Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Woman Conceived in Rape Responds to Akin Abortion Controversy
Life News ^ | August 21, 2012 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 08/21/2012 2:53:18 PM PDT by NYer

Rebecca Kiessling, a pro-life attorney from Michigan, fully understands the national debate going on concerning the controversial comments Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin made about abortion and rape. Kiessling was conceived when her mother was victimized by a rapist.

“It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, if it’s a legitimate rape, that’s really rare. The female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Akin said. “The punishment ought to be on the rapist, and not in attacking the child.”

Kiessling responded to the comments saying that the use of the term “legitimate rape” was unnecessary and improper and she gave her advice for how pro-life candidates can thoughtfully and articulately address the sensitive subject of rape and abortion.

First of all — never say ‘legitimate rape,’” Kiessling said. “Ron Paul used the same terminology last January and he got lambasted for it too. This kind of remark only serves to perpetuate the suspicion of rape victims’ accounts. It’s estimated that only 1% of rape victims ever see their rapist convicted as charged. Rape is rape. “Legitimate rape” almost sounds as if it was somehow justifiable.”

“If you are 100% pro-life with no rape exceptions, there is no need to question the veracity of a rape victims’ account, because you are against all abortions. It would not matter if a woman was not or not raped,” she continued.

While abortion advocates often talk about supporting a woman’s right to privacy, Kiessling says rape exceptions in abortion laws turn that notion on its head.

“Rape exceptions in the law actually put the government in the position of having to ascertain when the child was conceived, who the father is, whether the child was conceived during the alleged rape or during intercourse with her husband or boyfriend, and if the child was conceived during the time frame of the alleged rape, then the government would need to determine whether the sexual intercourse was consensual or not,” she explained. “So rape exceptions serve to perpetuate the injustice against rape victims that their accounts are to be viewed with skepticism, and it further leaves the majority of impregnated rape victims wholly unprotected under the law. Rape exceptions suggest that a “real rape victim” couldn’t possibly love “the rapist’s baby” and that rape victim mothers don’t exist.”

The pro-life attorney says pro-life candidates need to be coached on how to answer the media’s inevitable question.

“Senator Rick Santorum, during his presidential campaign, said that he thinks that a child conceived in rape is “a gift from God,” and he was made fun of for that. Just Google images for “Santorum rape” and you’ll see all of the posters where he is mocked for this statement. While I believe it’s true that every child is a gift from God, including children conceived in rape, I don’t believe this was the best response for the interview,” she explained. “If it had been my birthmother sharing that she believes that I’m a blessing and a gift from God, she would not be mocked and ridiculed in the same way he was. And then Sharron Angle, during her Senate race in Nevada, said it’s a “lemonade situation,” which did not come across well at all. The problem is not with these candidates’ values. The problem is how they express them.”

Kiessling gives a three-step process in terms of how candidates should answer the question:

1. The Supreme Court has said that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment for rapists and that rapists don’t deserve the death penalty. I don’t think the innocent child conceived in rape deserves the death penalty for the crimes of her father. It seems to me that is cruel and unusual punishment.

2. Rape victims are four times more likely to die within the next year after the abortion, with a higher rate of suicide, murder, drug overdose, etc.. As someone who really cares about rape victims, I want to protect them from the rapist, and from the abortion, and not the baby. A baby is not the worst thing that could ever happen to a rape victim — an abortion is. We need to educate the American public on the truth in this matter and not make public policy based on myth and misinformation.

3. Rape victims choose abortion at half the rate of the average unplanned pregnancy, which is over 50%. Only 15-25% of rape victims choose abortion, depending on the study. The majority of rape victims choose to raise her child — not “the rapist’s baby” — HER child.

Of course, I also think it helps to share a personal story and there are lots available, of women who became pregnant by rape and either regret aborting, are raising their children or are birth-moms, as well as stories of those of us conceived in rape and/or incest. You can find those stories on my website: www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html and www.rebeccakiessling.com/PregnantByRape.html



TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; akin; kiessling; michigan; missouri; prolife; rape; rebeccakiessling; sarahsteelman; toddakin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-182 next last
To: spunkets
The same goes for embryos in a petri dish in an fertility clinic; it is not a pool of people.

