Canis lupus hominis

Posted in Politics | Tagged Todd Aken | 37 Comments

37 Responses

1. on August 21, 2012 at 8:11 pm retrieverman

   LOL, Kirk the Crocoduckman has come out in defense of Aken!

   http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/21/kirk-cameron-wishes-everyone-would-leave-poor-todd-akin-alone-video/

   
   
   • on August 21, 2012 at 11:15 pm massugu

     “As a former atheist”. What happened, did he run into a burning bush or something?

     
     
2. on August 21, 2012 at 10:33 pm massugu

   Definitions:
   Legitimate rape; an oxymoron uttered by a moron.

   IIlegitmate rape; a redundancy.

   
   
3. on August 22, 2012 at 2:49 am justanotherbyb

   Eh, much ado about nothing.

   The guy likely meant “forcible.” He probably doesn’t consider consensual sex between teenagers to be “legitimate rape” and neither do I, even though the law often considers it to be statutory rape.

   He relied on information written by a medical doctor over a decade ago–information that does not seem medically sound (and I am an RN, so I’m not totally ignorant about the human body.) Stress can cause a woman to spontaneously abort, but it is highly doubtful that forced intercourse causes some sort of defense mechanism that prevents conception or implantation.

   However, if a baby is human even when still in the womb, then logically the mode of conception wouldn’t change that.

   Just my two cents.

   Personally, I think Bill Clinton’s behavior was far worse than Akin’s foot-in-mouth moment, and yet Clinton only got a hounding by the partisans in Congress rather than the media and members of his own political party.

   
   
   • on August 22, 2012 at 7:50 am retrieverman

     If it’s nothing, can you tell me why the bigwigs of the Republican Party have asked him to step aside and why Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have decided to pull their money from the race?

     If it’s nothing, they would have circled the wagons and sent in their talking point hitmen (and women). Everyone would be speaking from the same page.

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 10:25 am justanotherbyb

       Weeeeellll, politics is a delicate dance and with Romney and Obama neck-and-neck in the polls, the GOP (including the Tea Party faction) is unwilling to take any chances.

       If crucifying Akin helps them win an election, they’ll do it. Most politicians aren’t very principled. In fact, the only principle they really ever stick to is winning elections, particularly those folks known derisively as “establishment Republicans” or “RINOs.” But in this particular case, even the more principled faction (the Tea Party) is unwilling to see a loss in November due to a silly case of foot-mouth disease.

       
       
   • on August 22, 2012 at 10:48 am Jen Robinson

     I think Akin did a good thing . . . by showing his hand and raising questions about his party. The Grand Ole Party, according to the right-to-life planks added to the party platform, thinks it’s ok to let a girl get knocked up, without having much say in the matter, and then to leave her responsible for raising the baby without the support of a partner. Meanwhile, they cut back on the social services that would help a woman who happens, tragically, to end out with a baby that some person with gonads and a penis forced upon her.
     Date rape, statutory rape, sex that a woman would not have agreed to but for the effects of drugs and alcohol, rape of a wife by an abusive husband . . . I think it’s great that the law has come to regard these as crimes. Children should not be conceived outside of an environment that can see to their welfare. Akin et al. want to go back to the good ole days when a man could get his rocks off, prove his manhood, and leave some poor gal to raise the child. Not to mention, bringing a baby into the world without the benefit of a stable, loving home.

     I got pregnant by forcible rape in 1968, pre Roe v. Wade. I was hitchhiking. The guy pulled a knife. I yielded without struggle. I was able to get an abortion because my father knew a cooperative psychiatrist. My life would have been much worse if I’d been forced to go through with having a child at 18. It is tragic that any woman be forced to have the child from forced or coerced sex.

     Clinton allowing someone to give him a blow job — and denying it was sex — was worse than Akin. Give me a break! Whether or not a blow job is sex is a semantic question . . . but biologically, it’s clear that such a sexual act has little danger of conception.

     As for the rights of the unborn, what about the fertilized eggs that are for one reason or another, rejected in the womb? I lack the library resources to do a literature review, but I’ve heard reports to the effect that only a minority of fertilized eggs go full term . . . most are spontaneously aborted. Are you going to start charging women with manslaughter when they suffer a miscarriage? Are you going to start requiring tests for conception and monitoring every fertilized egg? Why not go the next step and punish women for eggs that go unfertilized?

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 11:38 am justanotherbyb

       I’m not going to pretend to understand your experience. I’ve never been at the mercy of a violent man. IMHO, violent rapists should be publicly executed. Maybe it would serve as a bit of a deterrent to the next one.

