Todd Akin - "Women don't get pregnant from "legitimate rape"" (See MOD REMINDER!

jill_valentine

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-rep-todd-akin-no-pregnancy-from-legitimate-rape-20120819,0,7447581.story

"It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that's really rare,” Akin said, referring to conception following a rape. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. 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 of the rapist, and not attacking the child."

Folks, there is something very wrong in the United States of America. I've been ambivalent about the "war on women" buzz phrase that's been doing the rounds just because it sounds so melodramatic, but it's getting harder and harder to interpret the Republican Party's attitude to women as anything less than contemptuous.

His comments don't simply amount to a dramatic ignorance of biology - his thought process here is quite clear. To wit: "If a woman gets pregnant as a result of rape, it's her fault. By failing to somehow magically reject her attacker's sperm, that whore consented. So she can't come crying to us for an abortion now." And he's not at all alone in that in his party, he's just too stupid to wrap it in a more digestable rationalisation.

This guy is a Republican nominee for senate, and not only that, he's the leading candidate in the race - he is not just some backwater yokel gibbering to himself harmlessly in the corner. His thought process on this stuff matters. But only to women. And shur, what would they know anyway.

This is, without exaggeration, the most chilling thing I've heard from a grown ass adult in a position of power in a long, long time.

IMPORTANT MOD REMINDER: Please read and comply with MOD REMINDER before posting on this thread. Off-topic posts violate both the forum charter and that mod instruction.

efb

I often feel so lucky I live in the EU

jill_valentine

efb wrote: »

I often feel so lucky I live in the EU

I've been voicing my disquiet about this on twitter this evening, and it's been pointed out to me repeatedly that Ireland doesn't have abortion full stop. But that's one thing - politics in Ireland moves at a glacial pace and the idea of separating Church and state is a pretty young one here. In the US, the extremes both big parties have adopted seems to be driving it backwards.

Now that terrorism and state security isn't as sexy to soapbox at, it seems that women's issues are at the forefront again and if this is the standard of the debate, it doesn't bode well.

Akin's only defense on this is that he "misspoke". I fail to see how. He said exactly what he, and many of his mates, evidently think. Whether it's abortion or contraception or even just whether somebody is allowed to use the word "vagina" in public, this guy didn't "misspeak". It's a perfect reflection of his personal philosophy, and one that's not a novelty to the Republican party by any means either:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Lawmaker-Says-Rape-Can-t-Cause-Pregnancy-3036411.php

Republican politicians seek to deny women access to contraception while turning a blind eye to publicly funded Viagra prescriptions, hold victims responsible for their own rapes, hold them at fault if they become pregnant afterwards, and then call them murderers if they seek an abortion in the aftermath.

They may not call it what it is, they may not even recognise it for what it is themselves, but the sheer scorn the GOP seems to exhibit towards women at every possible opportunity is chilling, and they're hardly even bothering to gussy it up anymore.

I have no particular love for the Democrats, but my God. Spare a thought for the women of Missouri, because this idiot wants to decide what's best for them.

poeticseraphim

jill_valentine wrote: »

I've been voicing my disquiet about this on twitter this evening, and it's been pointed out to me repeatedly that Ireland doesn't have abortion full stop. But that's one thing - politics in Ireland moves at a glacial pace and the idea of separating Church and state is a pretty young one here. In the US, the extremes both big parties have adopted seems to be driving it backwards.

Now that terrorism and state security isn't as sexy to soapbox at, it seems that women's issues are at the forefront again and if this is the standard of the debate, it doesn't bode well.

Akin's only defense on this is that he "misspoke". I fail to see how. He said exactly what he, and many of his mates, evidently think. Whether it's abortion or contraception or even just whether somebody is allowed to use the word "vagina" in public, this guy didn't "misspeak". It's a perfect reflection of his personal philosophy, and one that's not a novelty to the Republican party by any means either:

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Lawmaker-Says-Rape-Can-t-Cause-Pregnancy-3036411.php

Republican politicians seek to deny women access to contraception while turning a blind eye to publicly funded Viagra prescriptions, hold victims responsible for their own rapes, hold them at fault if they become pregnant afterwards, and then call them murderers if they seek an abortion in the aftermath.

