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

[visionary]

It is a common belief among the religious that conception is a act of God.

Especially if that God is Zeus....

[AsburySkinsFan]

I wish us CCers had the budget you guys have.

Pfffft....you obviously haven't seen many church budgets. :pfft:

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I have to say, the media is cherry picking what this guy said now. He didn't say it was God's will that a person get raped. He was just saying that he believes all life even in the "horrible" circumstance of rape is a good thing. He's entitled to his beliefs on that, and people are entitled to disagree with him. But he never said that rape was God's will or was good or anything like that. And I've seen some articles portraying it like that.

[Jumbo]

In this update, he is stating his words were twisted and maybe he didn't make his meaning clear enough.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20121024/US.Indiana.Senate.Abortion/

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said Wednesday that he is standing by his statement that when a woman becomes pregnant during a rape "that's something God intended." He says some people have twisted the meaning of his comment.

Mourdock said in a news conference that he abhors any sexual violence and regrets it if his comment during a debate Tuesday night left another impression. He said he firmly believes all life is precious and that he abhors violence of any kind.

"I spoke from my heart. And speaking from my heart, speaking from the deepest level of my faith, I would not apologize. I would be less than faithful if I said anything other than life is precious, I believe it's a gift from god," Mourdock said

I think the comment is still open to reasonably disagreeing judgment on its worthiness.

[Koolblue13]

I miss spoke, I spoke from the heart? What kind of thing is that to say? It's like saying I'm usually a very calculating liar, but my honest opinion slipped out. I usually like to go on faith, instead of rational thought.

What a joke.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

In this update, he is stating his words were twisted and maybe he didn't make his meaning clear enough.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20121024/US.Indiana.Senate.Abortion/

I think the comment is still open to reasonably disagreeing judgment on its worthiness.

Just my two cents, people should actually listen to the audio of it. I just heard it on the radio on the way to work.... I just think they are taking this one out of context.

Akin was a different story. He's an idiot. But this is trying to get another "Akin story" out of something that is not the same thing.

[Hersh]

I have to say, the media is cherry picking what this guy said now. He didn't say it was God's will that a person get raped. He was just saying that he believes all life even in the "horrible" circumstance of rape is a good thing. He's entitled to his beliefs on that, and people are entitled to disagree with him. But he never said that rape was God's will or was good or anything like that. And I've seen some articles portraying it like that.

I don't think he was suggesting that it's God's will that a woman gets raped. We are questioning if it's God's will that a rape victim got pregnant, what about the victim? If God is controlling if a woman gets pregnant, why is that the only thing he's controlling? Hope that clarifies my position on someone saying what he said.

[alexey]

I think the idea of all life being precious is legit and I can respect it. I think that all life is precious as well. The devil is in the details.

(btw from the get-go we can agree on mid-late term abortions except in cases of medical emergencies. With a few caveats, I see no problem with making those illegal.)

For example, I think that a woman should be able to choose not to serve as a procreation vehicle for her rapist. Nobody should be forced to bear their rapist's child.

Now about God and his will. In this reality where us humans are trying to figure out how to co-exist and succeed together, people can have opinions. People can have reasons for their opinions. What they cannot do, however, is claim that their opinions are based on authoritative access to ultimate truths.

So if YOU think that all life is precious and YOU have arrived to some policy conclusions based on that, great. It is YOUR opinion. You do not get to claim that you are channeling God's will. When asked why you feel that way, you can answer with REASONS or with FAITH. You do not get to present your FAITH as a REASON.

[Jumbo]

My two cents, with an eye on fairness an respect, is that I still think this guy is being an idiot too, here, and trying to connect any Gods Will message to the topic of pregnancy by rape re: the sanctity of life, is idiotic at a base level.

I'm reminded of the somewhat similar matter I witnessed recently, where a religious family member went over to the parent (a "less religious" person) in a room right after they have been told their child committed and told her "God wouldn't give you anything you can't handle."

No matter how sincere or benign the intention is claimed to have been, I find it's stupid (and insensitive) in many (not all) such cases, and often done in a very self-serving spirit though it's presented as a more selfless spiritual thought. This current incident is little different, fundamentally.