       That being said, I’m not a fan of unprincipled exceptions. I believe that developing humans in the womb are still humans, and I don’t believe it is right to kill those humans just because they’re not wanted…even if the circumstances of their conception were violent and horrible.

       Clinton did more than receive a blowjob and stick a cigar up an intern’s vagina. He was accused of sexual harassment as well, remember? He lied, he committed adultery, and he disgraced the presidency because he could not exercise even a modicum of self control.

       Comparing a spontaneous abortion (aka miscarriage) to an elective abortion is illogical. Do we charge drivers with murder when someone walks in front of their car on the highway? No, of course not, because it is about intent.

       It would not be practical to enforce an abortion ban on pregnant women. Too many variables, and there is that Fourth Amendment we must contend with (although maybe the TSA can deal with that for us /tongue-in-cheek). It is reasonable, however, to ban medical professionals from performing elective abortions just as we ban medical professionals from assisting suicide in most states.

       
       
       • on August 22, 2012 at 12:08 pm Jen Robinson

         I disagree that violent rapists (or sexual predators working as clergy) should be publicaly executed. I do think desexing is in order, a la Gilbert and Sullivan (Let the punishment fit the kind). Cutting the balls off may be cruel . . . that’s a subjective call. But I think the punishment should be employed frequently enough that it not be viewed as unusual.

         With respect to differentiation between spontaneous and deliberate abortion: Intent, when it is good intent based on reasonable logic, should not be punished. (I agree, ‘good’ is subjective, but so are many important issues.) In answer to your question, drivers who run over drunks who wander onto the road do sometimes end up charged with involuntary manslaughter.

         A foetus doesn’t care if it was aborted because some biological process detected problems in the womb or ‘Mom’ wasn’t in a position to give it a good home and had nothing but hatred for ‘Dad’.

         If there is a merciful God (which I doubt), I’d expect He offers kindly treatment to persons that were aborted in the womb. So they are spared the ‘misery here below’ (as per gospel hymns) and go direct to Heaven. I’d say that’s a winning ticket for the unborn . . . and abortion just spares them misery on earth.

         
         
       • on August 22, 2012 at 5:59 pm massugu

         “It is reasonable, however, to ban medical professionals from performing elective abortions just as we ban medical professionals from assisting suicide in most states.”

         At which time it goes back underground. It is still performed you understand, its just illegal now. BUT chances of death and other complications for the woman undergoing abortion go way up. That the same woman who may not be able to afford the children she already has.

         Well, you might say, that is her fault. But is it her children’s fault?

         Well, you say, she should have used birth control…but wait, Paul Ryan and his coterie (as per the Bishop of Rome) are against birth control. Hmmm, methinks we’re caught between Scylla and Charybdis here.

         
         
   • on August 22, 2012 at 10:55 am massugu

     No, its not “much ado about nothing.” It represents an overriding, paternalistic attitude among conservative male politicians that they know better than women how to handle women’s issues. Teenaged sex aside, rape is rape. A woman has the right to decide w/ whom she will have sex and w/ whom she will have children. The civil rights of a clump of undifferentiated cells do not trump the civil rights of a fully developed human being.

     BTW: Clinton’s big sin was lying to the voting public–seems to me that there’s a lot of that going around lately. I also notice that Clinton’s VP didn’t get elected. Instead we got the reincarnation of Alfred E. Neuman, many of whose destructive policies are likely to be perpetuated if R-money and St. Ryan get elected.

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 11:08 am retrieverman

       Bill Clinton also never said that he wanted to take rights away from women. This Akin character clearly has.

       And the reason why he wants to take away those rights is because he’s been exposed to a lot of propaganda and junk science from churches and various quack scientists that many of these churches bring along to reinforce their Weltanschauung.

       
       
       • on August 22, 2012 at 11:49 am justanotherbyb

         I guess it depends on what you consider to be a “right.”

         But I don’t know if he wants to criminalize women who have abortions. Most pro-life politicians don’t push for that kind of legislation (although some do.) Most of the time they just try to strip funding from organizations that provide abortions, or they try to regulate abortion providers out of business.

         
         
     • on August 22, 2012 at 11:46 am justanotherbyb

       I’m a woman, and I am as pro-life as they come. My opinions about abortion are probably on par with most conservative men.

       Therefore, why can’t they hold that opinion if it is an opinion held by pro-lifer females such as myself?

       I don’t find it to be paternalistic. It’s principled. Akin was just sadly misinformed about the science of conception.

       Reproduction is a NATURAL consequence of intercourse. I believe women do have the right to choose who they sleep with and when. I believe they have the right to use contraception and prophylactics. I believe they have the right to say “No” and that be respected.

