Rand Paul has introduced legislation called “The Life at Conception Act” which I presume is to establish when life begins for the purpose of protecting the unborn. But of course, as he is being questioned about it by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, he’s asked if it’s supposed to overturn Roe vs. Wade and also if it would include any exceptions for rape, incest, the life of the mother, etc.
Paul says that he doesn’t think Roe vs. Wade is any in danger of being overturned anytime soon and that the purpose of this legislation is to get the debate going again on when life begins. He also says that the noted exceptions mentioned by Blitzer put the discussion in too small of a box, arguing that there are thousands of exceptions, some that legislation can’t even address.
Watch the interview:
Personally I am one of the strictest in my view of abortion believing that that unless there is a significant, provable threat to the life of the mother in childbirth, there the life of the child should be protected. But given that, I do realize that Rand Paul is correct in saying that there are other things that haven’t yet entered the dialogue and are worth debating. For example, what if the woman who was raped happens to be mentally disabled?
Look, I don’t have all the answers but I absolutely don’t accept that the answer is to continue legal abortion as it is now. But I do concede that there is some room for discussion when it comes to exceptions for abortion as Paul suggests. But not much.