OK, no more Mr. Nice Conservative.
Ever since Missouri Rep. Todd Akin made his now infamous gaffe about "legitimate rape," liberals and Democrats have gone out of their way to accuse every Republican in the nation of thinking the way Akin does. President Obama was the first to hint -- and not very subtly, I might add -- that Republicans were the ones guilty of, in his words, "qualifying forcible rape versus non-forcible rape," even though the distinction is made by the Associated Press Stylebook.
Then editors at the Baltimore Sun -- a paper whose editorials sound more these days as if the chairperson of the Democratic National Committee wrote them -- decided they'd get in on the act.
"Republicans and rape" was the title of a recent Sun editorial, which accused Republicans of being soft on the crime of rape and claimed the party had been "captured by anti-abortion extremists."
I could claim it's the Democratic Party that's been captured by pro-abortion extremists, but to be pro-abortion doesn't seem extreme to Democrats.
If people like the president and editors of the Baltimore Sun want to take this debate to the nasty point of painting all members of a political party with the same brush, then I'll gladly oblige them.
In his remarks about Akin's goofy gaffe, the president said, "Rape is rape. And the idea that we should be parsing and qualifying and slicing what types of rape we are talking about doesn't make sense to the American people and doesn't make sense to me."
This comes from the guy who's done quite a bit of parsing and qualifying and slicing of his own, about the subject of abortion. So that he gets my meaning, I'll get straight to the point.
Infanticide is infanticide, Mr. President. And the idea that you would parse and qualify and slice the subject by calling it a "women's health issue" is downright despicable.
As for my friends at the Baltimore Sun, I'll point out that, in all fairness, a conservative newspaper should run an editorial titled "Democrats and infanticide," which would be much more accurate than the screed they ran last week.
Assuming you don't buy the notion that Democrats are the party of infanticide, or that abortion is infanticide, Democrats are still the party that advocates public funding for abortions, and laws that give minors the "right" to have an abortion without parental consent.
What kind of society has this given us? Permit me to recount an anecdote. In a college writing course I teach, I once had a student who was a very devout Muslim. She was 22 and still a virgin. She mentored some 13-year-old girls at a Baltimore middle school. They were all stunned, shocked, to learn my student was still a virgin. They informed her they weren't. They had sex and they had it often.
"What do you do if you get pregnant?" my student asked.
"Oh, we'll just get an abortion," they answered.
Thirteen-year-old girls having sex with any man stupid enough and horny enough to oblige them. Thirteen-year-old girls using abortion as a form of birth control. This can't be the kind of society we want, but it's the kind Democrats -- aided and abetted by seven Supreme Court justice who voted for Roe v. Wade in 1973 -- have given us.
It'll be a rare Democrat indeed who doesn't believe the girls mentioned above don't have the "right" to an abortion and even a right not to have their parents informed of the abortion.
It'll be an even rarer Democrat who sees this situation for what it is: a byproduct of a nation, and a political party, so obsessed with rights that they don't mind the complete abrogation of responsibilities.
Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.