Photo credit: Westside Conservative Club

U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, spoke at the Westside Conservative Club in Urbandale on Wednesday morning. I, unfortunately, am rarely able to attend that event.

I did not hear about King’s comments until my wife and I were out for lunch and she pointed out The Des Moines Register headline that read, “U.S. Rep. Steve King: If not for rape and incest, would there be any population left?”

That, of course, sounds bizarre and outrageous when taken out of context which is what The Register‘s headline does. Now, King is using hyperbole to make a point about the impact denying the right to life to those conceived in incest and rape could make. Now if only The Register would report on every time a Democratic presidential candidate going through Iowa uses hyperbole, but they don’t.

It’s probably larger than we think. I’m confident that it is.

His point is that these children have value, intrinsic value, that should be protected.

Going back and listening his speech and the full context, King discussed the heartbeat abortion ban that Iowa passed, and then talked about his own efforts in the U.S. House of Representatives, in particular, when he was asked to allow an amendment to his fetal heartbeat bill allowing exceptions for rape and incest.

He discussed his and the 174 co-sponsors’, who signed on to the bill without that amendment, opposition to that language.

“I had 174 people who did not want exceptions for rape and incest because they understand it is not the baby’s fault, to abort the baby, because of the sins of the father, and sometimes the sins fo the mother too, I refused to do that. I just kept pushing the pressure up. We had the votes in the judiciary committee to peel off every amendment, put that bill on the floor, and pass it on the floor. I put the marker down that exceptions are not going to be part of the dialogue any further because this is about the sanctity of human life,” King said.

And so I refused to do that down to the last couple days of our lame duck session, the word came down out of leadership – ‘no mark-up, no floor action,’ and boom. And so, all right, I held the ground on principle, maybe we could have gotten that to the floor if I compromised, it wasn’t going to move through the Senate anyway, and we still stand on these principles of life,” he added.

“We know the reasons why we don’t want the exceptions for rape and incest – at least for the most of us – because it is not the baby’s fault. And I started to wonder about this, what if it was ok and what if we went back through all of our family trees and just pulled those people out who were products of rape and incest would there be any population of the world left if we did that? Considering all of the wars, all of the rape and pillage that has taken place, whatever happened with culture after society, I know that I can’t certify that I know I’m not part of a product of that,” King said.

“And I would like to think that every one of the lives of us are as precious as any other life, and that is our measure. Human life cannot be measured. It is the measure itself against all things are weighed. Human life, there’s not a qualifier there, it doesn’t matter whether you are one day after conception or one day after birth or one day before your 100th birthday all life has equal value according to the law and equal value according to God,” he concluded his remarks on abortion.

He is right. King is absolutely right. Human life’s value cannot be weighed based on how one is conceived or what stage of life a person is at.

Pro-abortion advocates and the media who support them will blast this assertion or any remark about exceptions regardless who makes it. Conservatives should not.

I have no problem criticizing Congressman King for remarks that he makes that I believe are wrong and I have done that on several occassions. This is not one of those times.

His full speech courtesy of The Register is below. The embedded version should start at the beginning of his abortion comments.

14 comments
  1. His comment was insanely stupid and so is this OP-ed. The world does not and has never needed rape/incest for population growth. I can’t believe there are people in this day and age who will publicly and proudly show off this level of ignorance.

    1. What’s ignorant is this comment. Nobody said we need rape and incest for population growth. Utter nonsense.

  2. So you’re saying you still defend him following his years of White Supremacy nonsense (not to mention that Confedrate Battle Flag he proudly had on his desk), because it’s trash, poorly worded comments weren’t bad “in context”?

    Whelp, he’s taken this a piece of support. So congrats on that!

    1. I defended the point he was making. That’s it. How they view this piece is up to them.

      1. I’ve already made it clear I’m not endorsing in this race and I have criticized King on a number of occasions. I just think the “outrage” over this particular comment is overblown.

    1. The same as the unborn child’s. I’m confused, is somebody arguing for taking the woman’s life?

  3. Shane, his comments are despicable because he’s justifying rape and incest for the population growth, it is simple to deduce that. Never mind that God values babies born as a product of rape or incest. I ask Steve King to guess how many of these babies have been murdered by their distraught mothers who refused to raise a child in whom they would see their rapists in their eyes? Abortion/murder was a fact then as it is now. One sin trying to erase another.
    If he wants to say even babies from rape and incest have value to God, there are much better ways to do it.

    1. If you believe he was justifying rape and incest for population growth you are either 1. dense, or 2. live in a bubble where the only thing you believe is leftist talking points.

      How utterly stupid.

      So your argument is let’s kill the babies before the distraught mothers have a chance to do it themselves. Is that seriously your argument?

      I don’t disagree that he could have found a better way to make his point. I’m not defending that specific comment. I’m defending the larger point he made.

      1. He credited (and justified although its a grievous sin) rape and incest for part of the world’s population growth, period, and questioned whether he would even exist if all babies by rape and incest were removed from history. That is a despicable statement no matter what, Shane, and you should denounce it.
        Stating what some women have probably historically done (we know in the past in some cultures parents would kill a baby girl for want of a boy) in no way indicates my personal opinions on abortion, and it is much too presumptive of you to ask that, and will prevent me from any more discourse on this so subject.
        Name calling makes you look unprofessional.
        Steve King will not be re-elected, God willing, in 2020.

      2. I called the idea that he justified rape and incest stupid, not you. You said he justified it, he didn’t, you are misconstruing what he said. Period. In the whole context of what he said it is obvious that was not his intent.

        While I thought his remarks were an odd way to make the case that he did I think people are blowing it out of proportion. It was hyperbole to make a point that all lives are precious.

        Yes, rape and incest are grievous sins, do you know what else is a grievous sin? Taking an innocent life.

  4. When you get raped and become pregnant, or an uncle or father molests you and you become pregnant…THEN let us hear from you. Otherwise, you have no idea what that pregnancy is like for the woman. Or you don’t CARE about the woman involved.

    1. This is a straw man argument.

      Of course, it is a difficult situation. I just don’t believe it is the baby’s fault. So the question is this: do children conceived in rape or incest deserve to die? I don’t believe so. You obviously believe that they do. So, tell you what, go talk to one of these kids, I know a few, and tell them that you think they should be dead.

      See how well that goes for you.

  5. Thank you, Shane, for this article. SHAME on conservatives for jumping to conclusions against one of our own. Steve King is a great man, not a racist, very pro-life. None of us could have our words picked apart and taken out of context without giving the Left some way to condemn us speciously. It pains me that Feenstra and Family Leader are dog-piling on this honest and hard-working Iowa man who has done so much in VOTING for our causes. Let the ignorant and those with a leftist agenda make their uninformed comments, but as conservatives, and especially Christian conservatives, we must do unto him as we would want done unto ourselves, if WE were in the hot-seat taking fire. I’m going to support with a donation right after this post.

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Rene Gadelha Announces Iowa Senate District 34 Bid

Linn-Mar School Board Director Rene Gadelha announced for Iowa Senate District 34, which includes the cities of Marion, Robins, Hiawatha, Ely, and Bertram.

Fong Reaches Out to Young Voters

Former Gubernatorial candidate Christian Fong launched The Iowa Dream Project today as…

Iowa U.S. Senate Candidate Profile: Q&A with Joni Ernst

1.  What’s the most rewarding job you’ve held? Joni Ernst: “(Being) a…

By First Learning to Crawl, We Can Begin to Walk and Run

By Senator Paul McKinley, Iowa Senate Republican Leader Before we can run,…