They may not call it what it is, they may not even recognise it for what it is themselves, but the sheer scorn the GOP seems to exhibit towards women at every possible opportunity is chilling, and they're hardly even bothering to gussy it up anymore.

I have no particular love for the Democrats, but my God. Spare a thought for the women of Missouri, because this idiot wants to decide what's best for them.

He said the EU not Ireland.....we do have crazy people in the EU and Ireland too though.

Yes i worry about the trickle down affect of such attitudes in society...i don't know that Ireland is any better.

But it is statements like this which reveal a hatred of women. It happens here too.....and often goes unchallenged and the physical force often used in regards to women trying to TRAVEL abroad to have an abortion even when the child is not going to go full term is inexcusable .

As i female i can see some women becoming radicalized in response....which in itself is not positive.

If we applied the same types of profiling to white men as they do to minorities on crimes of peadophilia or rape or violence there would be uproar. The excuse of statistics for clearly racist and sexist policies are risable. If we applied the same to white people then white men would routinely find their computers randomly searched for child porn and men going into nightclubs would be routinely searched for date rape drugs etc etc.

Those policies would expose the racism inherent in such profiling against minorities.

Women don't vote for republicans ..they obviously feel these policies will galvanise men ..also Paul Ryans stances on contraception are ridiculous and probably lies anyway ..but lack of contraception reduces a country to third world status economically within a couple of generations and family planning is a driving economic force we see this in differences in India and china..neither WAY of doing it is fair but it says a lot..contracetion made it possible for women to fuel the economy in ways previously never imagined....

It is like the republican party are trying to bring about some kind of second apartheid..make women poor

southsiderosie

What makes this situation even more farcical is that this man sits on the House committee for SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. You could not make this up.

Honestly, I feel like this is the straw that broke the camel's back. These people are dead serious: they want to end abortion, end access to legal birth control, and end access to science-based sex ed (or science-based anything, it seems). Every woman I know is outraged, and this even includes relatively conservative friends of mine in the South and Midwest. Certainly this is not a representative sample, but there is a clear war on women's reproductive rights right now in the US, and I feel like women are finally starting to wake up to it.

I made a political donation today to Senator Claire McCaskill's campaign (Akin's opponent), and I will send her a check every month if it will help keep reactionary nut jobs like him out of the Senate.

southsiderosie

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Women don't vote for republicans ..they obviously feel these policies will galvanise men

This is not true. Women DO vote for Republicans. Personally, I do not know why any woman who works full time out of the home or uses birth control would ever vote for the present-day iteration of the Republican party; it seems akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.

Hunchback

jill_valentine wrote: »

I've been voicing my disquiet about this on twitter this evening, and it's been pointed out to me repeatedly that Ireland doesn't have abortion.

Abortion IS legal in Ireland.



We DO have abortion in Ireland, in circumstances where there is a real and substantial threat to the life of the mother - ie, in cases that fall within the parameters of the 'x' case.

But nobody or no hospitals will perform them, because, as I understand it, it would have to be 'okayed' by a medical professional who is of the opinion that the life of the mother would be at risk if the child was carried to full term, but opinions are subjective, and the fear is that any medical 'opinion' could be refuted, and the doctor in question could leave themselves open to litigation or worse.

sorry if that is digressing too much

southsiderosie

southsiderosie wrote: »

What makes this situation even more farcical is that this man sits on the House committee for SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. You could not make this up.

Honestly, I feel like this is the straw that broke the camel's back. These people are dead serious: they want to end abortion, end access to legal birth control, and end access to science-based sex ed (or science-based anything, it seems). Every woman I know is outraged, and this even includes relatively conservative friends of mine in the South and Midwest. Certainly this is not a representative sample, but there is a clear war on women's reproductive rights right now in the US, and I feel like women are finally starting to wake up to it.

I made a political donation today to Senator Claire McCaskill's campaign (Akin's opponent), and I will send her a check every month if it will help keep reactionary nut jobs like him out of the Senate.