A religious belief (credible or incredible) does not suspend being socially accountable for poor judgment and lack of intelligence (or worse) in presentation. I think sending rape victims any message that implies they may be on sinful or anti-Gods Will ground for not wanting to give birth is well within free speech, but in my house would have you out the door without your feet touching the floor, and in society, I would wish would have you drummed out of any representational body. Call it four cents for me.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I don't think he was suggesting that it's God's will that a woman gets raped. We are questioning if it's God's will that a rape victim got pregnant, what about the victim? If God is controlling if a woman gets pregnant, why is that the only thing he's controlling? Hope that clarifies my position on someone saying what he said.

I thought he qualified his statements pretty well. He said that rape is a horrible thing and went on about how terrible it was. His point was that all life is God's will, even in the terrible case of rape. And he even said how he "struggled" with this idea, but he came to accept it. Its his opinion. But its being distorted whether you agree with it or not.

[Jumbo]

So if YOU think that all life is precious and YOU have arrived to some policy conclusions based on that, great. It is YOUR opinion. You do not get to claim that you are channeling God's will. When asked why you feel that way, you can answer with REASONS or with FAITH. You do not get to present your FAITH as a REASON.

To me, in both conversational and logical terms (pragmatically and classically speaking) this position is as convoluted and pointless a position as the one's I indict on the "religious side" in the matter. People not only "can" but will give their faith in a religion as a reason (caps or not). They can give their "faith in democracy" as the reason they risk their lives and it be so. Etc.

You once again try to make your own fine-tuned (no pun intended :pfft:) definitions of words, and while you have not always been wrong in those efforts, you are often more off the mark than on it in such attempts. And that's an area (one of a few) I can speak on quite competently. Were I you, I'd drop that tactic, unless you can become more measured and competent at it.

---------- Post added October-24th-2012 at 11:34 AM ----------

I thought he qualified his statements pretty well. He said that rape is a horrible thing and went on about how terrible it was. His point was that all life is God's will, even in the terrible case of rape. And he even said how he "struggled" with this idea, but he came to accept it. Its his opinion. But its being distorted whether you agree with it or not.

The fact that you feel you need to point out that he needed to make sure we all get he feels that rape is horrible should be a huge clue to what an abortive (pun intended) attempt this was in communication and worth of message. It was stupid. It's ridiculous to even be in a situation where either an audience is cast in a light where they might wonder (????) if he's NOT finding rape horrible, and that the sender of the message and any defender of it needs to "make that clear." Bleh.

[alexey]

I thought he qualified his statements pretty well. He said that rape is a horrible thing and went on about how terrible it was. His point was that all life is God's will, even in the terrible case of rape. And he even said how he "struggled" with this idea, but he came to accept it. Its his opinion. But its being distorted whether you agree with it or not.

An incoherent position will always look distorted when examined.

Are his words being distorted? I'm sure they are.

What did he actually mean? Does God interfere with events in reality? Does God choose which sperm gets into the egg first? Does God combine the DNA? Does God decide whether the fertilized egg gets implanted in the uterus?

We have a huge problem here. A simple and sensible but purely philosophical statement "life is God's gift" does not actually describe God making things happen in reality.

There is no God's involvement to point out here. There is a forced sexual encounter during which a rapist's sperm managed to fertilize the egg.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

The fact that you feel you need to point out that he needed to make sure we all get he feels that rape is horrible should be a huge clue to what an abortive (pun intended) attempt this was in communication and worth of message. It was stupid. It's ridiculous to even be in a situation where either an audience is cast in a light where they might wonder (????) if he's NOT finding rape horrible, and that the sender of the message and any defender of it needs to "make that clear." Bleh.

I hear you, but just listen to it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u1Kc6lwzQ0

[alexey]

I hear you, but just listen to it:

Yes looks like he is a good, genuine, and honest man who had a really hard time accepting an immoral outcome of his faith.

[Jumbo]

OK, I did, dammit (I am trying to get my ass back to real work).

