On reproductive rights, Rubio says no exception for rape

[KamaAina]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/reproductive-rights-rubio-says-no-exception-rape

Obviously, the Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with Rubio on that last point, but even putting that aside, Rubio’s position is worth clarifying.

The far-right Floridian co-sponsored legislation just two years ago that would have imposed a 20-week ban, with exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. When Rubio said he’s “never advocated” such a policy, he was mistaken about his own record.

But let’s be more specific. What is Rubio’s position, exactly? The senator appeared on CNN this morning and insisted that “science” has already proven that life begins at conception (it hasn’t). Asked about unwanted pregnancies caused by rape and incest, Rubio replied, “I think both of those instances are horrifying and fortunately, they are extremely rare. It happens. And anytime it happens, it’s horrifying and it’s a tragedy. But I personally and honestly and deeply believe that all human life is worthy of protection irrespective of the circumstances, in which, that human life was created.”

There’s no real ambiguity here. Rubio’s position is that if a woman is impregnated by a rapist, the government has the authority to force her to take the pregnancy to term, regardless of her wishes.

When will repukes learn to zip it (their mouths ) about rape?

[sub.theory]

1. No one agrees with this nut

Americans aren't willing to force women to carry a rapist's baby. They just aren't. Even many anti-abortion supporters don't favor outlawing abortion for rape, incest, or to save the mother's life. Rubio is just making himself look like an extremist wacko. Fortunately, almost no one agrees with him.

On a related note, why don't presidential candidates support mandatory life sentences for all rapists without possibility of parole? But no one ever does. That would be something I could get behind.