George Allen and the morning-after pill (1 Viewer)

[aps]

It has been discovered that George Allen (republican senator from Virginia) owns stock in a company that makes the morning-after pill. He is pro-life, except in cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother. What do pro-lifers think about that? Is that hypocritical of him to own that stock and be pro-life?

Abortion Foe Allen Faulted for Stock in Morning-After Pill Maker

By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; Page B05

RICHMOND, Aug. 8 -- A leading conservative antiabortion group has joined Democrat James Webb in criticizing Republican Sen. George Allen for opposing abortion while owning stock in the manufacturer of the morning-after pill.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/08/AR2006080801323.html

 

[Spartacus FPV]

I dont think so, for example I'm morally opposed to abortion, but I am still pro-choice and for abortion clinic funding. Unless... maybe im a hypocrite!:shock:

 

[aps]

I dont think so, for example I'm morally opposed to abortion, but I am still pro-choice and for abortion clinic funding. Unless... maybe im a hypocrite!:shock:

LOL I have heard serious arguments from pro-lifers that the morning-after pill is essentially committing abortion, who are opposed to that pill under any circumstances. If Allen was pro-life under all circumstances, I might argue that he is a hypocrite (in fact, I would argue that). However, he supports the right of a woman to abort a child when incest or rape is involved (or their health). Under those circumstances, a woman would be able to take the morning-after pill to hopefully avoid getting pregnant. Thus, my personal feeling is that he is NOT a hypocrite in this circumstance, since it would appear he would support the morning-after pill in those situations.