Amigo, we will respectfully have to be of differing takes here---hearing ti actually increased my negative reaction a tad, but simply on this message and event, not knowing the man.

The man in that moment, to my best analysis from minimal information, seems "nice" (sincere and well-intentioned) enough.

As i said earlier, though, such, even when genuine, is not a pass on accountability to me re: the actual message. It does, when genuine, moderate level of negative evaluations on my end, depending on the situation.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Yes looks like he is a good, genuine, and honest man who had a really hard time accepting an immoral outcome of his faith.

Arent you the one claiming moral superiority by stating this?

---------- Post added October-24th-2012 at 02:51 PM ----------

OK, I did, dammit (I am trying to get my ass back to real work).

Amigo, we will respectfully have to be of differing takes here---hearing ti actually increased my negative reaction a tad, but simply on this message and event, not knowing the man.

The man in that moment, to my best analysis from minimal information, seems "nice" (sincere and well-intentioned) enough.

As i said earlier, though, such, even when genuine, is not a pass on accountability to me re: the actual message. It does, when genuine, moderate level of negative evaluations on my end, depending on the situation.

Ok ok. I appreciate that.

[Destino]

There is no God's involvement to point out here. There is a forced sexual encounter during which a rapist's sperm managed to fertilize the egg.

I agree with Alexey's quoted statement. There is nothing about a hypothetical rape results in pregnancy that indicates the direct involvement of God.

[alexey]

Arent you the one claiming moral superiority by stating this?

I think that it is immoral to force rape victims to bear children of their rapists. I disagree with people who think that rape victims must not be allowed to terminate pregnancies started as a result of rape.

"moral superiority" is a tricky term. In some ways it applies here and in some ways it does not.

One thing for sure - I am not claiming that my positions are based on a moral authority. They are my positions. I have reasons for them. Bearing a child is a significant investment by the mother. I do not think she should be forced to make it against her will.

[Koolblue13]

I get angry when this thread gets bumped and I see 'legitimate' rape in the title. What a joke.

Ignorant religion fueled *******. This guy is another one. They're everywhere.

[Destino]

When asked why you feel that way, you can answer with REASONS or with FAITH. You do not get to present your FAITH as a REASON.

Could you expand on that distinction? If I were to ask a Muslim or Jew why they refuse my offering them a pork sandwich is it your position that they could not present their faith as a reason?

[HooHog]

His belief on this subject directly contradicts his faith. If you say that it is "god's will" that a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, then you're either saying rape is morally acceptable, or if not then god is not good. What kind of omnipotent, inherently good deity would accept rape as morally acceptable? (this is not an argument against the existence of god, just stating that his theory here is absolutely without any sort of spiritual or intellectual merit given the belief structure under which he's operating)

[AsburySkinsFan]

When asked why you feel that way, you can answer with REASONS or with FAITH. You do not get to present your FAITH as a REASON.

Guess what....you don't make the rules for my life.

[88Comrade2000]

These pro-lifers hold such an extreme position; they can't hide their true feelings on the subject. Sad that the Republicans support these guys.

They cost themselves of taking a seat in MO and will have seat probably go Democratic in IN.

Obamacare isn't going anywhere- though should Romney win- I think it will be modified but he will not be able to repeal it.

[Destino]

Guess what....you don't make the rules for my life.

Not yet unbeliever... not yet.

[Destino]

I think that it is immoral to force rape victims to bear children of their rapists. I disagree with people who think that rape victims must not be allowed to terminate pregnancies started as a result of rape.

"moral superiority" is a tricky term. In some ways it applies here and in some ways it does not.

One thing for sure - I am not claiming that my positions are based on a moral authority. They are my positions. I have reasons for them. Bearing a child is a significant investment by the mother. I do not think she should be forced to make it against her will.

I think the point of distinction is caused less by the splitting of moral hairs and more by the opinion of when exactly a person becomes a person. The ProLife movement appears to have mostly accepted the idea that a fertilized egg is a full fledged person. If one accepts that premise, than any abortion would be the killing of an entirely innocent person and abortion which most people identify as generally being unacceptable behavior.