Herman Cain stridently pro-life with almost no exceptions – UPDATE!

The only exception to an outright ban on abortion he would pursue, if elected, would be if the life of the mother was at stake.  Given that all the extreme situation abortions (rape, incest, life of the mother) make up about 1% of all abortions performed, this would all but end abortion in the United States.  Unfortunately, it’s a very long road from campaign rhetoric to policy reality, but it’s a great start:

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain said Sunday that he didn’t agree with abortion “under any circumstance.”

The candidate, who has promised to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, told NBC’s David Gregory that he believes in “life from conception.”

“I do not agree with abortion under any circumstance,” he insisted.

“Exceptions for rape and incest?” Gregory asked.

“Not for rape and incest,” Cain replied. “Because if you look at rape and incest, the percentage of those instances is so miniscule that there are other options.”

But when it came to cases where the life of the mother was at stake, the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO left a little wiggle room.

“If it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”

I’m certain even leaving “life of the mother” as an exception would be badly abused, with ideological doctors or those looking for a quick buck certifying that women must have abortions in order to “save their life” when there is really not much of a real medical danger.  But it would cut down abortion likely by a factor of at least 10.

There’s a great deal to like about this guy.  I don’t know about the skeletons in his closet, if any, or if his present rhetoric represents beliefs he has consistently held (although, I think most of them are), but much of what he says is very appealing to a faithful Catholic.  He may be a bit weak on defense of marriage, he seems to be more libertarian than conservative in that area.  I’m sure some Catholics may balk at his position on immigration, but I think his desire for a fence, electrified or not, should be strongly considered, if only as a starting point to gain control of the border for national security and other purposes and as part of a total revamp of immigration policy.  But, again, it’s a very long road from campaign rhetoric to reality.

I am happy that there are so many serious candidates that are also stridently pro-life.  But I don’t trust this guy on the life issues, or just about any other issue, at all:

When it comes to a Republican nominee, anybody but Romney is my default position.

UPDATE: Dude!  Just saw this.  I would definitely vote for this guy.  He has a sense of humor alot like mine: