stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Paul Ryan Still Believes In Banning All Abortion, Even In Cases Of Rape

by David Badash on August 22, 2012

in News,Politics

Post image for Paul Ryan Still Believes In Banning All Abortion, Even In Cases Of Rape

Congressman Paul Ryan is being a good vice-presidential nominee and deferring to Mitt Romney‘s decision to support abortion in cases of rape and incest — though, not for any other reason, like, the Constitution. So when asked yesterday by KDKA political editor Jon Delano about his beliefs on abortion, he towed his bosses’ line:

Delano: “Should abortions to be available to women who are raped?”

Ryan: “Well, look, I’m proud of my pro-life record. And I stand by my pro-life record in Congress. It’s something I’m proud of. But Mitt Romney is the top of the ticket and Mitt Romney will be president and he will set the policy of the Romney administration.”

Delano: “Despite Ryan’s views, Romney says he will allow exceptions for rape and incest.”

Delano: “Ryan says women won’t fall for these side issues.”

Ryan: “And I don’t think they’re going to take the bait of all these distractions that the President is trying to throw at them.”

There are no degrees of separation between Todd Akin, the embattled GOP Congressman who has refused to drop out of the race for the U.S. Senate after claiming that women who are victims of “legitimate” rape rarely if ever become pregnant, thanks to some automagic women’s systems that biologists have never heard of.

Both Akin and Ryan believe there should be no abortion ever. Period.

Both Akin and Ryan support legislation redefining rape so men are less-likely to be prosecuted — based on the theory that if a woman gets pregnant, she must have wanted it, despite being raped.

Ian Millhiser at Think Progress notes:

Ryan’s attempt to stick a knife into the increasingly toxic senate candidate cannot be squared with Ryan’s long record of working with Akin to curtail reproductive freedom and redefine rape. Ryan and Akin cosponsored a “personhood” bill that would not only prohibit rape survivors from seeking an abortion, but would likely treat terminating a pregnancy that results from rape as a homicide crime. Similarly, Ryan and Akin partnered on a bill seeking to prevent Medicaid recipients who are raped from obtaining an abortion unless they are victims of “forcible rape.”


Nor is this a new position for Paul Ryan. The man Mitt Romney wants to be a heartbeat away from the presidency claimed that abortion should be illegal except for “cases in which a doctor deems an abortion necessary to save the mother’s life” as far back as his first House campaign in 1998. Throughout his career Ryan’s view has been consistent and unambiguous — rape survivors are out of luck.

Welcome to the thirteenth century.

Transcript via Right Wing Watch

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


bsradar August 22, 2012 at 5:50 pm

It's the children of rape survivors Ryan is concerned with defending.

Seems a little selfish to kill a child because one of its parents committed a crime.

Positively antedeluvian.

lepidopteryx August 22, 2012 at 8:23 pm

So the woman who must carry the progeny of the man who violated her inside her body for the better part of a year, and relive the attack every time she pukes with morning sickness, every time she feels a kick, and with every labor contraction is being "selfish" for not wanting to go through that? Tell me you weren't serious. Please.

bsradar August 30, 2012 at 4:03 pm

So you favor murdering children for the sins of their fathers.

Thanks for clarifying.

Or is it only defenseless ones who can;t fight back?

Abortion supporters are freakishly disoriented from a basic understanding of humanity and justice.

lepidopteryx September 26, 2012 at 6:57 pm

No, I favor not punishing women for the sins of their rapists by forcing them to have their attacker's baby.

What's next? The rapist pays the current equivalent of thirty shekels and the victim has to marry him?

EdinOcala August 30, 2012 at 7:00 pm

So as soon as sperm fertilizes an egg its a child……..? since when? sounds like the double speak of the right to lifers………..

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: