Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Burgold

Raw Story: GOP Senate nominee: Women don’t get pregnant from ‘legitimate’ rapes

Recommended Posts

But does the female body block impregnation in cases of statutory rape vs what is more conventionally thought of as rape? I agree with your assessment, but you're getting into a very grey area. TWA wants to move the discussion from the idiotic statement of a guy who will probably represent the state of Missouri into a discussion of whether the government should have to pay for Lolita's abortion. Or whether she should have a right to one at all.

Of course it does not block it

I agree it was a idiotic statement...JUST NOT THE ONE USED AS THE TITLE(which is NOT what he said)

I'm always open to abortion discussions over repeating how stupid politicians are

but I can multi-task

---------- Post added August-19th-2012 at 10:48 PM ----------

Pregnancy from rape is rare. But he makes it sound like we should dismiss those cases as unimportant because they're "rare."

I agree it comes off that way,but his focus is on saving a innocent human life

I would bet he is very willing to punish the rapists...perhaps even more than most

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coulda swore my dumbass just said consensual sex can be rape

my source is the NCVS study cited earlier...and common sense

You parsed the numbers out to help your argument. Again.

For anyone wondering what it actually says, in full:

In 2004 – 2005, 64,080 women were raped. According to medical reports, the incidence of pregnancy for one-time unprotected sexual intercourse is 5%. By applying the pregnancy rate to 64,080 women, RAINN estimates that there were 3,204 pregnancies as a result of rape during that period.

This calculation does not account for the following factors which could lower the actual number of pregnancies:

Rape, as defined by the NCVS, is forced sexual intercourse. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, oral, or anal penetration by offender(s). This category includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Certain types of rape under this definition cannot cause pregnancy.

Some victims of rape may be utilizing birth control methods, such as the pill, which will prevent pregnancy.

Victims of rape may not be able to become pregnant for medical or age-related reasons.

This calculation does not account for the following factors which could raise the actual number of pregnancies:

Medical estimates of a 5% pregnancy rate are for one-time, unprotected sexual intercourse. Some victimization’s may include multiple incidents of intercourse.

Because of methodology, NCVS does not measure the victimization of Americans age 12 or younger. Rapes of these young people could result in pregnancies not accounted for in RAINN estimates.

And that doesn't even get into the fact that rape tends to be one of the more underreported crimes in the country, so the number could be higher.

You want an "honest" discussion about abortion and rape? How about presenting all the facts and information first?

Of course you won't though. Because you don't want an honest discussion. You want to blame shift to the media.

The fact of the matter is, what Arkin said is not true. What he said is this---

“People always try to make that one of those things, ‘Oh, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question,” Akin said. “It seems to me, first of all, what I understand from doctors is that’s really where—if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

He is not saying "well, pregnancy because of rape is pretty rare" (nice job trying to shift the discussion away from that, the RNC should probably hire you for you marvelous ability to spin bull****). He's saying, that a woman's body somehow magically reacts to being raped by enforcing it's own sort of birth control. Which it doesn't, while implying that there are legitimate forms of rape and illegitimate forms of rape. And then saying if the bull**** thing he says happens doesn't happen, he still wouldn't support abortion in the case of rape anyway.

He would've been better off (still a horrible person, but better off) if he said "I don't believe in abortion in the cases of rape or incest." It would've been despicable, but it would've been honest, and that kind of thing gets guys like you psyched. Instead, not only did he say something terrible, but he also showed himself to be a complete ****ing moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree it comes off that way,but his focus is on saving a innocent human life

I would bet he is very willing to punish the rapists...perhaps even more than most

I don't think anyone's questioning punishing rapists for their crimes. Nor do I disagree that his focus on saving, what he describes as, an innocent human life.

But the way he goes about it takes in no consideration of the mother, who now has a consistent reminder for at least 9 months of a traumatic experience. And not only that, but she has to financially support those 9 months, which could include leaves of absences from work.

Yet, he makes it out to be like we shouldn't care about those mothers because they're a rare case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it comes off that way,but his focus is on saving a innocent human life

I would bet he is very willing to punish the rapists...perhaps even more than most

So you would say that a woman who is raped is somehow less innocent than the child she'd be forced to bear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's showing an amazing lack of concern for the original victim. The mental well being of the innocent victim becomes a secondary to him in those cases.

The people who look at rape victims and basically tell them to suck it up and deal with it because it's part of God's plan and they no longer have a choice and control over their own body have no place in a civilized society.

