The no abortion platform is the platform of Mitt Romney. It is the platform of Paul Ryan, and it is the platform of Scott Brown. They are all running under the republican party's banner. Time to pay up, boys. You hang out with these guys and you take their name and their money.

Well that's it then. That is the Republican position. Now show some guts boys and defend it, if yo can. It would be nice to see some other powerful planks, like ending Medicare, privatizing SS. That's what you believe in just as strongly as you believe in this particular plank. Say so, run on it and then we will all know where the American public actually stands. Dems. too, planks that say raise taxes on income's over 250k, maintain SS etc., keep the current abortion law status. lay it out there guys and quit shading the answers. Then we will know where the folks in the country really stand. Actually most of the nation will have a breakdown wanting all the benefits but not paying for any of them. Could be fun.

There is no such thing as a partial birth abortion. There are only procedures that will allow pregnant women to survive and have babies after a severaly malformed fetus.

As this very article makes clear, the GOP has no problem at all with Todd Akin's position on abortion. It's a precise match for the official platform position. They're only upset because he drew attention to that position while being spectacularly stupid.

Just a reminder: Romney signed the National Organization for Marriage pledge. The gay marriage positions are his positions: http://www.nomblog.com/12150/ ---- In signing NOM's marriage pledge, Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum pledged to: -- Support and send to the states a federal marriage amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman, -- Defend DOMA in court, -- Appoint judges and an attorney general who will respect the original meaning of the Constitution, -- Appoint a presidential commission to investigate harassment of traditional marriage supporters, -- Support legislation that would return to the people of D.C. their right to vote for marriage.

This has ALWAYS been the GOP's position, that it knows best when it comes to abortion. Personally I'd like to see them take their state's rights argument to this one and let the states decide. You can't cherry pick your causes that should be federal and state, there should be protections for this but when it becomes national then its more difficult for either side to really make the argument for or against. Letting the states decide will bring the discussion where it belongs, close to home, where it is needed rather than being decided for all by a few - who aren't really affected by it personally or health-wise if that really is their argument.

The Globe is just finding this out? This is FRONT PAGE NEWS? Your leftist agenda is so transparent and sickening. I know objectivity died at the Globe a long time ago. Too bad...a once great paper now morally dead.

mike1756 - Your are the one who is "Morally Dead" There is no moral standing for anyone who would force a rape victim to carry the fetus of her attacker.

It's important to note that the legislation on which this platform issue is based is scored as having a 1% chance of passing. So while I passionately disagree with it, I'm not concerned since it is never going to happen. The national debt, however, is increasing every minute, leading to us to a place where we won't have the luxury of debating irrelevant social issues. So despite my dislike of some activist Republican's (platform writers) positions on social issues, I'm definitely voting for Romney-Ryan and the local Republican ticket.

i am quite shocked that the republican party wants to abort Akin's campaign after it was conceived--in the 2nd trimester no less

good one

The worst government is often the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression. - H.L. Mencken

While it's important to note that there aren't enough Republican and anti-choice Democrat votes in Congress to give it more than a 1% chance of passing, also want to mention that even if it did get through Congress, it's a constitutional amendment that would have to go to the states for ratification. Never going to happen, never. It's an interesting subject since it shows a mindset of some fundamentalist citizens, both R and D, who don't grasp the first amendment freedom of religion, which doesn't allow their religious viewpoint as to when life begins to be imposed on the rest of us.

I think.with the GOP's latest, we can call Obama the winner now...why not save us all a lot of meaningless rhetoric from now to November? The GOP will spend millions dancing around this, with the usual Romney hip-hop spin and re-spin and the time and money could be better spent...but I wish.

I am sure when Pres. Obama voted to let babies born alive after an abortion to die (no intervention by doctors)....is alright with women's choice. A friends daughter 21 years ago had a 1.5 lb baby and is alive today...you notice they cry over the murderer on death road to be kept alive, but not a baby born alive or in the late trimester.

I hope that Democrats and Independents who oppose this kind of nonsense, but who are considering voting for Scott Brown, understand that it doesn't matter whether Scott Brown is personally a moderate, a nice guy, or a reasonable person -- if he is re-elected, he brings the Republicans one step closer to having control of the Senate, and once they have the majority, they can ram their proposals through. Scott Brown has a track record of voting with the obstructionists in the Republican Party, however much he may want to be seen as distinct from them. Maintaining and expanding a Democratic majority is essential if we don't want the Republican extremist agenda enacted -- even if our local Republican doesn't seem all that extreme himself.

Even though I am a Democrat, I believe in the unborn child's right to live. In fact, I'm pro-life 100%, no exceptions or compromises. Even so, I'm very upset with Todd Akin's comments. He should have thought before he spoke; after all, as a World War II saying goes, "Loose Lips Sink Ships!"

To the editors, With its latest assault on women's rights, the Republican party position is little different than that espoused by the Muslim mullahs. Do the Republicans realize this? Do they care that they are alienating millions of women, plus a lot of men, too? What's next? Repealing the right of women to vote? Burkas?

It doesn't actually matter whether Brown personally supports every bit of this or not. Whichever party has the majority in Congress sets the agenda, and Brown counts as one more Senator towards giving the Republicans the majority. I hope every moderate Democrat and every Independent who doesn't support the extremist Republican agenda understands that that's how it works -- a vote for Scott Brown is a vote to give extremist Republicans control of the Senate.