(CNN) - The campaign of Herman Cain again worked to clarify his stance on abortion Thursday night after the GOP presidential candidate raised new questions at a Texas campaign stop when he said he was "pro-life, no exceptions."
The "no exceptions" phrase seemed to contradict statements Cain recently made, suggesting abortion rights should be a family's decision when it came to cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother was in danger.
The campaign attempted to spell out his views Thursday in a statement obtained by CNN, but did not address any exceptions.
"I am pro-life, and believe in advancing the culture of life. My record as a pro-life candidate speaks for itself,” Cain said in a statement. “Anyone who says differently is simply not telling the truth. Next question."
When pressed by CNN on his position, however, a campaign adviser said Cain follows the same policy used by the George W. Bush administration, which said abortions should be allowed in the instances of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake.
"He has learned more about the issue," including the number of women affected in those instances, the adviser told CNN, explaining Cain's view.
Cain first stirred controversy last week on CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight." He said he was against abortion rights, but when asked about rape or incest, Cain said the government shouldn't have a say on those issues and the decision should be left to the family.
Some social conservatives slammed Cain for his remarks in the following days, prompting him to be vocal about his "pro-life" positions during campaign stops and interviews over the weekend.
In cases of rape or incest, I think the family should be left to make a decision, but when the life of the mother is at risk a legislation should be for the support of abortion.
To force a woman who has been raped or whose life is at risk to carry the fetus to term or go to jail is ludicrous. I cannot believe anybody would support such an agenda.
Why does the party that complains about too much big government intervention want the government involved in such a private matter? Cain had it right when he said it's a family's decision, not for the government to decide. Of course, this pro-life party only fights for the fetus while it's in the womb. Once a baby emerges, it's on its own – starvation, poverty, ignorance, and disease are not the government's concern because some of the fat cats' wealth will trickle down to those least fortunate among us. Or so they believe. The immorality of their morals is frightening.
Am not a fan of the 999 man, but I do really get his point. He is for pro-life personally. This does not mean that he should interfere to others life incase something bad happened to them. If there is no law at all on this (no abortion), I do not see the reason he should enforce or safe guard it.
Compare this with their stance on the death penalty... If life is so precious, why is it ok for the gov't to kill someone, even if they committed a heinous crime?
This is a women's health issue and the government has no business legislating what anyone does with her own body. If you don't support abortion, don't have one. But leave your beliefs out of my and my family's personal choices. This issue will surely sink the right wing, and only proves their hypocrisy. Keep the government out of the bedroom and the doctor's office!
Cain is pro-choice. He stated that when he first explained his position on abortion. All this stuff is just damage control to a crazy base.
Hate to say this, but it appears that the pro-life party is only out to promote life so they can exploit them in the future. What's even more disturbing is this pro-lifers are Christians who believe in death penalty and 'the eye for an eye' philosophy. One would think that the two positions are contradictory.