Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

Mitt Romney Distances Self From Todd Akin's Legitimate Rape' Comments

 

In response to Rep. Todd Akin's (R-Mo.) inflammatory comment on Sunday that "legitimate rape" victims rarely get pregnant and therefore do not need abortions, Mitt Romney's campaign said that he and running mate Paul Ryan support abortion rights for rape victims.

 

"Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan disagree with Mr. Akin’s statement, and a Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape," Andrea Saul, a Romney spokesperson, told The Huffington Post.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/19/m...26pLid%3D194382

That's one instance where Paul Ryan's flip-flopping then.

 

Ryan was against abortion in all cases including rape until Team Romney’s statement. Romney has said he would get rid of Planned Parenthood and has been moving further right on women’s issues since he was a pro-choice governor of Massachusetts. This could be a huge problem for the Republican ticket in November.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/the_rumbl...al-war-on-women

 

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. I trust you, Paul Ryan.

 

Last year, Akin joined with GOP vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as two of the original co-sponsors of the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” a bill which, among other things, introduced the country to the bizarre term “forcible rape.”

Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet the law also contains an exception for women who are raped. The bill Akin and Ryan cosponsored would have narrowed this exception, providing that only pregnancies arising from “forcible rape” may be terminated.

Under H.R. 3, only victims of “forcible rape” would qualify for federally funded abortions. Victims of statutory rape—say, a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 30-year-old man—would be on their own. So would victims of incest if they’re over 18. And while “forcible rape” isn’t defined in the criminal code, the addition of the adjective seems certain to exclude acts of rape that don’t involve overt violence—say, cases where a woman is drugged or has a limited mental capacity. “It’s basically putting more restrictions on what was defined historically as rape,” says Keenan.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/1...rape/?mobile=nc

 

Forcible rape? There's rape that's not forcible now? Good lord. Fortunately it was not passed, but the stuff in these people's minds just stagger me.

Edited by ylangylang

Share this post


Link to post

I know Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is sometimes taken to imply Biblical support for the idea of if you don't cry out even in a place where there are people around, it's not really rape.

 

 

Though if I was into conspiracy theories, I might just think that Akin was told to say such crazy stuff so they could justify the change in stance. xd.png

 

 

But really, it's just crazy to think that people seriously believe this kind of thing... Rape is rape is rape. I suppose "forcible rape" could be used to mean rape in which physical violence occurred, there's rape due to taking advantage of a person who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, rape of a person who may be unconscious so they CAN'T protest the sex, I believe it can be legally considered rape, at least in some places, if you lie about who you are to have sex with somebody...

 

But it really doesn't matter the situation surrounding it, rape is rape even if there are no bruises on the victim. sleep.gif' It's not complicated, how do people not understand it?

Share this post


Link to post
I know Deuteronomy 22:23-24 is sometimes taken to imply Biblical support for the idea of if you don't cry out even in a place where there are people around, it's not really rape.

 

 

Though if I was into conspiracy theories, I might just think that Akin was told to say such crazy stuff so they could justify the change in stance. xd.png

 

 

But really, it's just crazy to think that people seriously believe this kind of thing... Rape is rape is rape. I suppose "forcible rape" could be used to mean rape in which physical violence occurred, there's rape due to taking advantage of a person who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, rape of a person who may be unconscious so they CAN'T protest the sex, I believe it can be legally considered rape, at least in some places, if you lie about who you are to have sex with somebody...

 

But it really doesn't matter the situation surrounding it, rape is rape even if there are no bruises on the victim. sleep.gif' It's not complicated, how do people not understand it?

Also if you're a minor and you have sex with someone over 18 it counts as rape.

Share this post


Link to post

I think statutory rape is for 16 or younger. I don't know if it includes the 18 year old thing, though I seem to recall hearing something about a 4 year difference at certain ages being automatic rape. But, there is an existing term for that either way, statutory. The way this guy talks, it's more like the Deut. passage linked. Basically, if you get pregnant you were just a censorkip.gif. Which is pretty much in line with the Sandra Fluke debacle.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd imagine the age would vary depending on the legal age of consent in the area?

Share this post


Link to post
I'd imagine the age would vary depending on the legal age of consent in the area?

Spot on, KageSora. It varies according to local law.

Share this post


Link to post
Forcible rape? There's rape that's not forcible now?

Let's just be thankful they didn't say 'forced rape'. Given that forcible implies the use of brute force...

 

Just came in to say that, yeah, KageSora's right. And the legal age of consent varies a good bit in the US as well, so. (In my state, it's 16)

Share this post


Link to post

The following information was taken from the Mississippi state codes section via Lexis Nexis at http://198.187.128.12/mississippi/lpext.dl...fs-main.htm&2.0

 

§ 97-3-65. Statutory rape; enhanced penalty for forcible sexual intercourse or statutory rape by administering certain substances.

 

(1) The crime of statutory rape is committed when:

 

http://www.ageofconsent.us/state-laws/miss...f-consent-laws/

Share this post


Link to post

Rape Victim Reacts To Todd Akin's Comment: Delivering 'Baby Of A Rapist' Is 'Torture'

 

"Rape is so isolating -- it ruined my world for a long time," Law, now 43, said in an interview with The Huffington Post. "If I had had to carry that rapist's baby to term, quite honestly, I might have taken my life."

 

Law said she couldn't believe her eyes on Sunday when she read that Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin of Missouri declare in an interview that pregnancy from "legitimate rape" is "really rare" because "the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

 

"First of all, what is legitimate rape?" she asked. "Whether it's date rape, whether the woman was beaten to a pulp, whether it's a 14 or 15-year old kid carrying her father's child, it doesn't matter. Having to deliver the baby of a rapist -- that's torture."

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/20/t..._n_1811232.html

Share this post


Link to post
Got to love it how "Legitimate rape" became the featured definition of yesterday on Urban Dictionary.

"Was it legitimate rape, or was it just like, hilarious prison rape or acceptable acquaintance rape?"

 

Hahahahahahahahahaha biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Got to love it how "Legitimate rape" became the featured definition of yesterday on Urban Dictionary.

Comedy gold.

Share this post


Link to post

Why am I not surprised that the same conservatives that made a big issue over sticking up for Chik-fil-A are now sticking up for Akins.

 

Huckabee:

"Ethel Waters, for example, was the result of a forcible rape," Huckabee said of the late American gospel singer. One-time presidential candidate Huckabee added: "I used to work for James Robison back in the 1970s, he leads a large Christian organization. He, himself, was the result of a forcible rape. And so I know it happens, and yet even from those horrible, horrible tragedies of rape, which are inexcusable and indefensible, life has come and sometimes, you know, those people are able to do extraordinary things."

 

There's the forcible rape term again. And either way, it must be what they believe as the party platform does not make exceptions for it. So, Akins is just following the party line.

 

Family Research Council (The Chik-fil-A charity listed as a hate group by the SPLC):

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan sharply condemned Akin's remarks and pledged that under a Romney administration, abortion would be allowed in the case of rape.

 

An exemption for rape, though, is not included in the platform set to be adopted by the party Romney will officially lead when he accepts the Republican nomination next week.

 

And Ryan, his vice presidential pick, has opposed exceptions for rape and voted alongside Akin in the House, though Ryan now says he defers to Romney's position on the matter.

 

Debate over the abortion plank flared four years ago when John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee at the time, said he wanted to add language to the platform to recognize exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.

 

That prompted angry finger-wagging from top social conservatives.

 

Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, chided McCain and said it would be "political suicide" for him to add language about exceptions for rape or incest in the abortion platform.

Share this post


Link to post

Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.

 

But then the mother also has that right to life that cannot be infringed, right? So... What happens when carrying the fetus to term could compromise that right? Or WILL compromise it, and carrying to term will kill the mother--and most likely the fetus? Would abortion then be considered justifiable homicide because you are preserving one life when two would more likely have been lost?

 

Or is it that the mother doesn't have a right to life because silly wimmens, y u think u get rights? U not menz or babby. >_>

 

I'm guessing the latter, since they don't want you to be treated for life-threatening situations and miscarrying is murder. (Seriously, what the censorkip.gif)

 

 

But seriously, if my body has such amazing abilities such as preventing pregnancy from rape and miscarrying on demand if I don't want the child (because obviously nobody would miscarry a wanted child /sarcasm)... Why didn't I know this? And why don't I have the ability, then, to just swap what's between my legs? I'd like to be a man now, since I'd not become an incubator...