       I also believe that women are just as morally responsible for their choices as men. Women are not subhuman. They know what they are doing and why, and they are fully capable of understanding the consequences. Therefore, if a pregnancy results from intercourse, it’s not a “mistake.” It’s a big fat DUH.

       She chose to take the risk of impregnation with that particular man. And there is always a risk unless one is sterile. Why that means she can violently remove her offspring because she doesn’t want it is beyond me. It’s not even civilized. It’s barbaric.

       
       
       • on August 22, 2012 at 6:08 pm massugu

         You may have noticed that the majority of the pols who have spoken thusly are men. Men who are into power. Many of them–consciously or subconsciously–relegate women to a lower status, to that of objects or chattel.

         I find it likely that you, an RN, haven’t run into doctors with those characteristics. Think of one or more of them deciding what you can or cannot do with your body, what you and you and your significant other can or cannot do in the privacy of your own bedroom. Rape is about power not sex, modern politics is about power not public service, big business is about power not providing a quality product or service. We, the people, need to take back the power to make our own choices.

         
         
         • on August 22, 2012 at 7:35 pm massugu

           Afterthought: You say your are pro-life. Does that mean that you eat little else but rice and take great pains not to step on insects or other small creatures? If, as I suspect, your answer is no, then what you are is anti-abortion, not pro-life. I respect your stand and your right to have it, I just prefer clarity in expression.

           
           
         • on August 22, 2012 at 7:41 pm massugu

           That should read unlikely not “likely.” Sorry, a bad case of keyboard dyslexia.

           
           
   • on August 22, 2012 at 1:38 pm Dave

     In Europe and Canada, no one gives a damn if politicians have an affair or not. Why should they expect politicians to be clean of acts normal people commit everyday? Everyone knows that no one is perfect. What they do give a damn if politicians are accountable to the people in their promises of economic stability and social safety nets.

     I once idolized America; but when religious morals took precedent over the welfare of the people, it is no longer “the land of the free” anymore.

     What Bill Clinton was impeached for is rather silly compared to what Republicans tried to impose on the general public in the last decade.

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 1:46 pm retrieverman

       It is, isn’t it?

       I spent a long time in the past decade hoping someone would give Dubya a blowjob so he would get impeached and removed from office!

       
       
4. on August 22, 2012 at 8:53 am hemmingforddogblog

   What I like about American politics is that “special” type of crazy. Akin is one. Michelle Bachmann is another. I was hoping that Romney would pick her as his VP.

   Canadian crazies are just not “up” to your standards. :)

   
   
   • on August 22, 2012 at 8:59 am Ashley

     Agreed. And for that I am so, so thankful.

     
     
   • on August 22, 2012 at 9:55 am retrieverman

     What? You mean the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t run our state department?

     Who knew!

     LOL

     This whole thing reminds me of something you’d read about from Uganda, where they tried to pass a death penalty for all homosexuals.

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 10:28 am justanotherbyb

       Mmmm…I think that’s a bit of a stretch–comparing death penalty legislation for sodomy and lesbianism with a misinformed politician speaking candidly in an interview.

       This election seems particularly inflammatory to me, not just in the media and among politicians and talking heads, but also among the average citizen. Lots of poo slinging.

       
       
       • on August 22, 2012 at 10:48 am retrieverman

         Well, you did compare the consensual relationship between Mr. Clinton and Ms. Lewinski to this man, who apparently was making an excuse for rape.

         The implication is that if a woman got pregnant from a rape, then she really wasn’t raped.

         I have yet to see this man walk it back– at least in a convincing way.

         The trouble is that the House would not be in the GOP’s hands right now without the votes of women.

         For some odd reason, they decided to forget who actually gave them their majority and started pandering to the whole “values voters” or religious right constituency.

         
         
         • on August 22, 2012 at 11:54 am justanotherbyb

           I don’t think Akin made excuses for rape. I think he was trying to explain why he didn’t believe we need abortion to be legal for cases of rape. But I suppose people are going to interpret what he said in different ways.

           Mr. Clinton ACTED despicably. Akin made a gaffe.

           If a medical professional told Akin that in cases of forcible rape, the woman’s body will prevent her from conceiving, and he trusted that professional, then who’s the bad guy here? Akin was a fool, but he wasn’t despicable. The medical buffoon was the one who should be hung out to dry for spreading that type of misinformation.

           Everyone is a values voter. It’s just that people’s values differ. I vote based on my values, don’t you?

