Posted on 08/20/2012 7:55:26 PM PDT by sagar
Please ignore this if you are so "outraged" about Akin that you cannot dissect things more rationally and logically.
Akin made a legitimate mistake, in his choice of words. There are no legitimate rapes. A rape is a rape, whether it was legitimate or statutory. A rape destroys life -- the life of the victim. If the rape inadvertently creates life, then that should be cherished as a sign of something good out of something horrible.
So, murdering a child conceived via rape is still worth saving. By turning the rape into murder is evil. The grieving victim of the rape has no right to turn her grief on an innocent child who has absolutely no fault. The child is blessed like all children conceived.
If conservatives back now from this, they will give tremendous ammunition to the abortionists (including the Obomney wing of the GOP). Axing of Akin might be a short term victory, but it will damage the pro life movement by altering the PRINCIPLES that actually matter!
I would assume that Congressman Akin has the ability to say what he believes. Since his statement was far different from yours I believe he should be evaluated on what he said, not what we wish he had said.
He veered away from making a principled argument against abortion and tried to make some distinction between legitimate and I suppose illegitimate rape. He also tried to make the unprincipled argument that the frequency of conception in rape cases had something to do with the morality of abortion. Is abortion acceptable if there is 99 percent rate of conception but not acceptable if there is only 1 percent rate?
I believe the good Congressman dug a hole for himself that he can’t, and probably shouldn’t get out of. The question remaining is how many will go down with him.
Thank you. The only issue that really matters is whether a society values human life. ALL of its policies and culture derive from that. A society can become murderous at any time... that is how we have evolved. As a species, for us to survive and thrive, killing innocent babies will only make us degenerate, hence not survive and thrive.
Politically you are 100% correct.
Spiritually, the New Testament is clear.
In the OT- Israel was directed to obliterate every last remnant of the ungodly.
I have a special needs granddaughter- unknown at this point how disabled she may be.
John 9:2-3 KJV
And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
We are so far down that road only God can turn it around.
50 million since Roe V Wade, 1973?
God will turn it around; won’t be pretty.
We are so far down that road only God can turn it around.
50 million since Roe V Wade, 1973?
God will turn it around; won’t be pretty.
you said this so well, I totally agree with everything you said, he should not resign just because the pro-choice people demand it, I don’t know if people didn’t hear what he said or didn’t understand it, or are just grabbing the opportunity to hurt our side, AIKEN COULD HAVE CHOOSEN HIS WORDS BETTER, BUT HE SAID NOTHING WRONG IN MY JUDGEMENT
keep fighting the good fight y’ll, and next year will be the beginning to much better times
“The grieving victim of the rape has no right to turn her grief on an innocent child who has absolutely no fault.”
True. But, do the men have the right to force a woman to go through gestation, and then suffer delivery agony/risks if the child is the product of rape? I am here assuming the rape victim does not want to carry and deliver the child.
Please consider the contradiction between your “innocent child” which should be “innocent fetus”, and the Christian concept of “Original Sin”.
Original Sin would not allow the fetus to be free of sin, or are you postulating that Original Sin is contracted during passage down the birth canal?
I am sorry to hear of your troubles but happy that you were blessed with life.
That was a very personal tale to tell in a public forum.
It is very hard to intellectualize a deeply held moral belief. If people would accept the simple answer, 'because it is wrong' this kind of thing would not happen.
It’s not that hard to verbalize. Pro-lifers outside abortion clinics get bombarded with the “what about rape” question all the time, and interestingly enough all of us can and have given better responses than Mr. Akin gave.
Which leads me to think that Mr. Akin has never been outside an abortion clinic in his life.
No, It is easy to intellectualize a moral belief.
It is difficult to legislate.
You cant force someone to drink from the well.
I have had people damn me in my own home because we did not see eye to eye on theological matters.
I asked them to leave in a friendly way.
They are always welcome, just don’t damn me in my home.
The point is that these things need praying on. They don’t need knee jerk reactions, and they surely don’t need knee jerk reactions from people in power.
If some poor girl is raped I would not force her to raise the baby.
I would encourage her to at least bring the baby up for adoption but I would never damn her.
That's where Akin drew the line. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M09iWwKiDsA
He was clearly uncomfortable answering the rape / abortion question, knowing his answer does not poll well. That's probably what led him to adduce the questionable medical research about probability of conception when the act is forced. I.e., Yeah, I'm against abortion in rape cases, but, really, the question hardly ever comes up in real life — the docs say so ... yadda, yadda. Oops! Scheißsturm incoming!
“But, do the men have the right to force a woman to go through gestation, and then suffer delivery agony/risks if the child is the product of rape? I am here assuming the rape victim does not want to carry and deliver the child.”
You assume a lot. A rape victim need not channel her anger towards the child. The child is an innocent party in this and does not deserve to be murdered. A rape victim should be counselled and supported, not encourage to murder.
Taking an innocent life is simply not an option. That is the principle of my argument.
“Please consider the contradiction between your “innocent child” which should be “innocent fetus”, and the Christian concept of “Original Sin”.”
All children are innocent. There is no one more innocent than an unborn child. Anything else, including the argument for abortion because of “original sin”, is bulls##t.
“Original Sin would not allow the fetus to be free of sin, or are you postulating that Original Sin is contracted during passage down the birth canal?”
Original Sin is a religious concept for those who subscribe. My argument is based on the right of an innocent human to life and nobody has the right to take that away, not even the mother-to-be and definitely not based on religious concepts.
That may well be. But, have you ever had to give cogent secular reasons for your beliefs?
Das neugierige Kind |
“That may well be. But, have you ever had to give cogent secular reasons for your beliefs?”
Yes. I was anti-abortion long before I became a Christian.
Vos is los?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.