Skip to comments.Abortion and rape
Posted on 08/23/2012 6:12:14 AM PDT by DallasBiff
The criticisms of the recent absurd comments by Missouri Republican Congressman Todd Akin, who at this writing is his partys nominee to take on incumbent Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill in November in a contest he had been expected to win, have focused on his clearly erroneous understanding of the human female anatomy. In a now infamous statement, in which he used the bizarre and unheard-of phrase legitimate rape, the congressman gave the impression that some rapes of women are not mentally or seriously resisted. This is an antediluvian and misogynistic myth for which there is no basis in fact and which has been soundly and justly condemned.
Akin also stated that the female anatomy can resist unwanted impregnation. This, too, is absurd, offensive and incorrect. Medical science has established conclusively that women cannot internally block an unwanted union of egg and sperm, no matter the relationship between male and female. I think even schoolchildren understand that.
What has gone unmentioned, however, in the cacophony of condemnation by Republicans and Democrats, is the implication in Akins comments that rape is not a moral justification for abortion. In that, he is correct: It is not.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
And antedeluvian? What is he now, a Creationist?
Why would one wish to propagate the genes of a RAPIST?
Would it not be better to render him incapable of EVER reproducing (castration, death, your choice) as well as destroying his evil spawn?
The spawn, while innocent, has defective genes.
I just don't get it.
One that does not offend anybody, unlike Akin shooting his mouth off with dubious facts.
Akin also stated that the female anatomy can resist unwanted impregnation. This, too, is absurd, offensive and incorrect. Medical science has established conclusively that women cannot internally block an unwanted union of egg and sperm, no matter the relationship between male and female.
Extreme stress (forcible, traumatic rape) HAS BEEN SHOWN to cause women to miscarry and/or not conceive. This is not some great cosmic insight. Yes Martha, there is lots of science behind that.
Obviously not. I was attacking Napolitano.
I don’t understand what you are saying? Is the desire to rape linked to a defective gene? Just for clarity.. the “spawn” is a baby, right?
Kill the guilty rapist, save the innoc ent baby.
Why is it that rapists want EXACTLT the opposite of what is morally correct?
Sorry, on the second line I typed “rapsist” when I meant “liberals”.
Then, too, with few exceptions, humans breed to the average of the species. You can take a smart guy and a smart woman and they have kids, and about 5 generations down the line their ever so great grandchillun' are into armed robbery, aggravated mopery and running for Congress just like everybody else's kids.
If you look at the leftist (secular, humanist, wordly) value system, you’ll find that every identifiable tenet is the exact opposite of what God has to say about that issue.
Everything they espouse is exactly the opposite of what is morally correct.
When it comes to abortion, it all centers around how you’d complete this sentence:
“It’s OK to kill a baby in the womb when ________”
Years ago in Army medic training, this is exactly what we were taught by physicians, that the odds of a pregnancy starting in such a trauma were much less than consensual sex.
For the past few weeks, I have felt that only Akins and I were aware of this.
Of course, the term "legitimate" rape means back-seat car intercourse, but the word "legitimate" has given the libtards something to hang their hats on.
So, "legitimate" rape is a lot less traumatic than "forcible" rape, such as Bill Clinton forced on Juanita Broaddrick IS traumatic.
And yet this sexual pig is feted by the perverted Democrats as a hero worth $500,000 per speech, totally ignoring his rape charge and openly sexual aggression on Paula Jones and innumerable women in his disgusting career.
How anyone can cling for any reason to the "D"emocrat party is beyond me.
I’m sorry, but you are arguing for eugenics. And also genetic fatalism. Humans become crazy, defective, dangerous and hopeless animals which need culling by our betters.
Abortion is a great sin. No joke.
Of course, if one could make the case for eliminating the rapist and progeny on the basis of genetics, then one could make the case for eliminating close relatives who are genetically related.
But where does the pogrom stop?
Let it stop with the criminal. The baby also carries the genetics of the mother. The baby has committed no crime. Yet it is the first up to be killed for the crime someone else committed?
Don't you at least find that a tad unAmerican?
So you are saying that someone should get the death penalty for a crime they did not commit?
Makes much more sense morally. Whether the rapists deserves death is to be decided by a judge and jury but the point is that the offender is being judged rather than the victim.