Who’s the radical on abortion?

Pro-life politicians need to take a page from Newt Gingrich’s playbook when answering questions about Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. In an appearance on ABC News’s “This Week,” George Stephanopoulos asked Gingrich if Romney agreed with Mourdock’s recent remarks about rape. The exchange begins at 4:37 in the video above. Gingrich responded,

My response is, if you listen to what Mourdock actually said, he said what virtually every Catholic and every fundamentalist in the country believes, life begins at conception. Now, this seems to be fixated by the Democrats, but the radical on abortion is Obama, who as a state senator voted three times in favor of allowing doctors to kill babies in the eighth and ninth month who were born, having survived late-term abortion. And the Democratic Party platform, which says you should pay with your tax money for late-term abortion…

Here’s the lesson. First, you emphasize what many Americans believe—that life begins at conception. Second, you point out President Obama’s record—which is the most radical of any President in American History. Not only is he pro-abortion rights at every stage of pregnancy, he also once supported the right of doctors to kill live human infants who survived an abortion attempt. Moreover, Obama’s HHS mandate requires Christians and other pro-life persons to pay for abortions.

President Obama is the most radically pro-abortion president we’ve ever had, and it has shown over these last four years. Pro-life politicians need to point that out every chance they get.


  • Jeff Douglas

    I am interested in understanding and explaining the facts that prove Obama to be the “most radically pro-abortion president we’ve ever had.” Any chance you might do a post on the subject, or point me to some records on the web. Thanks.

  • Tom Parker


    You said the following:”President Obama is the most radically pro-abortion president we’ve ever had, and it has shown over these last four years. Pro-life politicians need to point that out every chance they get.”

    Proof please. It is not enough to just say it but where is the proof.

    All the years that there were Republican Presidents–why did they not overturn Roe Vs. Wade?

    Or is it that Republicans use Christians to win elections and then forget their promises about abortion?

    • Aaron Meares

      @Tom Parker: “All the years that there were Republican Presidents–why did they not overturn Roe Vs. Wade?” The answer is that they can’t. Presidents don’t have the power to overrule the Supreme Court. The executive branch cannot overturn a Supreme Court decision; the Supreme Court can overturn a Supreme Court decision. And right now it is not likely that there is a majority that would overturn it. A pro-life president can appoint new Supreme Court justices, as they die or retire, who would likely vote to overturn it if such a case were presented.

    • Aaron O'Kelley


      The proof is in Obama’s record, both prior to his term as President and during his term. Gingrich pointed out the radical position state senator Obama took while serving in Illinois. In addition, we could add that as President, one of Mr. Obama’s first acts was to rescind the “Mexico City Policy” that restricted NGO’s that received government assistance from performing abortions overseas. Since then, he has appointed two pro-choice justices to the Supreme Court, and his healthcare law now requires religiously affiliated organizations to cover their employees with insurance that includes abortafacient drugs. When Bush was President, he appointed justices who may vote to overturn Roe v. Wade (at least Alito would, though I’m iffy on Roberts). In addition, he signed into law a federal ban on partial-birth abortion.

      And, it must be noted, the Democratic Party’s official platform this election cycle calls for abortion on demand at any time during a pregnancy with taxpayer funding. When Clinton was President, Democrats used to say that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” The Democratic Party of today has wholeheartedly embraced abortion as a positive good for society, and the most significant event that can account for this shift in rhetoric since the Clinton years is the election of Barack Obama, the most radically pro-choice President in U.S. history.

  • James Stanton

    So are we taking for granted that contraception is 100% equivalent to an abortion? There’s some law known as the Hyde Amendment which prevents federal funds from being used for abortions. I believe it also applies to ACA/ObamaCare. The line between contraception and abortion is definitely being blurred. I don’t know what the truth is on the issue anymore. I do support ACA as a means to use the existing private healthcare system to extend access to healthcare to all Americans.

    I think there’s a point at which people don’t want to believe the worst about a candidate. You could claim all you want that Obama prefers to kill babies who survive an abortion attempt and people wouldn’t be inclined to believe it. I think it’s because the perceived image of these candidates doesn’t appear as radical to most as some would like to portray them. These candidates don’t run explicitly on the radical positions they have held in the past..

    Same as how elderly folks across the nation don’t want to believe that Romney/Ryan would force radical changes to medicare, medicaid and social security. And surely they wouldn’t cut taxes on the rich and raise them on the poor. Surely they wouldn’t get us into another war of choice. Surely they wouldn’t roll back wall street reforms.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.