Edited by KageSora

Share this post


Link to post
Thought this might be an interesting add. Link'd because I'm not sure if it's appropriate - blood and the like.

The thing is with this add, many such as myself who will vote Republican, do not agree with this add. Politicions do or say anything to get your vote.

 

I do agree with abortions for the right reasons, but to me there are more pressing issues than abortions.

 

It is getting the economy back on track, and people not having to struggle like being employed right now, who are loosing their homes, marriages going down the drain, loosing everything they have worked for their whole lives.

 

If people would try and not get pregnant, this would not be a problem as much. Yes, I know, contraceptions fail, and people are not taught how not to get pregnant, I have been with this topic for a while now, smile.gif

 

Obama is now all for the gays people, just to get votes I feel. Just like letting ILLEGALS stay here.

 

Politics make me sick because they are all liers, but I will vote Republican.

 

Just remember, I do agree with abortions for soome people.

Share this post


Link to post

lol! I've seen some very creative responses to what he said. Personally, I'm in a deep red state, Texas. With Rick Perry, who made a fool out of himself on a national level. So, we're suffering from the effects of too many people voting party no matter what. If people aren't willing to throw out politicians for doing a bad job, then they get lazy and take for granted they can do whatever they want. Texas already has 1/3 of the state uninsured, but Rick is firmly on the side of no abortion, no matter what the reason. So, he's moved to cut Planned Parenthood and all Women's Health funding from the budget. And while a lower court blocked what he was doing, a higher one just ok'd it. Citation So, got a medical issue with your pregnancy and poor? Too bad. Brest cancer screening? Tough.

 

To hear some of my coworkers talk, the poor are all stinky illegals anyway. But this is everyone making minimum wage. That's home health aids, teaching adjunts, it's not just "lazy" fast food workers. There's a lot of ingrained snobbery here against poor people that assumes the worst about them. And honestly, I don't get why working at McDonalds means someone don't deserve health insurance anyway.

 

But back to the Akin controversy, I see a lot of news agencies trying to point out that actions = proof on intent. And when we have things like stripping health insurance and denying basic rights, it doesn't matter what the politicians said. It sure does what they do. And they need to be held accountable for it. Here's an example:

Political commentators are accusing Senate Republicans of hypocrisy — and even outright support of rape — after thirty of them voted against a measure to de-fund military contractors who prevent rape victims from seeking justice.Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) introduced an amendment to a defense appropriations bill that would prevent the federal government from funding contractors whose employee contracts prevent workers from pursuing allegations of rape against co-workers.The measure passed the Senate by a vote of 68 to 30, with all 30 ‘no’ votes being cast by Republicans. Notably, 10 Senate Republicans voted for the measure, including all four female Republican senators.Franken was inspired to push the amendment by the story of Jamie Leigh Jones, who was an employee of KBR — at the time a subsidiary of Halliburton — working in Baghdad’s Green Zone when she was allegedly gang-raped by other KBR workers.

Original

 

It seems crazed that votes like this would even happen, but I've seen a few interesting notes comparing this period to Prohibition. Where basically, one strident little group took over the political process and passed something that no one ever thought would happen, and it had dire consequences. I mean really, we had votes against the Violence against Women Act this year, trying to defund it o.O

Share this post


Link to post

We should ban life jackets and other flotation devices.

 

They only encourage risky behavior. The only 100% effective way to prevent drowning is total abstinence from going in the water.

Saw this out somewhere, thought I might share it. biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post

Just wanted to give people a heads up, though most republican's are against abortion, for those who may not be comfortable with obama in office (I think we need a different solution for the economy, his spending just makes it worse with the amount of debt we're incurring >.<)

 

The libertarian party nominated Gary Johnson who is pro-choice and would not question a woman's right to abortion, I'd recomend people in the US to take a look, especailly if they were for other reasons going to vote republican.

 

He's very liberal but promotes actually less government interference and redoing the ineffective programs to make them better.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.