Abortions that are the result of rape amount to fewer than 1 percent of all abortions. Yet the press treats these rare exceptions as central. What goes virtually unreported are the doctrinaire positions of liberal Democrats: They oppose waiting periods, parental notification, limits on sex-selection abortions, restrictions on late-term or “partial birth” abortions, and laws protecting the lives of babies “accidentally” born alive following botched late-term abortions. Has there ever been a political debate in which the pro-choice candidate was challenged about his or her positions on those questions?- Mona Charen, National Review Online
It’s obviously a ghastly thing for a woman to be raped and to find herself pregnant as a consequence. What Mourdock was saying, if inartfully, was that the child so conceived is innocent, and doesn’t deserve to die because of the crime of his or her father. He understands that this is a tough issue. It makes everyone horribly uncomfortable. But the liberal answer — abort the child or else be accused of approving of rape — is a slimy abuse of tragedy and a disgrace to civil discourse.
Michael Coren has frequently said that, when people ask pro-lifers "what about rape?", what they are actually trying to do is to make the pro-life person look extreme. And then they can dismiss the pro-life position. Using the exception to make the rule. It never stands up.