When the subject of abortion of children conceived of rape comes up one can CORRECTLY point out that less than 1% of abortions are reportedly from rape, one can CORRECTLY point out that children are not usually punished for the crimes of their father in civilized nations - OR one can pretend that such people don't or shouldn't exist if the rape was “legitimate”.
Akin the combover idiot decided on pretending that such people (thousands every year in America) do not or should not exist if the rape was “legitimate”.
Is Palin a “feminazi”? She was offended as well and opined that Akin should withdraw from the race.
You said...
“He didn't “invent” a biological mechanism, he extrapolated from one. And it's one that is NOT without merit.”
Please explain the merits of his argument (the one he apologized for and even he was smart enough to figure out was indefensible and wrong) - what biological mechanism allows women to try to “shut the whole thing down”. What research do you have to show the merits of this argument?
As Akin would have it, perhaps the rape you are speaking of in your past was not “legitimate”.
You keep trying to gin up outrage like he was advocating female circumcision, but his statement simply doesn’t support your histrionics.
The reason you keep quoting snippets and liberal talking points is because any fair minded assessment of his error, and he did acknowledge it was an error, just doesn’t warrant the kind of lynching you want to dish out.
As for Sarah Palin’s opinion, I disagree with her and won’t hold it against her. But she sure hasn’t tried to contrive the sound and fury you have over it.
Furthermore, what kind of petty little troll asks to “explain the merits” of a statement acknowledged as error, in support of their continued belligerence?
The guy erred in extrapolating from stress induced infertility. Okay. What’s next? Are you going to call for the imprisonment of creationists?