Rand Paul’s Prolife Gibberish

Last night I caught an interview on satellite radio of newly-announced presidential candidate Rand Paul by Sean Hannity, and I was able to find a replay on television a bit later.  Paul was responding to a favorable Hannity on the topic of abortion:

Hannity:  You say you’re 100% prolife, and you actually proposed the Life At Conception Act… do you make any exceptions for abortion?

Paul:  I think that there’s something special about life.  I believe in God.  I think it’s not just we can say that’s oh it’s just another life, we can just throw it away.  I think there’s some unique and special and there is a sanctity to life… The real debate is when does life begin, when life begins it deserves protection.

Hannity:  You believe at conception?  What do you do in the case of rape, incest, and the mothers life?

Paul:  And I do truly believe that.  But I also understand that there can be a range of opinions, and to make life better and to protect more life, I’m willing to go for all kinds of in-between solutions.  And I think the one thing that we agree on more than others is that a 5 or 6 pound baby, even in the womb, absolutely has rights.

Hannity:  But would you make exceptions:  rape, incest, mother’s life?

Paul:  I’ve supported both legislation without, and legislation with.  I want people to know that I’m pro-life and that I’m open to get incremental change but I’m also open to promoting that there’s something special about life in the very beginning.


Uh… what?  After sorting through the twisted phraseology, the bottom line is that Paul’s answers contain radically contradictory views, with what I assume is politically-motivated equivocation about life beginning at conception but really only protected as such when the baby is “5 or 6 pounds, even in the womb.”  And the last sentence is a rookie response to a fairly common question when the topic is abortion.

What’s worse, this was a encore performance of a CNN interview from last month, so one must assume Paul considers himself on solid footing with his point of view.  Hard to say, but he might’ve simply followed his would-be predecessor by indicating such questions are above his pay grade.

After all, that other fellow did get over 50% of the Catholic vote.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.