Of course it is! Except for identical twins, every one of those embryos has its own unique DNA identity.

THAT is what makes them individuals. It is human DNA, that's what makes them people.

101 posted on 08/21/2012 6:34:31 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
The same goes for embryos in a petri dish in an fertility clinic; it is not a pool of people.

Your arrogance in asserting what does, or does not, constitute human life and personhood is disconcerting, if not downright mendacious. The facts are 1.) you do not know for sure, and 2.) you are unwilling to give the benefit of the doubt. You might be better served iterating your point of view amidst that other choir so enamoured of death and taxes.

102 posted on 08/21/2012 6:34:48 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew (Kyrie Eleison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: NYer

What a lovely woman.

Now, to all you holier-than-thou pubby Neo-Puritans who (unlike me) have apparently never uttered a foolish remark, in what way did Akin disparage or belittle or discount the value of children born of rape. Indeed, he defends their right to life ON PRINCIPLE!. So we attack him for saying something stupid. His point was not that children are never conceived via rape, but that such occurrences are relatively infrequent.

Anyone here personally know hordes and hordes of people who were conceived via rape? No. One or two or a few, perhaps, but not hordes. Point for Akin.


103 posted on 08/21/2012 6:40:17 PM PDT by man_in_tx (Islam is a Hate Crime. (Blowback: Faithfully farting towards Mecca five times daily!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

You can make that type of mistake this close to an election. He should know better. If this wasn’t an election year, there would be time to clarify and make statements. There is so little time till election day, that this makes it impossible. People will only be hearing one thing. That will be his statement.

You say yourself that evidence doesn’t point either way. I agree. But for him to come out that way was the wrong move. One that will be used against him in the worst way. It was stupid.

I agree that this does not define how he would do as a senator. It does create an identity to the public do. To answer in this way is one that can be used easily in the publics eye. Horrible move. He should have left. Too close to election day.

I hope he wins, and if he does, great. But if He doesn’t, then we all know where to look as to the reason.


104 posted on 08/21/2012 6:48:54 PM PDT by justice14 ("stand up defend or lay down and die")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
these two factoids are devastating to the argument that rape victims should be allowed to abort their fetus.

-or- these two factoids are devastating to the argument that rape victims should abort their babies.

... a bit of de-PC-izational license. I think reawakening the social conscience is prelude to repairing our societal structure. If we repair our norms, the rest will follow naturally. Of course, we may have to follow Shakespeare's lawyer admonition (and include the media as well) to get there...

105 posted on 08/21/2012 6:50:01 PM PDT by glock rocks (Hey... shut the damn barn! Were you raised in a... um, wait.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: man_in_tx
What a lovely woman.

Yes indeed what a lovely well spoken intelligent woman.

Now, to all you holier-than-thou pubby Neo-Puritans who (unlike me) have apparently never uttered a foolish remark, in what way did Akin disparage or belittle or discount the value of children born of rape. Indeed, he defends their right to life ON PRINCIPLE!. So we attack him for saying something stupid. His point was not that children are never conceived via rape, but that such occurrences are relatively infrequent.

Akin with his 'foolish remark' gave 'life' to the Claire 'I am this year a moderate independent' who got a boat load of campaign advertising calling Akin 'ignorant' over 'legitimate rape'.

Anyone here personally know hordes and hordes of people who were conceived via rape? No. One or two or a few, perhaps, but not hordes. Point for Akin.

Who can with absolute honesty answer that question? Given it is a known fact that not all women report 'legitimate rape'. I have come to the opinion because of Akin only women should be allowed to speak about rape pregnancies. Only they can know if the rape was 'legitimate' or not.

106 posted on 08/21/2012 6:50:01 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
You are wrong on so many counts--legally, medically, scientifically, rationally--it is hard to choose where to begin to address your inane and meandering protestations against reason.

1) It is not about a woman's body. From the moment of conception when a never-before-seen DNA is created it is about a second body--heart, blood, brain, limbs all separate from hers.

2) It is indeed about life and not about your definition of "personhood." The law of our land from the outset, as our Declaration of Independence from the British crown states most succinctly, is "that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life...."

The 5th Amendment to our Constitution states that "no person shall be deprived of life...without due process of law." Abortion is the depriving of life, no matter when it is performed.

3) Methinks thou dost protest too much. Are you suffering from a past abortion decision yourself, a choice that you need to come to grips with?

107 posted on 08/21/2012 6:52:35 PM PDT by .30Carbine (God bless you with the spirit of wisdom and understanding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
For an embryo to be called a person, their parents must make that designation. No one else has the right to do so.

Do you seriously not see the huge hole you're falling into here?

If an embryo is not a person until her parents say so, then she got her status as a human person from other humans. Once some humans get to decide when and if other humans are really humans, powerful humans will want to take that mantle on themselves ... if parents get to play God, then politicians will want to play God, too.

And they'll want it in regard to people who already born, not just people who are in the womb. People who are inconvenient ... the wrong race, the wrong religion, the wrong set of political views.

That's called "tyranny" and "genocide," and it flows inevitably from the logic of abortion.

108 posted on 08/21/2012 6:55:05 PM PDT by Campion ("Social justice" begins in the womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: kenavi; NYer

We already have a prescribed penalty for murder.

Taking a helpless life is the most abominable of crimes under any circumstances, but especially for personal convenience.


109 posted on 08/21/2012 6:57:33 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

Thanks for the response. I agree with your take on it.

One thing that astounds me, is that there is such a void out there when it comes to professional grade news services.

There should be one national professional level newspaper that presents news from a purely Conservative vantage point.

There should be one national professional level television news service.

FoxNews misses the mark so bad. It’s people don’t quite grasp the nuances of Conservatism, and they muddy the waters as often as they clarify.

I’d actually like to be able to turn on the news for half an hour in the evening, and get a truly Conservative version of the news. We’re not getting it.

This is why I’m not sure how you include the media short of the outline I made above.


110 posted on 08/21/2012 7:00:00 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: NYer

It’s obvious that Aikin meant “Genuine rape,” not “Legitimate rape.” He is just not a particularly articulate man; neither is our Resident.
.


111 posted on 08/21/2012 7:01:19 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; glock rocks
"Then there’s the mention of the factoid that women who have aborted their fetus conceived by rape, are four times more likely to die in the first year post abortion. Good grief, these two factoids are devastating to the argument that rape victims should be allowed to abort their fetus.

The factoids are wrong. Here's where the factoids come from. Which leads to this.

First, rape is not considered, only abortion. In the case of death due to natural causes, having an abortion results in a 20% less likelihood of dying than someone who has no pregnancy and only 1.6 times higher than someone who carries the pregnancy to completion. The original paper is not made available and considering the results, the very low data quantity, the lack of published variance and the lack of follow up supporting publication for this 1997 study, the study is rubbish.

What is notable in the study is that death by homicide is a bit over 4 times higher. The study applies that to risk taking behavior, but I can not believe that this level of homicide over the general population is the fault of risk taking. It probably more like poverty, or a general quality of life issue —like the neighborhood they live in.

112 posted on 08/21/2012 7:03:30 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Well, any chance he had to attempt this tack is gone with the shazai commercial. "Watashi wa fukaku owabi mōshiagemasu!"
113 posted on 08/21/2012 7:09:00 PM PDT by StAnDeliver ("So, a Mormon and a Catholic walk onto an aircraft carrier...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Because in a vacuum: we're that.

TPTB are only too cognizant that the alternate media is the new purveyor of truth. They will do everything they can to shut it down. Each and every bit of information that travels by email, cell, or web is being recorded in some well funded electronic cavern in Virginia, Cupertino, and soon in Lehi, Utah. How can anyone but the elite think that this can bode well for freedom of information?