I just want to know why the Republicans have decided to destory themselves. It's just staggering that contraception has come along as a "highly-charged" political issue in 2012.

matthew8

Todd Akin messed up his words, but what he said is true. If a woman is raped and she wants to prevent a potential pregnancy, she absolutely can. If she can't stop it, then the way Akin sees it is that there is a human being inside the woman and that human being's right to life is more important than the woman's decision on whether or not she wants to have a child. It's not the way I see it, but I know where he's coming from. The point he's making here is that often when a woman gets pregnant from so-called rape, it may not be rape at all, but an excuse. It can be very easy to convict someone of rape (there was a high-profile case recently when a guy called Brian Banks was released from jail after 6 years when the girl he "raped" admitted they didn't even have sex, but because Brian Banks is a tall muscular black guy he was doomed in the original trial), so it's an easy way out if the woman is dumb enough to let a pregnancy happen that she didn't want.

jill_valentine

matthew8 wrote: »

Todd Akin messed up his words, but what he said is true. If a woman is raped and she wants to prevent a potential pregnancy, she absolutely can. If she can't stop it, then the way Akin sees it is that there is a human being inside the woman and that human being's right to life is more important than the woman's decision on whether or not she wants to have a child.

That is absolutely not what he said or meant.

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

He believes that a woman will not get pregnant from a "legitimate" rape. This halfwit think that, if she just wishes hard enough, her body will do the work, making medical intervention unnecessary. Decadent even.

First of all, his implications about a "legitimate" rape are incredibly troubling given how hard he and his chums have worked to try to redefine and narrow the term so less victims will seek help.

Second of all, he's not talking about a woman taking the MAP or what have you. This guy, this member of a Science committee, believes that a woman has some magical internal resistance to unwanted pregnancy. And that complete misunderstanding of how the female human body functions is not unique to him in his party, there's an impressive list of comparable gaffes from his ilk on the subject, and they're almost invariably - funnily enough - founded on the notion that the victim is in someway at fault. They don't understand women's health and they aren't bothered learning, but they still feel qualified to dictate on the subject to actual women. They just "assume" that it works the way that suits their ideology, so rather than like, wiki it, by god everybody else will just have to deal with what the consequences of their wilful ignorance.

Even if you very charitably discount all of that - bear in mind, his is the party that wants to limit access to exactly the kind of resources that would actually prevent a victim from having to take her rapists baby to term. There is absolutely no equivocation or excuses or justification for this. The man is an idiot and it chills me to my bones that decisions made by this imbecile affect other people. Somebody who does not know how a woman's body works gets deal in laws on the subject for a living.

And we're not talking semantics here, or enjoyable bonuses. This isn't a question of whether or not he can find a g spot - this is basic 1st Year biology stuff about the fundamental mechanics of reproduction. He did not misspeak. He was not misunderstood. He said exactly what he believes and what he believes is dangerously, terrifyingly incorrect.

matthew8

jill_valentine wrote: »

matthew8 wrote: »

Todd Akin messed up his words, but what he said is true. If a woman is raped and she wants to prevent a potential pregnancy, she absolutely can. If she can't stop it, then the way Akin sees it is that there is a human being inside the woman and that human being's right to life is more important than the woman's decision on whether or not she wants to have a child.

That is absolutely not what he said or meant.

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

He believes that a woman will not get pregnant from a "legitimate" rape. This halfwit think that, if she just wishes hard enough, her body will do the wok, making medical intervention unnecessary. Decadent even.

First of all, his implications about a "legitimate" rape are incredibly troubling given how hard he and his chums have worked to try to redefine and narrow the term.

Second of all, he's not talking about a woman taking the MAP or what have you - this guy, this member of a Science committee - believes that a woman has some magical internal resistance to unwanted pregnancy. And that complete misunderstanding of how the female human body functions is not unique to him in his party - they just "assume" that's how it works because it suits their ideology, so rather than like, wiki it, by god everybody else will just have to live with that.

Even if you very charitably discount all of that - bear in mind, his is the party that wants to limit access to exactly the kind of resources that would actually prevent her from taking her rapists baby to term. There is absolutely no equivocation or excuses or justification for this. The man is an idiot and it chills me to my bones that decisions made by this imbecile affect other people. Somebody who does not know how a woman's body works gets deal in laws on the subject for a living.

And we're not talking semantics here, this isn't a question of whether or not he can find a g spot - this is basic 1st Year biology stuff. He did not misspeak. He was not misunderstood. He said exactly what he believes and what he believes is dangerously, terrifyingly incorrect.

