Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Rep. Todd Akin (R): "Legitimate Rape Rarely Causes Pregnancy"

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Rep. Todd Akin (R): "Legitimate Rape Rarely Causes Pregnancy"

    Douchebag.

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...nancy#comments

    Updated 5:18 p.m. — A Republican Senate nominee found himself in hot water on Sunday for suggesting that instances of "legitimate rape" rarely results in pregnancy.

    Rep. Todd Akin, a Republican who's locked in a hard-fought campaign in Missouri to unseat Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, was answering a question regarding his position on abortion rights in instances when a woman is a victim of rape.

    "People always want to make it into one of those things — well, how do you slice this particularly tough ethical question," Akin said in an interview on KTVI-TV, video of which was circulated by the Democratic super PAC American Bridge.

    “First of all, from what I understand from doctors, [pregnancy from rape] is really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down," Akin said.

    Regarding his opinion on whether to allow for an abortion in such instances, Akin added: “But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”

    Akin's comments had an almost immediate impact on Missouri's Senate race. McCaskill wrote on Twitter:


    Claire McCaskill✔
    @clairecmc

    "As a woman & former prosecutor who handled 100s of rape cases,I'm stunned by Rep Akin's comments about victims this AM" bit.ly/NahiHz


    In a statement, Akin said that he had misspoken.

    "In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year," he said.

    Akin emerged earlier this month from a tough three-way primary in Missouri, where he rallied social conservatives behind his candidacy. Democrats actually spent during that primary to help Akin win, viewing the six-term congressman as a less formidable challenger in the general election.

    McCaskill, who was first elected in 2006, has become a top target for Republicans this fall, given President Barack Obama's unpopularity in the state and successive statewide victories for the GOP.

    Republicans need a net gain of four seats this fall in order to take over the Senate in the next Congress, and Democrats must defend 23 seats this fall. But unexpected Republican retirements and races that have become more competitive than expected have boosted Democratic hopes of maintaining their majority.


    Pray tell....what constitutes legit rape?

    These people....eating humble pie is not good enough. Wash it down with a slice of shut your pie hole.

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,259
    Post Thanks / Like
    Progressive backlash from Roman Polanski fans and deniers of Occupy rapes was immediate..... Dana Loesch


  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    What an absurd, outrageous thing to say. He's dead in the water, unless he can win there without women.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,377
    Post Thanks / Like

  5. #5
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    19,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    What an absurd, outrageous thing to say. He's dead in the water, unless he can win there without women.
    I just read that Claire McCaskill essentially donated to his primary campaign (by running negative ads against his opponents) in hopes of facing him in the general election presumably with the the hope that he'd say exactly something like this.

    Decent strategy in retrospect.

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by crasherino View Post
    I just read that Claire McCaskill essentially donated to his primary campaign (by running negative ads against his opponents) in hopes of facing him in the general election presumably with the the hope that he'd say exactly something like this.

    Decent strategy in retrospect.
    Yep

  7. #7
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    How hard is it to say that "cases of rape and incest" account for a tiny fraction of all abortions perfomed, and hence is not a legitimate basis for crafting all abortion policy?

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    How hard is it to say that "cases of rape and incest" account for a tiny fraction of all abortions perfomed, and hence is not a legitimate basis for crafting all abortion policy?
    Hard, when you're being questioned specifically on why you oppose an exception for those few cases

  9. #9
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Hard, when you're being questioned specifically on why you oppose an exception for those few cases
    Well, thats actually rather easy, if not exactly popular. The life created cannot be held to blame for how it was created anymore than an illegal immigrant brought over as a child can be held to blame for being in the U.S. Right?

    Personally, I've give the exception in all cases, if only to get past it to work on the broader and more statisticly relevant issue of abortion-as-birth-control/family planning, where no rape, incest or life threatening condition exists.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Well, thats actually rather easy, if not exactly popular. The life created cannot be held to blame for how it was created anymore than an illegal immigrant brought over as a child can be held to blame for being in the U.S. Right?