We indeed live in interesting times.

114 posted on 08/21/2012 7:12:28 PM PDT by glock rocks (Hey... shut the damn barn! Were you raised in a... um, wait...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

Spunkets, thanks for the points of clarification.

I would like to see a study done that comes closer to your desired methodology. That still doesn’t mean that there is an inherent misrepresentation here.

If I understand you, it simply means you’re not inclined to buy off on the claims, because they don’t provide enough detail.


115 posted on 08/21/2012 7:17:19 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
For an embryo to be called a person, their parents must make that designation. No one else has the right to do so.

God calls them people, and this remains true whether idiots such as yourself like it or not.

116 posted on 08/21/2012 7:17:50 PM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Science puts you on the moon, atheism puts you in the gulag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Campion
Re: For an embryo to be called a person, their parents must make that designation. No one else has the right to do so.

"Do you seriously not see the huge hole you're falling into here? If an embryo is not a person until her parents say so, then she got her status as a human person from other humans. Once some humans get to decide when and if other humans are really humans, powerful humans will want to take that mantle on themselves ... if parents get to play God, then politicians will want to play God, too.

Parents do get to play God as a gift per Gen 1:26-27. They were created in God's Image, male and female. That Image included the capacity and right, under their own sovereignty of will granted as free will to procreate as they see fit. That is but one of the unlimited number of things granted per the image. Note that God didn't create politicians, nor did He grant to those He did not create a single right, or power, especially a power over anyone else.

"And they'll want it in regard to people who already born, not just people who are in the womb. People who are inconvenient ... the wrong race, the wrong religion, the wrong set of political views. That's called "tyranny" and "genocide," and it flows inevitably from the logic of abortion.

The people grant them this power. Even in the case of tyrants, some clymers have to back them up with their murderous thuggery. The founders recognized this and so did others, that's why they penned the second Amend.

Note also there is a limit to how long it takes the parents to make a decision. When the matter no longer resembles contraception and the near embryo begins to resemble baby, the state that also determines the age of reason as justified by their fundamental justification to protect rights; also has the right to determine when they will recognize at what stage of physical development they'll recognize personhood.

Also note that the parents have the sole right to determine tyranny, that is not, nor was it ever a power of the state.

117 posted on 08/21/2012 7:21:34 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

Yes, we do.

Look, I like the internet and the access to information. It still seems to me that ‘some’ of the information we get, fails to pan out. And when that happens, it strains the credibility of sources across the board. It is true the DNCp lives and dies by that same standard too.

I would like to see a program provided that does a good job of fact checking, which makes reports much more credible.

No, the elites are the only ones that think this bodes well for freedom period. And as we know, freedom is not their goal, unless it’s their freedom to destroy this nation.


118 posted on 08/21/2012 7:24:00 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
H. L. Mencken:

March 17, 1944

...I have given my whole life to newspapers. I am convinced that they have abandoned their functions, and in an abject and ignominious manner, in the present war. Nine-tenths of them, and even more than nine-tenths, print the official blather without any attempt to scrutinize it... It is a disgraceful spectacle, but I do not believe that anything can be done about it. Roosevelt has taken the press into camp as certainly has he has taken the Supreme Court. It has ceased altogether to be independent and has become docilely official.

I'm having a 'nothing new under the sun' moment. And with that, I'm off to sandland, as 0'dark thirty and another shift awaits.
Good talking with you, D1. Take care.

119 posted on 08/21/2012 7:46:37 PM PDT by glock rocks (Hey... shut the damn barn! Were you raised in a... um, wait...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"I would like to see a study done that comes closer to your desired methodology. That still doesn’t mean that there is an inherent misrepresentation here. If I understand you, it simply means you’re not inclined to buy off on the claims, because they don’t provide enough detail.

Theirs minimal requiremnts inherent in the hypothesis being tested regarding the structure, methodology and statistical treatment of the data and conclusions in order to determine the truth of any claims attributed to a study. There's not enough data and no variance given that would distinguish this work from no study at all. IOWs this study attempted to make definitive claims in marginal areas with some meaningful degree of certainty, with not nearly enough data.

