In the first Republican debate for the upcoming 2016 election, Scott Walker let his true colors show louder than ever — he is not pro-life, he is pro-birth. If the life of a pregnant mother is risky, possibly resulting in death, he will pick the birth over letting the mother live. Ergo, pro-birth, not pro-life.

Moderator Megyn Kelly told Walker that 83 percent of voters are in favor of a “life exception.” Additionally, she asked him whether he is too out of the mainstream on this issue to win the general election. Verbatim, Kelley inquired, “would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion?” Walker’s response was a lack of denying that he’d never let a mother die if an abortion would save her. This chilled me to the bone. Walker skirted the direct question (surprise, surprise) by going off on a tangent. To be expected, he turned the discussion into attacking Hillary Clinton and her support of Planned Parenthood, but he never returned to the original question to tell the people that he would favor the life of a pregnant woman over aborting the fetus that may kill her.

This downright chills me to the bone. Although Walker never countered the question and state that he prioritizes an unborn fetus over the life of the mother, his avoidance of answering the question is a enough. Guilty.

According to Walker, “Well I’m pro-life. I’ve always been pro-life. I’ve got a position that’s consistent with many Americans out there in that I believe that that is an unborn child that’s in need of protection out there. And I’ve said many times that that unborn child can be protected and there are many alternatives that would protect the life of the mother.”

Many alternatives? It appears that Walker also considers himself to be a doctor as well as a murderer. I’m begging everyone now. Please… do not let this man into the White House.

Reference