Vaginas have awesome secret sperm deflectors!
Options
Azdak
Posts: 8,281 Member
Who knew.
In case you have been living in a cave the last few days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us/politics/rep-todd-akin-legitimate-rape-statement-and-reaction.html?_r=1
In case you have been living in a cave the last few days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us/politics/rep-todd-akin-legitimate-rape-statement-and-reaction.html?_r=1
0
Replies
-
What's there to debate? He's an idiot.0
-
What's there to debate? He's an idiot.
QFT0 -
There are people in this country that are fundamentally against abortion for any reason. They have a right to their beliefs. Just don't attempt to shove your beliefs down my throat. The GOP would be a lot better off if they would just accept the fact that Roe vs Wade will not be overturned and just move on.
ya and Akin is an idiot.0 -
Makes me miss Clinton. Now THERE was a man who supported vagina.0
-
Idiot people are the reason I choose to live in a cave. No, I am not saying all people are idiots.0
-
Idiot people are the reason I choose to live in a cave. No, I am not saying all people are idiots.
You get internet in a cave? Cooooool!0 -
There are people in this country that are fundamentally against abortion for any reason. They have a right to their beliefs. Just don't attempt to shove your beliefs down my throat. The GOP would be a lot better off if they would just accept the fact that Roe vs Wade will not be overturned and just move on.
ya and Akin is an idiot.
Not sure about that one. We're not sure where Justice Roberts is, but if he's with Scalia, Thomas and (probably) Alito, the SCOTUS is only one vote away.0 -
-
It's a super secret sponge that goes into action as the rape is happening, it absorbs then spits back out.
Of course the sponge knows when it's a legitimate rape......0 -
I am ROFLing because I find it hard to believe, that he thought it was OK to say this. What a douche!!!! If he does win the race, what does that say about the people in his state? LOL....seriously, what an ignorant statement.0
-
I am ROFLing because I find it hard to believe, that he thought it was OK to say this. What a douche!!!! If he does win the race, what does that say about the people in his state? LOL....seriously, what an ignorant statement.
Polling is pretty worthless right now but before the statements he had a pretty big lead over McCaskill. Now he has a small lead.0 -
There are people in this country that are fundamentally against abortion for any reason. They have a right to their beliefs. Just don't attempt to shove your beliefs down my throat. The GOP would be a lot better off if they would just accept the fact that Roe vs Wade will not be overturned and just move on.
ya and Akin is an idiot.
Not sure about that one. We're not sure where Justice Roberts is, but if he's with Scalia, Thomas and (probably) Alito, the SCOTUS is only one vote away.
And there you have it.... This is why I continue to vote for Democrat presidents.0 -
The guy is an idiot. And he does not represent me or my views. But then really no democrat or republican does. I may be a registered republican, but I wouldn't vote for this guy if it were between him and Satan. But what is even more sad that he believes this enough to say it to the press, is that there are morons that will vote for this guy.0
-
"Last year, Akin joined with GOP vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as two of the original co-sponsors of the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” a bill which, among other things, introduced the country to the bizarre term “forcible rape.”"
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/19/712251/how-todd-akin-and-paul-ryan-partnered-to-redefine-rape/
In full disclosure, I got the link from a Facebook post and by how the article is written, the article appears to be from a pretty "left leaning" group. I try to avoid those. But made me go hmmmmm.0 -
You know I think some of these politicians may have lost that filter that goes between their mouth and their brains. I mean did he miss anatomy class in school or something. And "in the case of actual forceable rape" that statement alone should have won him the moron award never mind what followed. UGH0
-
You know I think some of these politicians may have lost that filter that goes between their mouth and their brains. I mean did he miss anatomy class in school or something. And "in the case of actual forceable rape" that statement alone should have won him the moron award never mind what followed. UGH
I don't think drawing a distinction between forced rape and statutory rape is necessarily inaccurate. I just think it's off topic. Regardless the man is few crayons short of a box.
It all sounds very Victorian to me. If I recall correctly, they believed that a woman can't conceive unless she has an orgasm, and that an orgasm isn't possible in the case of rape (both inaccurate). So, the logic went that if a pregnancy happened, it must mean that the woman gave consent.0 -
It's actually a lot older an idea than Victorian, EK.Legitimate rape' – a medieval medical concept
The idea that rape victims cannot get pregnant is a very old medical theory
. . . The idea that rape victims cannot get pregnant has long roots. The legal position that pregnancy disproved a claim of rape appears to have been instituted in the UK sometime in the 13th century. One of the earliest British legal texts, Fleta, has a clause in the first book of the second volume stating that:
"If, however, the woman should have conceived at the time alleged in the appeal, it abates, for without a woman's consent she could not conceive."
This was a long-lived legal argument. Samuel Farr's Elements of Medical Jurisprudence contained the same idea as late as 1814:
"For without an excitation of lust, or the enjoyment of pleasure in the venereal act, no conception can probably take place. So that if an absolute rape were to be perpetrated, it is not likely she would become pregnant."
This "absolute rape" is not quite the same as Akin's "legitimate rape". Akin seems to be suggesting that the body suppresses conception or causes a miscarriage, while the earlier idea of Farr relates specifically to the importance of orgasm. Through the medieval and early modern period it was widely thought, by lay people as well as doctors, that women could only conceive if they had an orgasm. . . .
Medical theories of sex, reproduction and conception changed gradually through the 18th century, so that by the 19th century the female orgasm was considered much less important for conception, and the female "seed" – if it even existed – was of less significance to the foetus. In popular culture the idea of the essential female orgasm lingered, and seems to still exist in a mutated form today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-h-word/2012/aug/20/legitimate-rape-medieval-medical-concept0 -
I still can't believe he said that. He did not do republicans or any pro-life supporters any favors.0
-
For a party that doesn't want the election to be based on women's rights issues... they sure are doing a bang up job of keeping it out of the news cycles0
-
I still can't believe he said that. He did not do republicans or any pro-life supporters any favors.
I'm sure he doesn't speak for you, but I am not sure he is that far out of the republican mainstream. The "sperm deflector" stuff is goofy, but I read that Republicans are going to sign off on a platform plank for the national convention that outlaws abortion even in the case of rape and incest, and the proposed VP Mr Ryan worked with Akin to sponsor the federal bill mandating full "personhood" status for fertilized eggs. The "personhood" idea is considered so extreme, it was even rejected by voters in Mississippi last year.0
