Herman Cain may have caused some pro-life advocates to pause when the normally solidly pro-life Republican presidential candidate made some controversial remarks on abortion. But the pro-abortion activists at NARAL say they’re still resolute in their opposition to Cain over his pro-life position.
Cain has advanced the pro-life cause throughout his political career but came under fire this past week when he gave an interview to CNN on Wednesday in which he used typical “pro-choice” language about government not making abortion decisions for women that applied, depending on the listener, to either abortions in the case of rape and incest or abortion policy in general. Either way, pro-life advocates have been disappointed following the comments and they have called on Cain to clarify the comments — which he did in a short message on twitter later in the day saying he is “100% pro-life.”
Cain, later Thursday, released a statementsaying he is fully pro-life, saying he will appoint the kind of judges who would be inclined to consider reversing Roe v. Wade, and adding that he opposes taxpayer funding of abortions or the Planned Parenthood abortion business.
He followed that up with a Fox News interview on Friday where he said he repeatedly that he wants abortions to be made illegal and he then told CBN’s David Brody that he would support a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution to afford legal protection for the 1.2 million unborn children who die in abortions annually since the Roe v. Wade decision.
Now, NARAL president Nancy Keenan has released an open letter Cain saying she believes he is fully pro-life on abortion and condemns him for taking such a position.
“Let’s start with the things we agree on: you are 100 percent opposed to a woman’s right to choose abortion care–even in cases of rape or incest–and have made that position clear on numerous occasions. End of story,” Keenan writes. The NARAL leader then says she disagrees with Cain’s assertion that a president doesn’t have significant power over the issue of abortion.
“The president has tremendous power over reproductive-health policy in the United States,” she said.
Keenan says the next president “could nominate enough Supreme Court justices to determine the future of Roe v. Wade and women’s constitutional right to choose for decades to come,” has the power to appoint federal officials such as the FDA commissioner who could exert tremendous authority over abortion and abortion drugs, and she worries the next president could overturn the Mexico City Policy that protects taxpayers from having their tax dollars going to groups like Planned Parenthood that promote and perform abortions in other nations.
Keenan also worries about a pro-life president who has a pro-life Senate to work along with the current pro-life, Republican -controlled House of Representatives, which has passed several pro-life bills limiting abortion and abortion funding.
“Anti-choice forces currently control the U.S. House of Representatives, and have passed extreme, anti-choice bills,” Keenan laments. “While the Senate currently is under pro-choice leadership, only 40 senators can be counted on as reliably pro-choice votes. The president could be the deciding factor in whether these outrageous attacks on women’s freedom and privacy become law.”
To Cain directly, Keenan concludes: “As this presidential race continues, I’m sure that you will continue to be asked questions about the powers and responsibilities of the office you seek.” She invites him to read NARAL’s publications to learn more about its pro-abortion position.