All this study might be good for is as part of a proposal for a larger and more complete study that might differentiate from no study at all. The lack to date of a follow up study is telling in that regard, given the intense political motivations. Also, the lack of structural and methodological details indicates misrepresentation, as they accused prior authors that published quite different results of doing.

This study covered suicide, which is concievable for an otherwise would be mother after an abortion, but not for a rape victim. Suicide in that case would be more likely due to the mental and physical effects of the rape itself, which would depend on the particulars of the rape and the woman's prior and post mental status.

120 posted on 08/21/2012 7:53:22 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
"God calls them people, and this remains true whether idiots such as yourself like it or not."

Chapter and verse please. While your at it, maybe you can find where He distinguishes between man and his ancestors. You know the ones that lived in the forest where cain got his wife from.

121 posted on 08/21/2012 7:59:04 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
...only 15 to 25% of women who become pregnant as a result of a rape, decide to terminate the pregnancy.

This is the huge underreported story - that the victims of rape who become pregnant - are more likely to see an abortion as being victimized a 2nd time.

The MSM and the left frame the argument in such a way that abortion in the case of rape or incest is considered a given - when in fact it is when compared to "regular" unplanned pregnancies.

Another little factoid: ~64% of all abortions are coerced in one form or another (e.g. parter threatens to leave, parents threaten abandonment, etc). So much for "choice".

122 posted on 08/21/2012 8:04:43 PM PDT by jonno (Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jonno
3rd para. should read: ...when in fact it is less likely when compared to "regular" unplanned pregnancies.
123 posted on 08/21/2012 8:07:51 PM PDT by jonno (Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
Re: The same goes for embryos in a petri dish in an fertility clinic; it is not a pool of people.

" Your arrogance in asserting what does, or does not, constitute human life and personhood is disconcerting, if not downright mendacious. The facts are 1.) you do not know for sure, and 2.) you are unwilling to give the benefit of the doubt.

Regarding point #1: I have reasons for believing what I do and have indicated what they are. I do indeed know for sure that is what I believe and the reasons for having made those decisions. Human life is simply any human cell, or collection thereof. With regarding to being absolute with regard to personhood, all one can do is to formulate a construction that is consistent and does not contradict any other objective principle, or construction. It must also be independent of any particular being, otherwise it will necessarily be subjective and non-absolute. Once that is done, it will be as close to unique and objective that it can be and whatever the measure of that is, will be the measure of how absolute it is.

With regard to point #2. I have no doubt. What is it you suppose that I doubt and who should I give what I don't doubt and my power and right of decision to?

124 posted on 08/21/2012 8:34:18 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine
"1) It is not about a woman's body. From the moment of conception when a never-before-seen DNA is created it is about a second body--heart, blood, brain, limbs all separate from hers.

Oh, of course not. Embryos grow inside of eggs in the storks nest.

"2) It is indeed about life and not about your definition of "personhood." The law of our land from the outset, as our Declaration of Independence from the British crown states most succinctly, is "that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life...."

Who's we? Why those are persons! Persons wrote the Declaration, for the people(who are persons) and are justified in identifying who persons are, as they are justified in determining at what age those persons attain the age of reason.

125 posted on 08/21/2012 8:46:12 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Re: The same goes for embryos in a petri dish in an fertility clinic; it is not a pool of people.

"every one of those embryos has its own unique DNA identity. THAT is what makes them individuals. It is human DNA, that's what makes them people. "

I'll have to be more careful about where my loose hairs fall. I didn't know they was people. Who's going to take care of them? All my kids! ...and the toe nail clippings too! Oh, the hugh manitee!

126 posted on 08/21/2012 8:55:47 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
"So far, all I can tell is Akin will not back down from principle when politics threaten them."

And Akin is to be admired for that stance. Full force in the face of political vs principle......Akin chooses Principle. He will win handily.