My mistake. I thought he was referring to contraception as the way to prevent it, but I looked it up and apparently he wants the morning after pill gone too. But if this madman gets into the senate, you can point the finger at Claire McCaskill, he may not have won the primary without her.

Black Swan

Does this mean that Republican US Senate candidate Todd Akin suggested with his pseudo-biology statement to the media that 32,101 women were not in fact raped each year in the US because it resulted in a pregnancy?

"The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year" in the United States (US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health).

And Republican Representative Todd Akin currently sits on the US House Science and Technology committee?

southsiderosie

matthew8 wrote: »

Todd Akin messed up his words, but what he said is true. If a woman is raped and she wants to prevent a potential pregnancy, she absolutely can. If she can't stop it, then the way Akin sees it is that there is a human being inside the woman and that human being's right to life is more important than the woman's decision on whether or not she wants to have a child. It's not the way I see it, but I know where he's coming from. The point he's making here is that often when a woman gets pregnant from so-called rape, it may not be rape at all, but an excuse. It can be very easy to convict someone of rape (there was a high-profile case recently when a guy called Brian Banks was released from jail after 6 years when the girl he "raped" admitted they didn't even have sex, but because Brian Banks is a tall muscular black guy he was doomed in the original trial), so it's an easy way out if the woman is dumb enough to let a pregnancy happen that she didn't want.

That is not what he said at all. He said that if a woman was 'legitimately raped' that her body would naturally resist becoming pregnant. And I quote:

“First of all, from what I understand from doctors, (pregnancy from rape) is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in a clip posted to YouTube by the Democratic super PAC American Bridge. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

This man sits on the House Science & Technology committee and he spouts this kind of nonsense? There is no excuse: this guy is a nut job.

As for a woman wanting to prevent unwanted pregnancy after being raped, the best way to do that would be to take the morning after pill...which Akin wants to ban. Again, and I quote:

“As far as I’m concerned, the morning-after pill is a form of abortion, and I think we just shouldn’t have abortion in this country,” Akin said Wednesday, the day after his victory in the Republican primary, in an interview with Kansas City radio host Greg Knapp.

So according to Representative Akin, a woman's body will reject an unwanted pregnancy if it is from a 'legitimate' rape, but if it is not a legitimate rape and she gets pregnant, well she is **** out of luck.

EDIT - well that's what I get for stepping away in the middle of posting :pac:

matthew8

The fact that Akin sits on a science committee has nothing to do with this story. He sits on the space & aeronautics and the energy & environment subcommittees, so he's not on a committee relating to abortion.

jill_valentine

Black Swan wrote: »

Does this mean that Republican US Senate candidate Todd Akin suggested with his pseudo-biology statement to the media that 32,101 women were not in fact raped each year in the US because it resulted in a pregnancy?

Don't you see? Secretly, they must have sort of wanted it, or they wouldn't be pregnant at all! Probably wanted to "trap" some decent, God fearing man in a marriage, those sluts.

southsiderosie

matthew8 wrote: »

The fact that Akin sits on a science committee has nothing to do with this story. He sits on the space & aeronautics and the energy & environment subcommittees, so he's not on a committee relating to abortion.

I think the fact that this man sits on a committee that allocated funding for scientific research, yet makes such outlandish statements about basic human biology is VERY relevant to the story: it shows us how utterly useless our elected representatives are.

As for his committee, and I quote AGAIN:

The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has jurisdiction over all energy research, development, and demonstration, and projects therefor, and all federally owned or operated non-military energy laboratories; astronautical research and development, including resources, personnel, equipment, and facilities; civil aviation research and development; environmental research and development; marine research; commercial application of energy technology; National Institute of Standards and Technology, standardization of weights and measures and the metric system; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Science Foundation; National Weather Service; outer space, including exploration and control thereof; science scholarships; scientific research, development, and demonstration, and projects therefor. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology shall review and study on a continuing basis laws, programs, and Government activities relating to non-military research and development.

The NSF is a key source of funding for academic research in the biological and life sciences, engineering, and social science.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand where you are getting your information from because everything you have posted in this thread has been utterly wrong.

matthew8

Just because he hasn't a clue about the female body has nothing to do with his competence. Perfectly competent people often have bizarre thoughts.

jill_valentine

matthew8 wrote: »

Just because he hasn't a clue about the female body has nothing to do with his competence. Perfectly competent people often have bizarre thoughts.

