US Republican ignorant of female biology. Again.

[TheDoctrineOfEnnis]

www.salon.com/2012/08/19/todd_akin_legitimate_rape_stops_pregnancy/

Opening quote: ?First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,? Missouri Senate hopeful Todd Akin said in an interview Sunday, explaining why his ideal abortion ban wouldn?t include an exception for rape. ?If it?s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,? he added.

Aargh! If he believes the rights of the fertilised egg trump the rights of the woman regardless of circumstances of conception, OK, that is his position. I completely disagree but at least it might be a consistent stance. But saying, yeah, well, it hardly ever happens anyway and if it does happen it's the woman's fault cos her body didn't stop it is just mind-bogglingly stupid.

I wish there was some kind of basic competence exam for would-be politicians.

Some good news!
www.theonion.com/articles/pregnant-woman-relieved-to-learn-her-rape-was-ille,29258/?ref=auto

sorry
www.theonion.com/articles/pregnant-woman-relieved-to-learn-her-rape-was-ille,29258/?ref=auto

I'm sure lots of good people got born after drunken one night stands too.

Does that stop the Republicans shaming such events? Um, let me think...

He's only repeating what the party leaders actually want - an end to all abortions in the US. From all I have read about it, there is an exemption for rape victims, but only if they can prove they were raped

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/gop-platform-abortion_n_1815021.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

Utter scum.

Ach, shite link

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/gop-platform-abortion_n_1815021.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

Thanks, Tapir.

here's some more republican horse-crap:

www.salon.com/2012/08/22/eight_staggering_gop_comments_on_rape_and_women

What's with the 'forcible' rape shit again? Gah it's so depressing. Can someone please explain to me what non-forcible rape is?

It just gets more and more unbelievable tbh - how they manage to get to these positions of responsibility and still think this way!

Here's another jaw dropper.

thinkprogress.org/health/issue/

Geek "non-forcible rape would be when a woman is asleep, when she is drugged, when she is too scared to fight back, when she believes she has no other choice. Also in the US they have statutory rape (sex with someone under the age of consent), which is one of the big areas they target in regard to federal funds.

The most depressing thing? This poltroon was on a Congressional Science Committee.

According to the bbc, in Germany sex with someone asleep or unconscious is a different offence - abuse of persons unable to resist. Don't know if it is the same sentencing though.

And finally, the GOP reveals their draft plans should the republicans win in the 2012 US elections.

thinkprogress.org/election/2012/08/22/723241/gop-approves-most-conservative-platform-in-modern-history/?mobile=nc

One of the main points - No abortions for victims of rape or incest...

Wow they really don't like women do they? :/

It's not like their proposal is accompanied by. say, a massive increase in budget for housing single mothers, or counselling rape victims, or otherwise taking care of the people they are forcing into having children. Just - we want you to do what WE want with your bodies, but we aren't going to provide any back up for you: suck it up.

But their 'focus' also doesn't include anything about jobs, growth, industry etc!

It basically reads as repress women, own more guns & make the public pay for war.

How very modern.

Own more guns and make the public pay for war seems counter-intuitive. The right bear arms is in order to form a militia, thus actually they could privatise war.

www.channel4.com/news/akin-row-prompts-heartfelt-response-from-rape-survivor

Channel 4 News tonight. A very moving and articulate interview.

However, I am left with a certain unease. The fact that this rape victim kept her child and is so positive and (I paraphrase) would say to another pregnant rape victim take time to think (before you opt for termination) almost plays into idiot Akin's and the Republicans' hands i.e. in giving them succour that rape should not be a reason to allow abortion.

But what do others think?

I think it shows there are two sides to it, I think it would be wrong to use her in isolation.

I was talking to a woman awhile ago who kept her baby after she was raped, built up a relationship with his mother who took the baby on. Because of this contact she ended up being raped by the same man again, another baby who the paternal grandmother also brought up. I didn't ever talk to her anymore than that, it's fascinating (maybe in a slightly morbid way) and I'd love to have had a good chat with her.

Have you seen this?

Two sides to what, though? No-one who opposes the Akin position thinks that abortions should be enforced for rape victims. The two sides of this argument are not 'everyone should keep their babies/no-one should keep their babies'. I'm sure there are lots of women who would decide to keep a baby conceived during rape - particularly given the number of rapes which happen within the context of a relationship. Having counselling and being supported to make the decision which is the best one for them should surely be the right of every woman considering an abortion, particularly in such awful circumstances.

I didn't mean that. Two sides as in keeping or not keeping. Choice for the mother, no one else. I didn't mean that it should be used politically, nothing about this should be political.

Equally scandalous is the fact that SPUC is going into schools in the UK to teach the same thing to schoolchildren. Is this what passes for sex ed these days?
educationforchoice.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/todd-akins-not-only-one-claiming-that.html

SPUC came into my school to give us a lecture on the evils of abortion when I was about 15 or 16. But it was during an RE lesson, so not promoted as sex ed. We didn't get a pro-choice lecture though.

@StormGlass - fair enough. Do you remember what they said? Was it purely opinion-based "abortion is wrong" or did they include facts? Did they teach that abortion is dangerous, or just say that it's morally wrong?