127 posted on 08/21/2012 10:07:11 PM PDT by NoRedTape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
I'm glad she did too. Brave lady.

I agree that the judge should be gone.

128 posted on 08/21/2012 10:18:05 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Disagree. Akin believes that he is bigger than the conservative movement, and uses principle as an excuse to keep his political career. His actions could in fact cause the GOP to fall short of taking the Senate, and thus be unable to reverse Obamacare. Then there will be abortions as far as the eye can see, thanks to Akin.


129 posted on 08/21/2012 10:29:23 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Talking point for Akin:
“My facts were misinformed, however my sentiment is heart felt and of deep conviction. I ask that anyone who objects accepts my apologies on that misinformed statement and accepts that I am pre-disposed for life. Further I ask that we interview and talk to individuals whose mother brought them into the world vice aborting them and get their opinion on the subject.”


130 posted on 08/21/2012 10:46:27 PM PDT by ghannonf18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith; PhxTM06

Not to worry... you shouldn’t care a fig if a troll has a hissy and wants to lecture you.... Seems to be a lot of these on FR these days.


131 posted on 08/21/2012 10:55:36 PM PDT by antceecee (Bless us Father.. have mercy on us and protect us from evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks

Nice quote from the past there. I’m sure Mencken was on to something there. He was right of course.

What I find worse about today’s situation, is that today the press is backing a man that hates our nation, blames it for the world’s evil, and wants to diminish and alter it for all time.

In Roosevelt’s time, they were far too accepting of his actions, but as that related to the war effort, they probably were trying to be supportive of the war effort. At least that was pro-American, even if a betrayal of the idea of a free and open and challenging press.

Today these folks are colluding with the president to destroy our founding ideals, and the viable continuation of our world leadership.

This is out and out sedition.

Perhaps someone can correct me here, but I don’t see the Roosevelt treatment as being the same thing.

I do see a similarity in the betrayal of the press mandate, so I’m not being critical here at all, but it ends there for me.

I’ve enjoyed the discussion too. Take care.


132 posted on 08/21/2012 10:58:16 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

Thank you for expanding on your thoughts.

I appreciate your take on this. I think you make some good points.


133 posted on 08/21/2012 11:01:45 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: jonno

I have shared your thoughts on this, but Spunkets does make some reasoned criticisms of the study presented.

I will say that if these figures are anywhere near reality, it is very damning of the propaganda efforts of those who support the industry of death.

Thanks for your comments.


134 posted on 08/21/2012 11:05:40 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
"Or zygote. So... is your keyword for this issue 'unwanted?'"

Absolutely, and the key to it is the requirement for the mother's body and the mother's absolute sovereignty over that body. There's nothing viable about the embryo whatsoever w/o the mother's body being involved, until some later stage of the pregnancy — later stage being the keyword. For the purposes of this discussion, contraception is essentially what's involved here.

A human being comes into existence when the information from an egg and sperm combine to create a new unique individual or set of individuals in the case of maternal twins (unlike cloning which comes from a single existing individual's DNA).

To purposefully abort a human being or to use contraception that does not prevent conception, by definition, ends the existence of a human being and is wrong. There are forms of contraception that prevent conception, and by definition, do not end the existence of a human beings. Unfortunately the most popular form of contraception does not prevent conception, only prevents a uterus from being viable for pregnancy. This is how the standard birth control pill and the morning after pill are similar as pointed out by Dr. Ron Paul in one of the debates.

Ending the existence of a human being at any stage of their development is wrong, whether a non-productive senior that requires someones dedication and complete care for many years, or a baby in the womb for 9 months (and that is what most proud pregnant people call a human being inside them).

Simple logic.

135 posted on 08/21/2012 11:34:55 PM PDT by bondserv (God governs our universe and has seen fit to offer us a pardon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks
It’s hell being born in the 50’s, and having a notion of ‘normal.’

You think that is bad. I was born in the 40's.

136 posted on 08/21/2012 11:51:24 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
With apologies, I'm not sure who Ethel Waters is.