    Yep, that would be the easy (easily consistent, anyway) answer - and he got around to it - but it comes with the political liability of appearing callous towards women who suffered from rape or incest. So to brush up on his "I care about women" bonafides, he wanted to make clear that opposing the exception isn't really bad for women, because they can't get pregnant in those situations anyway

    Personally, I've give the exception in all cases, if only to get past it to work on the broader and more statisticly relevant issue of abortion-as-birth-control/family planning, where no rape, incest or life threatening condition exists.
    A much smarter move

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    So to brush up on his "I care about women" bonafides....
    Also an easy, if not exactly common, answer.

    "I care about women, but I also care about life. Murdering a womans abusive husband and a girls abusive father MIGHT help that woman, but that wouldn't make it right.

    In this case, the life created is also a victim of the crime, and then a victim of the victim."

    Not saying I hold this view, btw, but if I WAS a right-to-lifer, this would be the type of tact I'd take in public debate. It's not about being callous to the victim, it's reminding people that (according to pro-lifers) the thing inside is ALSO a life and victim, and should not be callously killed, thus becomming a victim twice.

    Pro-Life needs to stay with the base argument that a Fetus is a life, and go from there.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Also an easy, if not exactly common, answer.

    "I care about women, but I also care about life. Murdering a womans abusive husband and a girls abusive father MIGHT help that woman, but that wouldn't make it right.

    In this case, the life created is also a victim of the crime, and then a victim of the victim."

    Not saying I hold this view, btw, but if I WAS a right-to-lifer, this would be the type of tact I'd take in public debate. It's not about being callous to the victim, it's reminding people that (according to pro-lifers) the thing inside is ALSO a life and victim, and should not be callously killed, thus becomming a victim twice.

    Pro-Life needs to stay with the base argument that a Fetus is a life, and go from there.
    Agreed. Problem (for them) is that doesn't sell well politically, so they look for ways to avoid saying that. Which leads to moments like Akin's

  13. #13
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Agreed. Problem (for them) is that doesn't sell well politically, so they look for ways to avoid saying that. Which leads to moments like Akin's
    Yup, agreed.

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,592
    Post Thanks / Like
    That guys statements are embarrassing. That said I thought abortion was decided law in America.

  15. #15
    Practice Squad
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Rockland County
    Posts
    399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Well, thats actually rather easy, if not exactly popular. The life created cannot be held to blame for how it was created anymore than an illegal immigrant brought over as a child can be held to blame for being in the U.S. Right?

    Personally, I've give the exception in all cases, if only to get past it to work on the broader and more statisticly relevant issue of abortion-as-birth-control/family planning, where no rape, incest or life threatening condition exists.
    Personally, I've give the exception in all cases, if only to get past it to work on the broader and more statisticly relevant issue of ...

    I honestly thought as I was reading this that you were going to say something like:

    ...things that matter more to our country's future.
    ...the economy.
    ...taxes.
    ...the deficit.
    ...jobs.




    I just read that Claire McCaskill essentially donated to his primary campaign (by running negative ads against his opponents) in hopes of facing him in the general election presumably with the the hope that he'd say exactly something like this.

    Decent strategy in retrospect.
    genius. Maybe we'll start seeing more of this in the primary rounds. Democrats could have used Citizens United/PACs to run ads for Michele Bachmann (if more of this hasn't already been done) and so on.



    Anyway, on the subject of rape pregnancies I think history tells us plenty. About current/recent rape campaigns in Africa, Prima Noctus (or so Mel Gibson would have us believe, and made our blood boil while doing it too),... I think rape, and the possible pregnancy consequences of it, are even in the Bible. Crazy stuff what this guy was saying. I think he is serving on one of the science committiees?!

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Republicans just cannot miss those icebergs.........


  17. #17
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Meanwhile....

    Minnesota lawmaker urged to step aside after rest-stop liaison with 17-year-old boy

    Published August 21, 2012

    Associated Press

    A Minnesota state lawmaker who authorities say admitted having a liaison with a 17-year-old boy at a rest stop faced calls from party leaders on Monday to give up his re-election bid.

    Rep. Kerry Gauthier, 56, hasn't been charged in the July incident, and authorities said he wouldn't be because the boy was older than 16, the legal age of consent, and no money was exchanged. Police say the teenager responded to the lawmaker's Craigslist ad for "no strings attached" sex.

    Gauthier admitted to the liaison, according to police reports made public late last week. The teen told police the two had oral sex, according to the reports.

    The scandal has hurt Democrats' hopes of retaking at least one chamber of the Legislature. They need to pick up at least six seats in the House, and Gauthier's Duluth-area seat is usually reliably Democratic. But if he drops out, any Democrat seeking to replace him would have to run as a write-in candidate, making the race much more difficult to win.

    Still, Democratic leaders called on Gauthier to withdraw from the race. House Minority Leader Paul Thissen, D-Minneapolis, said he was "deeply disappointed" in Gauthier's conduct and wants him to step aside.

    "As I shared with Rep. Gauthier, I believe he should withdraw from the race for re-election," Thissen said in a statement released by his office.

    Less than an hour later, state Democratic Party Chairman Ken Martin echoed Thissen's comments, although neither man asked Gauthier to leave office before his term ends in January.

    Gauthier hasn't commented to reporters on the incident. A call to his cellphone rolled to voicemail on Monday. Thissen's statement said he expects Gauthier to "address these issues publicly and soon."

    Gauthier was hospitalized for an undisclosed condition until last weekend, which prompted Thissen to wait to issue his statement. House Speaker Kurt Zellers, a Republican, on Friday urged Gauthier to resign.

    Gauthier was elected in 2010 with 73 percent of the vote. He is not married.

    Duluth City Councilor Jay Fosle has already filed paperwork to run as a write-in candidate against Gauthier and Republican nominee Travis Silver.
    I'm curious though. The man isn't married, the "boy" is of legal age of consent, and (D) is supposedly the party of homosexual rights and tolerance.

    If so, why should he step-down?

  18. #18
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,592
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Meanwhile....



    I'm curious though. The man isn't married, the "boy" is of legal age of consent, and (D) is supposedly the party of homosexual rights and tolerance.

    If so, why should he step-down?
    Maybe because it is disgusting and sickening for a 40+ year old man to have sex with a 17 yr old kid regardless of the specifics of the particular law of that state?

  19. #19
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    Maybe because it is disgusting and sickening for a 40+ year old man to have sex with a 17 yr old kid regardless of the specifics of the particular law of that state?
    But 40 year old men have sex with 17 year old women all the time in States in which it's legal (and I'm sure in States in which it's not as well), and no one bats an eye. I know one man, for example, who had sex with a 36 year old women when he was 17. Cougars, I belive it is called.

    Are you suggesting that the (D) part is going to actively descriminate against this man's choice, as a consenting adult, to a homosexual lifestyle and legal activity?

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,592
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    But 40 year old men have sex with 17 year old women all the time in States in which it's legal (and I'm sure in States in which it's not as well), and no one bats an eye. I know one man, for example, who had sex with a 36 year old women when he was 17. Cougars, I belive it is called.

    Are you suggesting that the (D) part is going to actively descriminate against this man's choice, as a consenting adult, to a homosexual lifestyle and legal activity?
    First of all I'm shocked that the D party would call for anyone's resignation for a immoral or unethical behavior. That has not been that party's MO in the past. Charlie Rangel is the first person in 30 years to be censured by the house in a completely bipartisan vote yet he has been endorsed by all of the D party leaders. If any politician has sexual encounters with children under the age of 18 they should be shamed out of office.

    I'm not sure what to make of the scenario of the 17year old boy banging a 36 year old cougar though. For some reason that doesn't bother me at all. Maybe if the 36 year old woman was a Senator or politician I'd be bothered by it.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us