National Review Editors defend Richard Mourdock on abortion

When Bill Buckley, the late and legendary conservative writer, founded the National Review in 1955, he said he wanted it to "stand athwart History, yelling Stop!". His successors at the magazine have today published an editorial in which they defend Richard Mourdock, the Republican nominee from Indiana, said this week: “I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”

The editorial is headlined: "Reading God's Will in Indiana". And here's the final paragraph: "Mourdock has hurt himself by bringing attention, clumsily, to a position he holds that places him in a distinct minority. That position is, however, more than defensible, and it follows logically from very widely shared pro-life premises. President Obama’s support for partial-birth abortion, taxpayer-funded abortion, late-term abortion, and a type of infanticide is also an unpopular set of positions that follows logically from certain premises, albeit very different ones. Some of these views have actually been the law of the land, and others have a greater likelihood of becoming law than a ban on abortions in cases of rape. What a pity that the media’s interest in politicians who espouse unpopular views on abortion is so selective."

We have a simple question for Mourdock and the irony-immune editors of the Review.

What if God doesn't exist?