Jazz musician.


Ethel Waters
1896-1977

137 posted on 08/21/2012 11:51:48 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

Thank you CynWoody. I appreciate the response.


138 posted on 08/21/2012 11:55:15 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Americans want what Americans always wanted: Better lives for families; little government authority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“So far, all I can tell is Akin will not back down from principle when politics threaten them.”

Yes. Also, his principles are barbaric and idiotic.


139 posted on 08/22/2012 2:13:28 AM PDT by Skylab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wage Slave

>> One of my coworkers told me today that she is here because her mother was raped

And they also FReep among us.

My primary views on this matter are not that virtuous, but I damn proud of those that have the wherewithal, will, courage to protect Life in the darkest moment of one’s existence.


140 posted on 08/22/2012 2:22:39 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #141 Removed by Moderator

Comment #142 Removed by Moderator

To: Tzar

Subjects, as in dictating to a rape victim how they should behave after their trauma.


143 posted on 08/22/2012 4:46:36 AM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

And he’ll be a distraction for the rest of the campaign for it. His comments weren’t just a gaffe they were incredibly ignorant.

Anyone rember “wide stance”?

We’ll see how this plays out, but Akin, is now a millstone around every republican, doesn’t matter who they are. His comments have already been nationalized, and internationalized, every republican candidate now is going to be forever tied to this joker the longer he’s around.

This won’t be a big deal in some races, but in a close race, this guy sticking around is going to cost seats.


144 posted on 08/22/2012 5:06:58 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

Agreed, “legitimate rape” is just instantly morally repugnant on its face, and deserves the harsh criticism its received.

The claim that the female reproductive system will stop a pregnancy if the sperm is introduced involuntarily is just flat out IGNORANT.

The first is more politically damaging as far as the campaign goes.. the latter is far more scary long term that this guy could be in a position to make and vote on laws.

The guy didn’t just gaffe, he showed complete ignorance. He’s now decided to stay in, which will now create a millstone around the neck of every republican out there because his comments have been nationalized. It won’t matter in many races, but in close races this guys comments and the fact he’s sticking around will indeed cost seats.


145 posted on 08/22/2012 5:12:02 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: OKSooner

See above article for proper way to handle the rape/abortion question. Also, note that Ron Paul and Santorum gave similarly rejected answers to the question.


146 posted on 08/22/2012 5:40:28 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

No, we ALL need to read it right now, and be ready to respond at the grass roots level, this Labor Day weekend at family gatherings, or any other time the liberals in our respective families are first to bring up the issue, from now until November 6th:

If the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (Kennedy v. Louisiana - 2008 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_v._Louisiana ) that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment for rapists, why then is the death penalty acceptable for the innocent unborn child? It’s not the baby’s fault.

http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/index.html


147 posted on 08/22/2012 5:42:52 AM PDT by golas1964 (Obama must be defeated in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
So far, all I can tell is Akin will not back down from principle when politics threaten them.

His principle is that "legitimate" rape is rare and that the female body can stop a pregnancy from a "legitimate" rape. I disagree with that "principle."

148 posted on 08/22/2012 6:49:52 AM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Opinionated Blowhard
The trauma of a violent rape (or any kind of trauma, physical or emotional) can cause a woman to start her period and wipe out a pregnancy before it is even started.
149 posted on 08/22/2012 6:58:10 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
The image of a Presbeterian minister voting to force rape victims to accept and nuture a completely unwanted pregnancy at gun point is absolutely repulsive and so is calling a rape victim that chooses to prevent the pregnancy a murderer. I think folks would rather put a clothes pin on their nose, close their eyes and vote ugly before they'd vote for repulsive

THe media is giving this a HELL of lot more play than they did the videotapes of Planned Parenthood staffers repeatedly telling minors to lie in their paperwork so as to let rapists go free.

150 posted on 08/22/2012 7:31:19 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Only Obama put a dog on the roof of his mouth. Dogs are friends, not food.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-182 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson