In explaining himself, King argues that animals have more rights than fetuses, and suggests that liberals have so devalued life, that a man can rape a young girl, kidnap her, force her to undergo an abortion across state lines, and then “drop her off at the swingset….and that’s not against the law in the United States of America.”
I know Republicans like King don't live in reality. But those things simply aren't legal in the reality the rest of us live in. And again, he doesn't seem to understand the idea of coercion. Leaving aside the creepy scenario he paints, I think King actually comes out looking worse here than he did with his original defense of dogfighting.
He at least admits that he has broken up a dog fight, presumably because it was at a point where it was immoral. He'll break up a dog fight, but he won't allow a woman who has been raped to make a decision about her own body and get an abortion. What a great respect for human life.
There's more going on here, such as the idea that a life maintains value once it's outside the womb of a woman. But not knowing about that idea or just not caring about it is nothing new to a Republican. And there are other instances in which I'm sure King doesn't give a shit about a human life. But the main point here is that King basically thinks a woman's right to control her own body is a right about on par with that of animals' rights.
As a liberal, I guess I'm just too concerned about making sure poor people are dependent upon gov't handouts to understand King's logic for valuing human life properly.