           
           
           • on August 22, 2012 at 12:07 pm retrieverman

             If what Bill Clinton did was so bad, then shouldn’t these people also be impeached and removed from office? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/is-skinny-dipping-in-the-_n_1819972.html

             At least he didn’t get blown at the Wailing Wall.

             Yes. I’m a values voter. I vote secular. I vote feminist. I vote pro labor and pro environment.

             I’m about the only person in this state who does, though.

             BTW, I think asking Yoder to resign or be impeached is silly.

             I’m sure you agree with this.

             But that’s exactly how I feel about Bill Clinton.

             And no, the FBI didn’t investigate them. However, he did skinny dip.

             
             
           • on August 22, 2012 at 4:55 pm Pai

             What ‘medical buffoon’? What ‘gaffe’? This urban myth has been in evangelical pro-life circles for ages (just like ‘the pill causes cancer’ and ‘the day-after pill causes abortions’). It’s straight-up delusion, because the scientific facts of the matter are irrefutable. I’m sorry, but the Pro-Life movement loses most of it’s legitimacy because it embraces falsehoods that support their position rather than facts, and tolerates the strong undercurrent of religious-based blanket anti-contraception proponents.

             http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/a-canard-that-will-not-die-legitimate-rape-doesnt-cause-pregnancy/261303/

             
             
             • on August 22, 2012 at 5:00 pm retrieverman

               At megachurches and other evangelical cesspools, they are well-known for bringing in quack “experts” who promote all this crap, along with creationism, and some of the bizarre NWO crap.

               There are people– not just the Hovinds– who make a living out of spreading ignorance among religious communities.

               
               
             • on August 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm Pai

               1988: “The odds that a woman who is raped will get pregnant are “one in millions and millions and millions,” said state Rep. Stephen Freind, R-Delaware County, the Legislature’s leading abortion foe.

               The reason, Freind said, is that the traumatic experience of rape causes a woman to “secrete a certain secretion” that tends to kill sperm.”

               1995: “The facts show that people who are raped — who are truly raped — the juices don’t flow, the body functions don’t work and they don’t get pregnant. Medical authorities agree that this is a rarity, if ever.” -Henry Aldridge

               There’s a pattern here of stark-raving biological ignorance and denialism of reality. This is not some one-off ‘he misspoke’ event.

               
               
               • on August 25, 2012 at 10:29 pm kittenz

                 Most of them probably also believe that women have one more rib than men (you’d be surprised at the number of people who believe that. Not just the infant classes in Sunday schools, either, but grown men and women).

                 
                 
           • on August 22, 2012 at 7:59 pm massugu

             The term “values” as used by the political right in America almost always means morality. Morality, like its sister concept religion is a cultural phenomenon. That is its not consistent from one culture (or subculture) to another. Point in case, some Islamic theocracies prescribe stoning for adulterers (this can include rape victims btw). Citizens of those regimes generally feel that its a moral thing to do. In the West it is often described as immoral, but it isn’t, not to those Islamic citizens. They feel as strongly about it being the moral thing to do as you do legislating against abortion. So the question isn’t whether its moral, its whether its ethical, the right thing to do. Ethics are personal–you have yours I have mine, but are usually informed by morality. Laws (at least theoretically) are generic–applying to all citizens equally. Morals are subjective, confined to a particular culture or subculture.

             The bottom line here is that “values”, aka morality tend to be binary, i.e., black or white, friend or foe, with us or against us. Reality, on the other hand is almost never binary, its Boolean, i.e., IF circumstance A applies, THEN do Z, ELSE do Y, unless B AND C apply OR D applies…. Reality, which includes rape and abortion (as well as canine genetics and evolution to get back on subject for this BLOG) consists of shades of gray–its fuzzy, not set in concrete.

             
             
       • on August 22, 2012 at 10:49 am retrieverman

         Democrats just figured out how to swiftboat.

         
         
       • on August 22, 2012 at 6:13 pm massugu

         “Lesbianism”? Is that a choice like Rosicrucianism, or capitalism? Your usage betrays your bias in this case. ‘Homosexuality’ would have served as well in this instance.

         
         
   • on August 22, 2012 at 11:01 am massugu

     Yeah, I’ve been tempted more than once to move to BC. But seems to me that Canada’s politicos are starting to go crazy as well. There’ll be no place left for sane people to go.

     
     
     • on August 22, 2012 at 1:32 pm Dave

       You are welcome to move to Europe.

       
       
     • on August 22, 2012 at 1:39 pm Dave

       At least they are not dumb enough to touch certain subjects like public healthcare.

       
       
     • on August 22, 2012 at 2:26 pm hemmingforddogblog

       BC is probably safe. It’s Alberta that you want to stay out of.

       
       

Comments are closed.