Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who this week officially announced his candidacy for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, said this week that he does not believe abortion is a personal decision, once again shifting away from his previous, more nuanced stance on abortion.
During an interview with Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host of an eponymous show, Walker was taken to task over comments he made in a TV advertisement during his 2014 gubernatorial reelection campaign.
In that ad, Walker says he supports abortion-related legislation that “leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor.”
Ingraham, referencing the clip, asked Walker to clarify his position on abortion.
“You don’t believe—I just want to clarify this, governor,” Ingraham started. “You don’t believe the final decision should be between a woman and her doctor—”
“No,” Walker interrupted. “I believe it’s an unborn child.”
The Republican governor’s stance on abortion has changed significantly in the lead-up to his presidential bid. As recently as this March, Walker told Fox News host Chris Wallace that he recognizes the decision to get an abortion is one protected by the Supreme Court.
Only a week later, Walker for the first time announced his support for legislation banning abortion after 20 weeks—legislation that is unconstitutional and based on discredited evidence that a fetus can feel pain at that point.
The GOP-majority Wisconsin state legislature passed such a bill last week. During a debate on the ban, state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo (R-West Allis) told his pro-choice colleagues that they misunderstood the intent of the abortion ban.
“This bill isn’t about abortion, this bill is about protecting children who are capable of feeling pain from going through an extremely excruciating and painful experience,” he said.
He's already said that he doesn't believe abortion should be legal to save the life of the mother, so this doesn't even surprise me. He's made it abundantly clear how little respect he has for women, their bodies and their lives.
He's already said that he doesn't believe abortion should be legal to save the life of the mother, so this doesn't even surprise me. He's made it abundantly clear how little respect he has for women, their bodies and their lives... their living children, their ability to unionize, their fair pay acts, their privacy if they get public aid (drug tests specifically), and their ability to vote without added hurdles.
I truly wonder if he would change his view if his wife were in a situation where continuing a pregnancy could kill her.
He would probably pull a Rick Santorum and say that it was ok for his wife in that situation, but not for anyone else's.
I thought Ms. Santorum had a spontaneous miscarriage as a complication of a serious infection? And then they helped it along with labor-inducing drugs to minimize the risks to Ms. Santorum.
He would probably pull a Rick Santorum and say that it was ok for his wife in that situation, but not for anyone else's.
I thought Ms. Santorum had a spontaneous miscarriage as a complication of a serious infection? And then they helped it along with labor-inducing drugs to minimize the risks to Ms. Santorum.
I believe there is some debate as to what actually happened.
He would probably pull a Rick Santorum and say that it was ok for his wife in that situation, but not for anyone else's.
I thought Ms. Santorum had a spontaneous miscarriage as a complication of a serious infection? And then they helped it along with labor-inducing drugs to minimize the risks to Ms. Santorum.
She had a severe intrauterine infection and was counseled to terminate. Not an option For her. The antibiotics had the adverse effect of triggering labor. This is permissible under Catholic doctrine because it is not done to terminate the pregnancy; that is a side effect. Nothing she did is considered an abortion. It was not a miscarriage, either; it was a live birth.
Of course, the real disturbing thing here is that despite this unpredictable, dangerous situation that could have forced them to make extremely difficult choices, they did not come away from the situation with any sort of new respect or understanding or compassion for others in similar situations.
I think that my point is that people frame the story as though the antibiotics caused the end of the pregnancy.
I can't think of any antibiotics that reliably induce labor or cause miscarriage.
On the other hand, infections are definitely associated with spontaneous abortion and miscarriage.
I'm an anal scientist and this minor detail bugs me on it's own but the general fear of taking pharmaceuticals during pregnancy can prevent women from seeking necessary treatment and that's really not conducive to healthy women or babies.