If his job didn't involve legislation dictating on the subject of female bodies and related medical sciences, then I'd agree with you.

matthew8

The committee is only very loosely related to abortion. Besides, if that issue ever came up on that committee and was discussed, he would definitely have been better informed than he is.

Memnoch

I think when you see someone trying to defend things so utterly beyond the pale as this, either by minimising or trying to obfuscate the issue, it really goes a long way to illuminate their thought process.

Republicans or GOP supporters who are trying to defend this guy are nothing but pure ideologues in my book.

This is the perfect example of why no one should vote for a republican ever. They really want to drag the US and the rest of the world along with it back into the medieval ages financially and back to the dark ages scientifically.

Black Swan

In 2011 Republican Representative Todd Akin co-authored a US House bill to redefine rape to forcible rape. Over 200 Republicans in the US House voted for the bill, but it failed to pass the US Senate (which the Republicans did not control in 2011).

Today we find out how Republican Todd Akin really wants to redefine rape if he wins the US Senate seat: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down;" i.e., if a women experiences a "legitimate rape," and pregnancy results, the rape was in fact illegitimate (was not a rape for the 32,000+ raped women per year in the US that became pregnant after being raped).

Brian?

matthew8 wrote: »

Just because he hasn't a clue about the female body has nothing to do with his competence. Perfectly competent people often have bizarre thoughts.

Are you serious? The guy wants to legislate female reproductive health without knowing how it work.

I really don't see how you defend his stupidity.

hooradiation

matthew8 wrote: »

The fact that Akin sits on a science committee has nothing to do with this story. He sits on the space & aeronautics and the energy & environment subcommittees, so he's not on a committee relating to abortion.

And to borrow a cliché - How a woman gets pregnant isn't exactly rocket science.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Jonny7

Well, when you analyse it, he is making policy based on an invisible wizard in the sky, male bigotry and plain old ignorance. However this is sadly more reflective of his voter base. Bipolar America.

molloyjh

poeticseraphim wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And here-in lies the single biggest problem in American politics today. Both sides driving each other further apart which inevitably leads to this kind of thing.

Deleted User wrote: »

I just want to know why the Republicans have decided to destory themselves. It's just staggering that contraception has come along as a "highly-charged" political issue in 2012.

The Republicans are appealing to a certain audience. This is a sales pitch. Nothing more. A badly conceived one obviously (no pun intended).

matthew8 wrote: »

My mistake. I thought he was referring to contraception as the way to prevent it, but I looked it up and apparently he wants the morning after pill gone too. But if this madman gets into the senate, you can point the finger at Claire McCaskill, he may not have won the primary without her.

What!? No, you can point the finger of blame at a ridiculously stupid (and I try to use that word sparingly) electorate for electing such a total numpty.

matthew8 wrote: »

The committee is only very loosely related to abortion. Besides, if that issue ever came up on that committee and was discussed, he would definitely have been better informed than he is.

I think you'll find the point is that he is involved in a scientific committee and has very little real grasp on science. Abortion and the female reproductive system is where this came to light, but if he can't get that right what chance does he have with far more complicated scientific topics!?

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

We're not talking about American attitude to abortion. People can be pro-life without being that daft. We're making a point about this guys attitude to rape and basic knowledge of human reproduction, not abortion.

karma_

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Why are you banging on about Ireland? Is this not about an episode that happened in the US?

Perhaps you would be so kind as to grace us with your opinion of it instead of waxing on about how much worse it is in Ireland. It is after all an American story, in the US political section.

Amerika

A stupid and ignorant comment on Akin ‘s part. Might just cause him to lose his bid against McCaskill. Every Republican has or will denounce his comments. And Akin has now issued a lengthy statement saying "it’s clear that I misspoke in this interview." IMO, if he were a Democrat, that would pretty much be the end of it. Unfortunately it dominate in the news spotlight for some time by the media who is all too willing to do the bidding of the Obama administration and the Democratic party.

molloyjh

Amerika wrote: »

A stupid and ignorant comment on Akin ‘s part. Might just cause him to lose his bid against McCaskill. Every Republican has or will denounce his comments. And Akin has now issued a lengthy statement saying "it’s clear that I misspoke in this interview." IMO, if he were a Democrat, that would pretty much be the end of it. Unfortunately it dominate in the news spotlight for some time by the media who is all too willing to do the bidding of the Obama administration and the Democratic party.

