Posted on 08/21/2012 10:40:56 AM PDT by Uncle Slayton
I don't think that's true of Akin at all. It was a stupid statement but he is not a stupid man. Is Rush stupid because he started the Sandra Fluke "slut" controversy? Everyone makes mistakes. Regardless, this is a democracy. Do you want the party elders selecting your candidates or the voters? The primary voters took a look at this guy and made a judgment based on far more than you or I know about him from one interview.
There are many pro-life web sites that state the same thing Akin said about rape and pregnancy. So this seems to be a common belief among some established pro-life groups. I simply don't know if it's true or not. But this is not something Akin made up. If pro-lifers don't agree with it there needs to be some clean-up in their own literature, which is most likely where Akin got the information.
So, it may come down to whether we are still a country of people who adhere to “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Even in the face of 0bamascaretax, the Party of Death, and the 0bama/Soros-engineered attack on everything American.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2921240/posts?page=8#8
Are we really “OK” with butchering babies? If so, who’s next?
The problems seems to be that Akin doesn’t think like the typical politician.
The problems seems to be that Akin doesn’t think.
Then why did he win the primary? Doesn't that indicate that every other candidate was worse? We'd all like politicians who communicate as well as talk show hosts do. But those who can seem to prefer to make gobs of money as talk show hosts rather than run for office. Dole, Bush Jr., McCain and Romney were all pretty weak communicators. If you want to purge the weak communicators out of the Republican party, we've got a LOT more ground to cover than just Akin.
conjecture - n.
the belief that a person so boneheaded and so unprepared can overcome the stupidity emitted from that person’s mouth and somehow with no money can still pull off a victory in a US Senate race in 2012.
There are many think tanks on both sides that don't check their information thoroughly. Unfortunately for us, the vast majority of media workers are liberal, which means that only conservative mistakes of fact are ever called out. There's no point whining about it - it's just the way it is. We just have to be on our toes. Hopefully, what doesn't kill us will make us stronger.
Yeah that’s one thing I’m afraid of; even if Akin could recover from this inexplicably stupid comment, who is to say that he won’t say other stupid, self-destructive things before the election.
The guy just doesn’t seem very bright. Neither is McCaskill of course, but at least she’s figured out how to hand her opponent the rope with which to hang himself.
“This election is about the future of the United States of America.
NOT ABORTION.”
What if, in God’s plan, they’re intertwined? I believe they are. “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” doesn’t differentiate according to subtleties.
The life of a baby. The life of our country. Neither is a throw-away. I don’t believe we can have one but not the other.
What I heard from him on the radio today says different.
Good stuff all. Thank you.
You said, at one point, “The problem here is not Akin opposing the rape exception, but bringing biological inaccuracies into an extremely explosive and emotional fight.” This may be the crux of the matter entirely, although no one, NO ONE, has said it. But it may be less inaccurate historically than it is today. All too unfortunately, he may be wrong about the “biological” figures today.
There can be no doubt that the feminist lobby, Rats, and most pubbies fear the attack on abortion like nothing else, and they’re going to defend that right to kill, uh, to the death. They’ve got their own “studies” and “polls” to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that killing a newborn is permitted, even preferable, if that newborn was conceived other than deliberately.
It’s certainly not surprising that someone here posted a piece on such “studies”—two on the incidence of pregnancy as a result of rape. 6% was one surmise. IF, and I seriously stress the word, this and another related study are factual (never mind complete—just factual), pregnancy-from-rape has indeed increased, because equally “scientific” studies released in the early 70s reported less than half a percent. It occured to me only this morning that both could be correct.
Rapes reported prior to the sexual revolution that resulted in pregnancies may well have been far fewer than those “legitimate” rape-claims today. The act itself, besides being unwanted and traumatic, was also utterly alien to most victims. The biological resistance to which Akin referred probably did exist. But frequent or even occasional sex is bound to reduce any perceived resistance-factor because the act, in an overwhelming number of cases, is no longer alien. This came home forcefully when I read in that same “studies” post that even contraceptive users succumbed to rape-pregnancies more often than consensual-pregnancies. If that’s true (and I tend to doubt it or the veracity of the control-group), the only reason I can see for their argument that pregnancy occurs more often with rape than with consensual sex is that contraceptive users, by definition, either have or expect to have more sexual encounters than non-users. Again, because the newness or alienation-factor is, in effect, turned off, the victim’s natural biological defenses are far less potent. It’s hard for some to remember, but part of the fear of rape wasn’t simply the invasion or the violence; it was also the fear of universally stigmatized, unwed or extra-marital pregnancy. That fear is almost entirely gone today. And whether that’s progress or not (in some ways it’s wonderful), it may have the unintended consequence of shutting down the body’s resistance.
Maybe you should get your head examined for mental behavioral patterns that fit the insanity profile.
It doesn't mean pregnancy can't happen, but it makes it difficult to happen.
Akin himself has written off his statements about this. He now says he was wrong. There is no special magic that makes a woman shut off pregnancy in cases of rape. A simple look at the history of rape in warfare alone is enough to debunk such a dopey claim.
If America were a democracy your rights could be taken away at whim by a majority vote of the populace.
A democracy is the very thing the Founding Fathers didn't establish.
Akin can really bring the RINOs out of the brush and into the open.
“If he is a moron, we need more morons in Congress. I hope he stays in the race as a matter of principle. He has the moral courage to buck the Establishment and be his own man. These are the kinds of people we need to lead this country.”
Exactly right. Akin needs our support. This follow the crowd mentality is not good.
I can't find any info on this. Link please?
It’s passed 5 in the central time zone and Akin made up his mind by staying in. The Rs will just have to deal with it and with their inabilities to cope and push back at the Dems, and quit barking at him.
Aren't you simply guessing at the outcome?
Or do you know the future with certainty?
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.