I'm against abortion as a means of birth control for consenting adults, but to try and fight rape victims over abortions is indefensible to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you would say that a woman who is raped is somehow less innocent than the child she'd be forced to bear?

I would say they are AS innocent

I also do not require her to give up her life....as some 'civilized' folk do with the child

helucopter there is support available, and I agree more would be in order

perhaps we can streamline the criminal appeals process to pay for it.....after all they have been found guilty in a court of law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's showing an amazing lack of concern for the original victim. The mental well being of the innocent victim becomes a secondary to him in those cases.

The people who look at rape victims and basically tell them to suck it up and deal with it because it's part of God's plan and they no longer have a choice and control over their own body have no place in a civilized society.

I'm against abortion as a means of birth control for consenting adults, but to try and fight rape victims over abortions is indefensible to me.

And that is really the bottom line. Akin is trying to justify his position by saying that if it's, to paraphrase, a "real" rape, then it is unlikely (though slightly possible) to result in pregnancy, so outlawing all abortions is therefore more acceptable. The way people fall on what he said will be determined by whether or not they think any abortions should be legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people who look at rape victims and basically tell them to suck it up and deal with it because it's part of God's plan and they no longer have a choice and control over their own body have no place in a civilized society.

.

If a victim wants choice they should report the rape and get the pregnancy prevention available

if they are unable to do so and unwilling to carry the child I would not prevent it

I WILL argue against aborting the child though, not as God's plan,but as a former fetus)uncivilized as that may be to some)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And some people think the Republicans' War on Women is all in our pretty little heads. Riiiiiiight!
My brain is melting out of my ears from the stupidity.
He basically says "I may not have been right about the rape thing, I guess. But you should still have to carry that kid you never wanted because that's an innocent life! And you were sort of innocent, but still. The baby is innocenter."
*HEADDESK*

No, no, no, you poor, misguided, daft old man.

Rape is rape. It doesn't matter how it starts. Rape is rape. There is not "more than one kind of rape", nor can consensual sex be rape. By definition consensual sex can't be rape. The two concepts are incompatible with one another.

Thank you!! How does this crock of **** even seem appropriate with even a half normal, semi functioning brain???? First of all, there is NO such thing as a "legitimate rape". Second, did I mention this whole thing is a total crock of ****?

If anyone wants to know how these embarrassingly stupid people continue to get elected, your answer is right here in this thread

:applause:

If a victim wants choice they should report the rape and get the pregnancy prevention available

if they are unable to do so and unwilling to carry the child I would not prevent it

I WILL argue against aborting the child though, not as God's plan,but as a former fetus)uncivilized as that may be to some)

You wouldn't prevent them from carrying the child if they are unwilling, but you'll argue against aborting it???? Huh??? Oh, I get it! Because you were a former fetus! Gee, so if (God forbid) someone close to you ever got raped and they got pregnant, and for ANY reason chose NOT to have the baby, you could just preach to them about how we were all former fetuses. I'm sure that'll go over real well :cool:

I mean hell, I can remember playing charades, go fish, and other **** when I was a fetus :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's showing an amazing lack of concern for the original victim. The mental well being of the innocent victim becomes a secondary to him in those cases.

The people who look at rape victims and basically tell them to suck it up and deal with it because it's part of God's plan and they no longer have a choice and control over their own body have no place in a civilized society.

I'm against abortion as a means of birth control for consenting adults, but to try and fight rape victims over abortions is indefensible to me.

And you know what? Even though I disagree with your opinion, I can at least somewhat understand where you're coming from. I sort of get, even if I disagree.

I will never understand the rational behind forcing a woman to bear their attackers child. The idea is that you don't want to "murder an innocent child", but you have no problem forcing a woman to bear a child she did not ask for because the action of another person that she did not ask for, with no regard for the mental or physical well being of said victim.

Those people basically say that regardless of the situation, because it's "rare", you have no rights and no choice. You will have this child regardless. You have to bear your attackers child, because that child is "innocent". Your rights be God damned. Literally.

---------- Post added August-20th-2012 at 12:53 AM ----------

I WILL argue against aborting the child though, not as God's plan,but as a former fetus)uncivilized as that may be to some)

This is ****ing dumb.

As a former fetus? Really?

And you want an honest discussion about abortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you take from my post I was forcing NLC?

I can reword it if you can't comprehend it as written

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you take from my post I was forcing NLC?

I can reword it if you can't comprehend it as written

You're hedging the issue.

Your post basically amounts to "if a woman gets rape, she should abort the child, and then take something like the morning after pill to prevent pregnancy".

And then you basically contradict yourself; you would not prevent it, but you would argue against aborting the child.

So you mean to say, (God fordbid, seriously, I would never wish this on anybody, purely as rhetorical question; seriously, we debate but I don't hate you or your positions or anything) if someone close to you were raped and (as about 60% of women don't) did not report it, and conceived a child, you would then argue that that woman should not abort the child? And while you wouldn't prevent them for doing so, you would disagree with that person making the decision to not bear their attackers child?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The woman should have the choice of not letting the rapist use her body to procreate or even to mix his genes with hers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're hedging the issue.

Your post basically amounts to "if a woman gets rape, she should abort the child, and then take something like the morning after pill to prevent pregnancy".

? abort then the morning after pill?...do you not understand the morning after pill prevents contraception after rape?

at least according to the scientists

add

Yes NCL, I would argue for the life of a loved ones child ,or a strangers

Alexy ...I agree, report the crime and get the morning after pill...and counselling

and checked for more dangerous things than his genes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
? abort then the morning after pill?...do you not understand the morning after pill prevents contraception after rape?

at least according to the scientists

add

Yes NCL, I would argue for the life of a loved ones child ,or a strangers

Alexy ...I agree, report the crime and get the morning after pill...and counselling

and checked for more dangerous things than his genes

What if the morning after pill doesn't work? Would you want your wife, mom, sister, daughter, cousin, etc to have to carry a child that they were not psychologically able to carry after a rape? And again, I would NEVER wish this on you. I'm only trying to get you to see this from a different perspective. As a male, it's very easy for you to say what you would or should do. But I can tell you, having had 2 kids myself, being pregnant with children you WANT isn't easy! A man will never really know what a normal, healthy, "wanted" pregnancy is like- forget about an UNWANTED one! Heck, as a female, I can't even imagine what it must be like to be pregnant with a child that was conceived out of rape. How can you be so quick to either judge or say what is right or wrong in a situation like this when you have no uterus and have never (I'm assuming and hope you haven't) been raped?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would bet he is very willing to punish the rapists...perhaps even more than most

So? Punishing the rapist =/= salvaging the woman's ruined life. Focusing on that and trying to force that woman to have that baby is some seriously ****ed up priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So? Punishing the rapist =/= salvaging the woman's ruined life. Focusing on that and trying to force that woman to have that baby is some seriously ****ed up priorities.

I could not agree with this post more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
consensual sex can be rape

Yes, that was his point, too.

"If you got pregnant, then you consented".

Which is all that matters to some people

Which explains why you're defending him. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, that was his point, too.

"If you got pregnant, then you consented".

Yep, because in "legitimate" rape the body shuts down the process.....what a moron.

twa, do yourself a favor, cut your losses, the guy revealed his ignorance and if he wasn't a GOP you'd be crucifying him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So? Punishing the rapist =/= salvaging the woman's ruined life. Focusing on that and trying to force that woman to have that baby is some seriously ****ed up priorities.

a abortion =/= salvaging her life either and takes a life

nor have I called for her to be forced to carry the child...AT ALL

what is ****ed up is the assumption her life is ruined and a innocent must die to make it better

---------- Post added August-20th-2012 at 06:34 AM ----------

twa, do yourself a favor, cut your losses.

not in my nature

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I was reading this thread, I thought maybe even twa will abstain from this one and see the absurdity behind it.

But lo and behold, the master has arrived.

How you can spin this:

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

Into acknowledging:

I agree it was a idiotic statement...JUST NOT THE ONE USED AS THE TITLE(which is NOT what he said)

And then spin it into this:

I agree it comes off that way,but his focus is on saving a innocent human life

Epic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What if the morning after pill doesn't work?

the odds of pregnancy are low, the odds if you take the morning after pill are even lower.

in the very small number of cases left I would suggest the life still has value, but will not force childbirth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't women who don't want to get pregnant just pretend that it's a legitimate rape whenever they have sex? Then their female body parts will kick into gear to "shut that whole thing down." Bingo-bango-bongo...no unwanted pregnancies. Abortion issue solved. It's brilliant.

On a related note, I am announcing my candidacy for Senator from the great State of Missouri. You know that guy from the "Rent is Too Damn High" party in New York City? My party is the "Shut That Whole Thing Down" party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.