I'd hope that if anyone in any party said it that the media would make a huge deal of it. It's a very stupid and irresponsible statement to make regardless of political leaning.

Has there been anything like this on the Democrat side that was brushed under the carpet?

Amerika

molloyjh wrote: »

I'd hope that if anyone in any party said it that the media would make a huge deal of it. It's a very stupid and irresponsible statement to make regardless of political leaning.

"hope" LOL. Yeah, let's look at Joe Biden's "They Gonna Put Ya'll Back In Chains" told to a mostly black audience. If it had been a Republican vice presidential candidate who said that, we would have endless discussions of how stupid the person is and can they possibly govern.

Instead the media is covering for Biden, and trying to figure out how to change the 2008 message of Hope and Change into the 2012 message of Hope in Chains.

Has there been anything like this on the Democrat side that was brushed under the carpet?

It's early Monday morning here... wait a couple of hours.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen (a Democrat), just introduced Obama recently stating that the president "led the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice." Shades of "Mission Accomplished?" Bet you haven't even heard of this from the media.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MarkHitide

matthew8 wrote: »

My mistake. I thought he was referring to contraception as the way to prevent it, but I looked it up and apparently he wants the morning after pill gone too. But if this madman gets into the senate, you can point the finger at Claire McCaskill, he may not have won the primary without her.

Classy footwork. Still get to blame a woman.

posts deleted - stop bickering and stay on topic please

matthew8

MarkHitide wrote: »

Classy footwork. Still get to blame a woman.

Not even Sarah Palin endorsed this guy, he would never have been nominated if it wasn't for Claire McCaskill's clever million dollar ad campaign about how Akin is too conservative during the primaries. I couldn't give a damn that she's a woman.

spank_inferno

Permabear has a very good point.

Congressman Akin is an idiot, that much we can agree...

However its hard to condemn his opinions when we live here in a country no more progressive when it comes to a woman's right to choose.

Our politicians are just smarter about keeping their traps shut on such matters and are happy to leave tricky social issues where the are.

karma_

spank_inferno wrote: »

Permabear has a very good point.

Congressman Akin is an idiot, that much we can agree...

However its hard to condemn his opinions when we live here in a country no more progressive when it comes to a woman's right to choose.

Our politicians are just smarter about keeping their traps shut on such matters and are happy to leave tricky social issues where the are.

Can we not be indignant about both whether it happens here or elsewhere?

Can we not apportion criticism where something is as worthy of criticism as this, and then be afforded the opportunity of criticising our own when it's warranted?

It's also more than a bit hypocritical when the poster in question is active in another thread criticising Russia over the Pussy Riot affair (in that case warranted), so it sounds to me he does not follow his own advice.

spank_inferno

karma_ wrote: »

Can we not be indignant about both whether it happens here or elsewhere?

Can we not apportion criticism where something is as worthy of criticism as this, and then be afforded the opportunity of criticising our own when it's warranted?

Yes, of course Karma.
(I didn't say otherwise!)

molloyjh

Amerika wrote: »

"hope" LOL. Yeah, let's look at Joe Biden's "They Gonna Put Ya'll Back In Chains" told to a mostly black audience. If it had been a Republican vice presidential candidate who said that, we would have endless discussions of how stupid the person is and can they possibly govern.

Instead the media is covering for Biden, and trying to figure out how to change the 2008 message of Hope and Change into the 2012 message of Hope in Chains.



It's early Monday morning here... wait a couple of hours.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen (a Democrat), just introduced Obama recently stating that the president "led the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice." Shades of "Mission Accomplished?" Bet you haven't even heard of this from the media.

I wouldn't class either of those anywhere near as badly as the Akin comment tbh. Bidens poor choice of words to convey a particular message and Senator Shaheen providing a technically accurate statement without context (deliberately) aren't as bad as claiming that womens bodies can decide when to get pregnant and when not to, and that there is different forms of rape, one of which is "legitimate".

