from my own political thoughts is that I find the very idea of religious private schools repugnant, but I still support the right of religious people to open up religious private schools. I don't like it, but who am I to say what other people have the right to do, as long as it doesn't violate human rights and the law of the land?
 
I think Cain is making a distinction that appears to be missed here. He's against abortion. But in the case of rape and incest, he'll leave the decision to the woman/family that is facing the issue.

It's good politics. Bad policy in my opinion but good politics as he pursues the nomination. He appeals to the base but leaves himself wriggle room in the election ... if he gets there.
 
Ryokan said:
In European liberalism, which is close to classical liberalism, there is the concept of 'not making something illegal just because you don't like it' - similar to 'I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it'. I think Cain's position, as stated in the video in this thread, is a good example of that.

An example from my own political thoughts is that I find the very idea of religious private schools repugnant, but I still support the right of religious people to open up religious private schools. I don't like it, but who am I to say what other people have the right to do, as long as it doesn't violate human rights and the law of the land?
Click to expand...
So in other words he's indeed pro-life but doesn't want to impose his position on the nation. A fair position but to not one that = pro-choice.
 
Last edited:
Juniversal said:
So in other words he's indeed pro-life but doesn't want to impose his position on the nation. A fair position but to not one that = pro-choice.
Click to expand...

Well... As long as his position is that ultimately it's a woman's choice to make, I'd say that makes him pro-choice.

But you'll have to forgive me if there's some nuance in this when it comes to US politics I'm missing, as I'm really not used to see this issue in such black and white terms.
 
Ryokan said:
Well... As long as his position is that ultimately it's a woman's choice to make, I'd say that makes him pro-choice.

But you'll have to forgive me if there's some nuance in this when it comes to US politics I'm missing, as I'm really not used to see this issue in such black and white terms.
Click to expand...
If that's the case I want to see him campaign as pro-choice because his words clearly implicate him as being pro-choice. While you can certainly have a personal opposition to abortion while believing others should have the ability to decide for themselves, the fact is this stance is "pro-choice" while he says he's pro-life. I think it's his way of safely stradelling the party lines and not alienating him from his conservative base but it just makes him look indecisive.
 
Juniversal said:
If that's the case I want to see him campaign as pro-choice because his words clearly implicate him as being pro-choice. While you can certainly have a personal opposition to abortion while believing others should have the ability to decide for themselves, the fact is this stance is "pro-choice" while he says he's pro-life. I think it's his way of safely stradelling the party lines and not alienating him from his conservative base but it just makes him look indecisive.
Click to expand...

He should, he won't, and no doubt.. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom