House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy says Alabama pro-life law goes TOO FAR

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was asked today of the Alabama pro-life law that was signed by the governor yesterday goes to far and he said YES.

As noted on the tweet above, he believes the Alabama law should have had exceptions for both rape and incest.



He also suggest it should have an exception for the life of the mother, but the law already does that. It allows for an abortion only in cases where it’s needed to prevent a serious health risk to the mother.

But back to the other points, why is the life of an unborn child worth terminating in the case of rape or incest? Why is a child’s life less valuable because of unfortunate way it was conceived?

Whether a child is inside the womb or already born, the value of its life should be the same! If not, then why can’t a mother be allowed to kill her child born from rape? Why does the fact that a child is in the womb make any difference in its value?

We all know that rape is a horrific thing for a woman to go through and dealing with a pregnancy from something like that would be terrible. But I can’t believe snuffing out that new life, especially in the heat of the moment, is going to alleviate that woman’s pain or misery. If anything it would likely compound her grief in the future once the reality of that sinks in.

It would be better to endure that pregnancy and give the child up for adoption than to remove that child’s life from existence.

This is why I have issues with Kevin McCarthy. Either his values don’t go deep enough or he loves his job in Washington too much. I get he’s from California, but this is no excuse.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

61
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
31 Comment threads
30 Thread replies
29 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
newest oldest most voted
Omega Man
Member
Omega Man

Yes, rape and incest are tragic experience for a women and whether she has an abortion or not, that experience will haunt her forever. However, murdering the resulting baby can never be right. Two wrongs never make it right.

I do agree if a pregnancy is truly life threatening to a mother, then she and her husband should be able to make that call.

C.W. Smith
Member
Active Member
C.W. Smith

Kevin McCarthy is a perfect illustration of everything that’s wrong with the Republican Party.

hubman
Member
Trusted Member
hubman

As you might expect from a politician, McCarthy would rather have exceptions for rape and incest because it takes away an argument from the pro-abortion side and makes the anti-abortion side sound more “reasonable.” The argument is that we should gradually promote the restrictions on abortion until it gets seen as barbaric. And if I honestly thought allowing exceptions for rape and incest would accomplish that, I could see making that deal, since it would stop 99% of abortions, which would represent millions of lives saved. But we all know the first thing that would happen is that everyone who wanted an abortion would claim to have been raped, or victimized by incest. And then you would have to have some manner of proof required for the exceptions, which would immediately be portrayed as cruel and not compassionate. So even making that deal wouldn’t work. But making such a deal… Read more »

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

It’s either a human being or it’s not.

Moreover, these provisions are added out of false compassion, since victims of incest and rape would be burdened with the additional suffering resulting from the guilt and grief of having killed an unborn child.

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

Kevin McCarthy should read up on the strategy behind this new law. It’s pretty interesting, and shows some real advanced thinking going on in the Alabama legislature…

Jeff Poor (Breitbart): Fact Check: 9 Things to Know About Alabama’s Abortion Law

june2016
Member
Member
june2016

It is always wrong to intentionally kill an innocent human life.
Abortion intentionally ends an innocent human life.
Therefore, abortion is always wrong.

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

Rape and incest is a little trickier than a woman just being loose. I would imagine carrying the child of someone who took away your humanity could be challenging. I know if I was impregnated by someone sodomizing me, I couldn’t say I would want that child in me. It’s not the child’s fault, but that child is a reminder of a destructive life experience. And I know cases of it are extremely rare. Tough call.

TJK ✓
Member
Trusted Member
TJK ✓

Mc cuck = scum.

Solely2Post
Member
Active Member
Solely2Post

But back to the other points, why is the life of an unborn child worth terminating in the case of rape or incest? Why is a child’s life less valuable because of unfortunate way it was conceived?

Because of The Cult of Death demands it.

Eric
Member
Noble Member
Eric

We want to free the slaves, just not the ones who like being enslaved, after all we don’t want to impose against the owners. – Civil War RINOs

SafeThusFar
Member
Member
SafeThusFar

Another weak Spineless Republican Liberal unwilling to fight for a babys life

cookiebob
Member
Active Member
cookiebob

He’s right and will ensure that we make no progress at all. Two years of power and we give it all away… we were so close. I hope we haven’t blown it all up, but the Alabama law is so full of holes, it is anti-science. It’s such a shame. If Trump loses and gets no more court picks, it’s because of this law. They cut off their nose in spite of their face!!! It makes you wonder if the whole state of Alabama doesn’t really understand human reproduction! Can’t they read? Don’t they get the difference between an tubal pregnancy and a pregnancy that results in a child? It is like they really do want to kill women and children… I know that is not so, but they didn’t even bother to do basic homework! Basic medical terms…. learn them!!! Such dumb mistakes… and all the ammunition the Democrats… Read more »

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

You sound like you are unaware that this Alabama law allows any pregnancy termination necessary to prevent serious health risk to the mother.

I’m more inclined to believe you’re a pro-choice troll than a concerned pro-life citizen.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

Pro-abortion.
#FightOppressionByEuphemism

Ragtag Media
Member
Member
Ragtag Media

This is simply tactical on Alabama’s part. Excluding “exceptions for both rape and incest” leaves some meat on the bone for the SCOTUS to nibble on.

RWrad
Member
Noble Member
RWrad

Pro life means pro life, there are no exceptions as to how that life is conceived. These so called “conservatives” who carve out the “pro life, but” exceptions are not pro life. McCarthy wants to have it both ways to placate squishy republicans who he needs to keep power, shame on them.

cookiebob
Member
Active Member
cookiebob

Your opinions are not facts. A tubal pregnancy kills mother and child and the child cannot be reimplanted… among other problems. What the law claims has to happen is not possible.

Basic medical knowledge is needed to make laws, and apparently Alabama doesn’t have it.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

Again, you falsely accuse Alabama of disallowing a medical end to tubal pregnancies.

hubman
Member
Trusted Member
hubman

The Alabama law has an explicit exception for ectopic pregnancy, precisely because it threatens the life and health of the mother, and is an impossible pregnancy to bring to term anyway.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

Most importantly, it’s morally permissible under the principle of double-effect, wherein a single action has two effects, one good and one bad, with the bad effect of equal or lesser weight than the intended good act. The evil must not be the primary intention.

So I’m this case, the intention of the act of removing the tube is to save the life of the mother. But the act also results in the death of the child.

michaelpshayes
Member
Member
michaelpshayes

joins the rest of ….”I’m pro-life, but…” …crowd

if the law in Alabama does nothing else, it is at least showing who is really pro-life and who is just a pro-life when it’s convenient

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

I’m pretty sure the only place in all of creation where a policy of, “All or nothing,” matters is before the Seat of Judgement.

Here on Earth, you have to work with people. You need to form coalitions.

So while McCarthy (who is clearly not a full conservative–or in my book, *not* a conservative) may not be an all-or-nothing pro-lifer, it might not be helpful to throw him out for this.

Accept the win. Keep fighting.

curlylouis1970122
Member
Active Member
curlylouis1970122

I’m glad there weren’t people who fought slavery that had your attitude. What these I”m pro life but, people are doing is no better than those who said, “I’m against slavery but I”m also ok with it being kept just in the South.”

K-Bob
Editor
Noble Member
K-Bob

I’m glad the Founders had my “attitude” and signed the Declaration, which the pro-slavery colonies refused to sign if it outlawed slavery–and put the 3/5ths Clause into the Constitution.

This “attitude”–which is actually a *tactic*, based on a well-grounded political philosophy encompassing Biblical morals, led to the ability of the anti-slavery states to eventually win in the effort to end it.

Imagine if Thomas Jefferson had won the day in Philadelphia, and gotten the anti-slavery language he wanted into the final draft of the Declaration.

No southern colonies would have signed. The Revolutionary War would have been over in a few weeks, and slavery would still be legal.

If you can’t build a coalition, you lose. It’s that simple.

Thomas-Aquinas
Member
Noble Member
Thomas-Aquinas

Pro-life legislation almost always involves arguable prudential judgements.

But McCarthy’s statement reeks of cowardice, a lifetime of RINOism, and snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

cookiebob
Member
Active Member
cookiebob

Do some research on tubal pregnancy… read the law, then come back and discuss. The law claims false things, and demands undoable medical procedures.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

Not according to the link (straight to the law itself) which someone sent you yesterday.

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

You’re suggesting that those who eliminated the transatlantic slave trade shouldn’t have bothered, until those already here were freed?

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

He’s “pro-life”, unless it costs him votes. This NOT a man of truth or conviction.

Eric
Member
Noble Member
Eric

At any point that you say it’s ok to kill the baby, you are no longer Pro-Life!

Contemplator
Member
Active Member
Contemplator

Eric, is the morning after pill ok? Or if your wife is raped, do you want her to just wait and see if there arrives a baby to deal with?

Eric
Member
Noble Member
Eric

We will wait. If the LORD chooses to give us another child by that means, we would gladly welcome the baby – it is not the baby’s fault that his/her life would start under such horrific circumstances. Please understand that I didn’t always think this way. But after 12 years of trying to have a child, multiple trips to fertility doctors, lots of weeping and praying, we finally had our first child. After another 5 years we decided to adopt. Because of these circumstances, we feel very keenly that life ONLY begins when the LORD makes it so. Therefore, stopping that life is the ultimate act of telling Him that He is wrong and that we know better. Personally, we have learned that we don’t know better. I’d much rather err on the side of putting my faith in Jesus that He is sovereign and will give us good gifts… Read more »

curlylouis1970122
Member
Active Member
curlylouis1970122

McCarthy and those who think as he does, show they are wolves in sheep’s clothing when it comes to this issue. They call themselves pro life, but they only wear that label when it’s convenient.

TMFB
Member
Active Member
TMFB

Well said Scoop. I’ve made similar arguments to my prolife and pro choice friends that there should not be an exception for rape and incest. My arguement, similar to yours is that the child did NOTHING wrong to deserve the ultimate punishment of death. Punishing them by killing them is not justice in any way. Punishing the actual perpetrator (rapist/child predator) by death is something I could get behind though. If we are all created equal and endowed with certain inalieanable rights… then how we are created (rape/incest) should not be a factor when choosing what babies can be aborted and which ones cannot. Only in the extreme, exceptionally rare case of life/death for the mother should abortion be allowed. That becomes a legit case of self defense. As medical technology continues to improve and children can life outside the womb at earlier stages of pregnancy, even this rare exception… Read more »

Kathleen
Member
Trusted Member
Kathleen

Scoop is right. A baby conceived by rape is not worthy of life? McCarthy is saying that some deserve to live but not all. You know, because he’s compassionate. This is political talk and we know what follows: if a child should be aborted because of rape, he/she should be aborted because the mother is poor, etc. Kevin McCarthy is weak and he’s no leader.

Renny
Member
Noble Member
Renny

But they act as if the pro-life people are the ones ‘forcing’ a woman to carry a child. No, that happened under whatever circumstances led to that baby being. Yes, it would be very, very difficult for the woman. But there should be mental health people involved to get her through the pregnancy and decide if she wishes to put the child up for adoption. Instead of ‘just kill it’ and it all goes away. It’s adding one crime to another.

tryandgetbyme
Member
Active Member
tryandgetbyme

Slowly, the rape exception is being debunked, I think..

During my school years, rape and incest exceptions were automatic.. Now I know that these exceptions represent a fraction of the circumstances and are used as the wedge to win the argument for abortion on demand. Most cases are abortions of convenience.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Kevin can we leave in that portion of the Bill that protects the Born baby from any harm. I wish you could do for California what Alabama is doing for its People.

Squirrelly
Member
Noble Member
Squirrelly

Well, this guy can join the great “Christian” leader, Pat Roberts, with his crap.

willtapp
Member
Trusted Member
willtapp

Yes as Matt Walsh has been saying since this bill passed let the “conservative” cowards sit on the sidelines while we fight for the lives of ALL the unborn, not just the ones we pick and choose.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

National Review makes the counterargument: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/state-level-abortion-restriction-best-way-to-protect-life/

We have a good sense of what happens when the national debate focuses on banning abortion in this rare circumstance that accounts for less than 1 percent of abortions. In 2011 voters in Mississippi defeated an abortion ban that lacked this exception by 16 percentage points. In Alabama, laws can’t be repealed via a voter-driven referendum, but pro-life lawmakers should care about how their actions affect the cause of protecting life throughout the country. Nationwide, more than 75 percent of Americans think abortion should be legal early in pregnancy when the pregnancy was the result of rape. Public opinion cannot be ignored in a democratic republic, and it would be a grave error to insist that no lives should be saved until all lives can be saved.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

I’m not saying I agree with the argument, but I get it. It’s like like doing triage. The major concern are the “contraceptive” abortions. If we can get those for now, that’s a huge victory – and (callous as it is) we can push for the rape/incest later.

But if we insist on getting the rape/incest now, and it becomes the reason to overturn the laws in full – then we’ve got a huge loss.

Ice cold practicality. Ironically, it’s the “BUH HILRY” binary choicers who should appreciate that the most.

MxnCheeseHead
Member
Active Member
MxnCheeseHead

Agree. In an imperfect world we must realize when we can’t get everything we want morally wrong or not and fight for what we can.

Squirrelly
Member
Noble Member
Squirrelly

I get it too. This is where 46 years of legal abortion and indoctrination and propaganda about it gets us. 75% think it’s necessary, at least, for certain things. Sad.

Watchman
Member
Noble Member
Watchman

This is the same thing libs do, they focus on the exceptions while ignoring that most abortions are about convenience and not talking responsibility for their actions. Abortion won’t undo rape or incest. If anything it compounds the problem because now you’ve added murder to the list. Two wrongs do not make a right. And if you were to ask a person who was born as the result of rape or incest if they wish they had been aborted, I’m willing to bet they would say no.

joyfulgiver
Member
Noble Member
joyfulgiver

Even the baby who was a product of rape or incest, is a child ALLOWED by God. While it would be a hard thing to do, carrying a child that was conceived in rape, it’s still a child of God, a blessing from above. I’m certain there are many childless families who would love to welcome these children into their family.

James 1:16 Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. 18 Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Unfortunately this is the “pro life” stance of many Republicans. I remember W saying the same thing.

Killary Hinton
Member
Member
Killary Hinton

I have to agree with him on this one. You cannot force a woman to carry a baby she had no consent in conceiving. I am totally pro-life, but these kind of laws will not stand up and I believe will ultimately backfire.

joyfulgiver
Member
Noble Member
joyfulgiver

My sister-in-law is a product of a violent rape, I’m happy she is my sister-in-love. She was adopted at birth into a very special family and she has been loved for decades. I can’t imagine life without her.

Tallboy
Member
Active Member
Tallboy

Don’t kid yourself you are not pro-life at all and certainly not totally. You are more totally pro-abortion. Either you with the pro-life side or you are not. You are lukewarm and weak with no backbone structure to stand on. You are a type of person that would crumble easily when face against the tide and drown in it with fear from men retribution.

Squirrelly
Member
Noble Member
Squirrelly

You are so right. Sometimes pro-life isn’t pro-life at all. All in or not at all.

Squirrelly
Member
Noble Member
Squirrelly

So not “totally” pro-life. Words have meaning.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

I agree wholeheartedly Squirrellyy, how can anyone be Pro life ,but,but, but,but,but with these exceptions.

MxnCheeseHead
Member
Active Member
MxnCheeseHead

Maybe because millions will die as politicians continue to use rape and incest as an excuse to defeat these bills.

I can believe anything I want but if it means a law won’t pass that would otherwise save thousands or millions of lives, then is my stand doing more harm than good?

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

“Totally pro-life”? SMH

Tallboy
Member
Active Member
Tallboy

For him to say he is pro-life he is a liar. Any type of abortion you approve of either from incest or rape or even the moment of conception, you are not pro-life but a baby killer. What make any gestation period of development more important then another. They are all important and the same because there is life inside the womb that is growing and developing to be a baby, not a dog, cat, rabbit, squirrel, mouse, but a human being created in the image of God. Period.

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

The second I saw Kevin McCarthy’s picture, I knew it was gonna be bad. Yeah, he’s pro-life… sure he is. It’s convenient for votes to say that – even if he is from the hellhole state of California. But once again, he’s a liar. Make no waves. Show no backbone. Status Quo. Low profile. He’s a disgrace – and that was long BEFORE this asinine comment. He’s a career politician. When you look up RINO in the dictionary, Kevin McCarthy’s picture is there.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

….and we had a great opportunity to send him back to California and give Jim Jordan permanent residency as the Minority leader and possibly the Speaker ship in 2020..

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

I know a guy who was borne out of rape. He takes great offense to the notion that his life is somehow less valuable because of the circumstances of his conception.

As well he should.

Back to Top of Comments