Mitt Romney Endorses Richard Mourdock

First there was Rick Santorum saying that women made pregnant by forcible rape should “make the best of a bad situation” and be forced to give birth to their “horribly created” baby.

Then there was Todd Akin‘s “Legitimate Rape” comment.

And now there is Indiana Republican senate candidate Richard Mourdock, who offered this gem:

“Even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”

The Mitt Romney’s campaign has already released a statement saying that he ‘disagrees‘ with Mourdock. And yet, just this past Monday, Mitt Romney released an ad endorsing him.

You be the judge. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice? Three times??? They’re not fooling anyone.

If you follow the “life begins at conception” logic through to its logical end, you get moronic statements like what we see and hear above. GOD INTENDED FOR IT TO HAPPEN!


11 Responses

  1. And Richard Mourdock knows this how?

    And let’s not overlook the fact that, according to his logic, God also intends that at least half of pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion.

  2. “f you follow the “life begins at conception” logic through to its logical end,”

    Indeed! So many commentators seem to not be able to trace this.This is the core issue with respect to abortion.

    IF an unborn is a human at conception, then the moral/ political implications of termination are considerably different to what they are if that is not the case. All of the logic in the debate stems from the core assumption. And it is that assumption that needs to be addressed.

  3. Per this guy … “God abhors rape”

    . . . which is why God permits rape to happen ?

    SO: … is God NOT omnipotent after all, as it turns out ?

    Anybody know ?

  4. In Romney’s defense the ad was cut before the comment came out. Once cut and handed over he doesn’t have full control of the ad.

    I do believe that life begins at conception and that the unborn child should not be punished for the act of its father. I also side with saving the unborn child over the mother. These are my personal beliefs

    That being said I don’t think that that is how the law should be written. My personal beliefs are not shared by the majority so they should not be the law so long as the law does not prevent me from following them. Legally defining life as beginning at conception would open a whole host of issues. Drinking while pregnant (knowingly or not) would be child abuse or child endangerment. Any sort of accident that caused an abortion would become manslaughter. You get the idea.

    I think a good law position is to only allow abortions for the first trimester or in cases where the mother’s life is in danger. Cases of rape would of course fall under the first trimester provision.

    As for God wanting it happen, I feel like this comes down to predetermination vs free will. If you believe in predetermination and you believe in God, then I guess God did will it to happen. If you believe in free will and God, then God allowed it to happen. In the latter case, most religious people will refer to the concept that “God will not give you more than you can bare.”

  5. By itself I can’t get too exercised at Mitt on this one. That said, what does appall me is Mitt continues to support Mourdock. S

  6. I don’t understand the logic here. By definition, everything that happens is ultimately what God intends. If God is not omnipotent then what is He?

  7. Everything that happens is what God intends? Because it happens, it’s God’s will?

    Is there a difference between all-powerful and infinitely-powerful?

    Maybe God is not omnipotent.
    Maybe there is no god.

    Why is this politician looking for a seat in a secular congress invoking ‘the will of god’ in a debate anyway??? In an Iranian theocracy, sure. But in the USA?

  8. Andrew – why do you favor the life of the unborn child over that of the mother? What has the mother done to deserve being killed by her own child? In Jewish law, an abortion can be performed practically until the baby has been delivered in order to save the life of the mother.

  9. The mother has had a chance at a life. The unborn child has not. This is a personal opinion though and not something I would ever want to see turned into a law. The decision on who to save if only one can be saved should be made with great care and hopefully to go along with what the mother herself would want.

  10. […] when something bad happens, it is no longer the “will of God” (unless you’re a Republican running for senate), but is a civil liability claim against the church because of shoddy […]

  11. Cm.dedalus, If you hold “Reformed” (Calvinist) theological beliefs EVERYTHING is “God’s will.” Rape, genocide, rape, the existence of Honey Boo Boo, etc.

    God doesn’t just allow these things to happen, he planned them to occur. He still “hates” these things though so he will punish those he willed to do evil acts with eternal hellfire.

    It’s all fairly internally consistent, it’s “goodness” is just beyond the imperfect comprehension of fallen man.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: