Rand Paul Makes Curious Abortion Comment That May Make Some Pro-Life Voters Nervous

National   |   Steven Ertelt   |   May 19, 2015   |   5:12PM   |   Washington, DC

There is no doubt that Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is pro-life on the issue of abortion, but he has made some curious remarks over the years about may make some pro-life voters doubt how fervently pro-life he really is.

In comments to the press on Monday, Paul said he didn’t enter politics to take on abortion but, rather, was more interested in tackling the national debt. The Daily Caller has a transcript about what Paul said when asked whether he would go out of his way to talk about abortion during the presidential campaign nd if he thought abortion should be handled by the states or federal government.

The comments come after Paul did a remarkable job turning a media question about abortion on its head by asking if Democrats would support aborting a 7 pound baby.

“You know … I will answer the question as honestly as I can,” Paul replied. “I didn’t run for office because of this issue. It wasn’t what got me to leave my practice. And I ran for office mainly because I became concerned that we’re going to destroy the country with debt. That we would borrow so much money that we would just destroy the currency.”

“I think best by the states,” Paul replied.

“I think the question that still divides us, and it’s a difficult question, is when does life begin,” Paul, an eye doctor, added. “I think we go down all kinds of rabbit holes talking about other stuff, but I’m an ophthalmologist, and I see one, two-pound babies in the neonatal nursery. I look into their eyes to try to prevent a form of blindness that is now preventable.”

“And everybody agrees that that one-pound baby has rights,” he said. “If someone were to hurt that one-pound baby in the neonatal nursery, it’s a problem. That baby has rights. But we somewhat inconsistently say that seven-pound baby at birth or just before birth has no rights. And so I think these are questions we have to sort out. We just have to figure when we agree life begins.”

This isn’t the first time Paul has made some curious comments about abortion and his pro-life position.

Paul made pro-life activists curious when he said that Republicans should agree to disagree on social issues. Then, in an April interview, Paul says he doesn’t anticipate changing the laws on abortion and added that his belief that life begins at conception is a personal and religious one, not a scientific viewpoint.

“The country is in the middle (and) we’re not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise,” he says.

Click here to sign up for daily pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

He seems to think America is not pro-life enough to ban abortions, never mind that a majority of Americans have been consistently pro-life in polls for decades — so much so that Gallup recently called the pro-life majority on abortion the “new normal.”

When it comes to pro-life issues, there is little doubt Paul is pro-life and, on 10 votes on pro-life issues cast in the Senate during his tenure, Paul has a 100% pro-life voting record — voting against Obamacare, to stop abortion funding with taxpayer dollars, and protecting the conscience rights of pro-life people. Paul has said “personal religious belief” is that life begins at conception.

On his campaign web site, Paul makes his pro-life views very clear.

“I strongly believe in the sanctity of life. I believe that life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. Under the 14th Amendment, it is the government’s duty to protect life as defined in our Constitution,” he says. “As a physician, one of the first things we learn is to ‘Do no harm.’  Since Roe v. Wade decision, over 50 million children have been killed in abortion procedures. As President, I would strongly support legislation restricting federal courts from hearing cases like Roe v. Wade, in an effort to stop harming the lives of the unborn.”

Paul continues: “Our government should not be responsible for funding abortions, and as President, I will attempt to stop the flow of taxpayer dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion. I believe we may be able to save millions of lives, and do no harm, by allowing states to pass their own anti-abortion laws. By giving this power to the states, I sincerely believe we would save hundreds of thousands of lives.”