It's as funny and appalling (yes both at the same time) as the Polish ant-semite who found out his grandmother was a Jew.

spank_inferno wrote: »

Permabear has a very good point.

Congressman Akin is an idiot, that much we can agree...

However its hard to condemn his opinions when we live here in a country no more progressive when it comes to a woman's right to choose.

Our politicians are just smarter about keeping their traps shut on such matters and are happy to leave tricky social issues where the are.

I don't give a fiddlers about the abortion aspect of this though, and I'm not sure it's the main point most people are making. Akins comments on rape and reproduction are the issue.

hooradiation

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Ohh look, it's false equivalence theatre!
Was wondering when this would happen.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

molloyjh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear.

And then there was the one about the flag on Mars.

And she's getting large majorities when getting elected, with her percentages in the 70s!?

I'm sorry, but with stuff like these it's no wonder America gets a lot of stick across the globe.

southsiderosie

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

spank_inferno wrote: »

Permabear has a very good point.

Congressman Akin is an idiot, that much we can agree...

However its hard to condemn his opinions when we live here in a country no more progressive when it comes to a woman's right to choose.

Our politicians are just smarter about keeping their traps shut on such matters and are happy to leave tricky social issues where the are.

These posts seem to presume that all Irish people support the fact that Ireland's abortion laws are so restrictive. But that is not the case - many Irish are frustrated by these rules, and the general conservatism of Ireland's social policy. So why wouldn't - or shouldn't - people criticize the same kind of conservatism in the US?

This is like saying I as an American can't condemn, say, the Russian invasion of Georgia because the American government invaded Iraq. I didn't support the Iraq war - I protested against it actually - and it sickens me that my tax dollars have been used to support such folly. So I don't think that I should be somehow blocked from critiquing the behavior of other warmongering governments just because I live under a warmongering government.

The one thing that religious conservatives have in common - no matter their faith or where they live - is that they try to control women's bodies and their sexuality. So I think every country has people who think like Akin; the only difference is, there are more voters willing to support these kinds of views in the US than in most other Western democracies.

20Cent

Thinking that women can't get pregnant from rape and not knowing north and south Vietnam were united sounds like a false equivalence tbh.

jill_valentine

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Did he indeed...?

southsiderosie

jill_valentine wrote: »

Did he indeed...?

He 'clarified'...and then he had to clarify his clarification to note that he did actually understand how babies were made.

Sigh.

Amerika

In a phone interview this morning with the National Review Online, Mitt Romney said that Representative Todd Akin’s recent comment on rape is "inexcusable." He continued: "Congressman’s Akin comments on rape are insulting, inexcusable, and, frankly, wrong." "Like millions of other Americans, we found them to be offensive." And said "I have an entirely different view." "What he said is entirely without merit and he should correct it."

That should be the end of it from the media trying to tie Romney/Ryan into Akin’s foolish comments. You’d think wouldn’t you. :rolleyes:

jill_valentine

He "clarified" nothing. He was perfectly clear to start with and honestly, I find his attempt at damage control so piss poor as to double the insult.

He said he misspoke in an "off the cuff" remark. He did no such thing. He said exactly what he meant, no two ways about it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

molloyjh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You'll always have crackpots in every country. The good thing about the systems in the EU in general is that these people end up being marginalised and rarely have any real power. Unfortunately it seems that in the States they are driving towards these crackpots, not marginalising them.

As was pointed out earlier this kind of comment isn't a one off from this guy. He's already tried to "redefine rape" before (personally I tihnk rape is pretty simple to define so I don't know why it would need redefining). And hasn't he had a go at NBC before saying they have a "hatred of God" or something similar?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/28/lawmaker-apologizes-for-liberal-hatred-god-quip/

And it's not like we haven't heard this kind of thing before re rape and pregnancy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/20/rep-todd-akin-is-wrong-about-rape-and-pregnancy-but-hes-not-alone/

BTW he hasn't apologised from what I can see. He has said he misspoke (a very specific kind of misspeaking if I may say so). Also he referred to doctors in the original quote. I'd love to know what doctors he was talking to on the matter...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-missouri-rep-todd-akin-says-he-misspoke-on-rape-and-pregnancy-20120819,0,512566.story

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

southsiderosie

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The EU is not Ireland?