Which is why we need to outlaw swing sets, for chrissake. Won’t anyone think of the children?
That’s been stolen, and put in a Facebook post. Just thought I’d let you know.
Praise Cthulu!
Perhaps. Of course, Clayton Willions was up over 20 points on Ann Richards at one point, and his rape comment was clearly just a bad joke, not a horrendously ignorant statement regarding proposed policy.
OTOH, that was 1990, it’s entirely possible that conservatives have regressed that much since then.
Alas, this view is more prevalent than any educated person might think. There really are people who think that criminality is heritable. Worse, they hold a kind of Lamarckian view, such that the children of someone who hadn’t yet committed a crime are okay, but the children of the same parents, after one of them has committed a crime, are more susceptible to criminality. And, specifically, that it’s “in the blood.” It’s just something people say – and not just in Bible Belt states. “That family? Tainted blood. Nothing good ever came of a ---------.”
(One might think that they are speaking of learned traits, rather than genetic ones. Until you find them tracing out lineages of distant cousins. “No…his aunt was a ---------- by birth, so those cousins carry the taint.” Like it’s something out of Dunwich…)
Well, I’m just pleased that I gave you guys an opportunity to congratulate yourselves about something. Those Discovery Channel hours finally paid off, huh?
You said COCK! No diploma for you!
Why are ya’ll forcibly assaulting poor Todd Akin? He’s the real victim! Here’s my proof::
“Bryan Fischer, a conservative radio host and an official with the American Family Association, compared Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), to a rape victim Tuesday, after Akin’s controversial comments about “legitimate rape” prompted a wave of outrage toward the Missouri Senate candidate. “You talk about a forcible situation, you talk about somebody being a victim of forcible assault, that would be Todd Akin,” Fischer said.”
No, I haven’t seen that. Akin and Huckabee and others are just responding to the concept that a woman shouldn’t have to bear the child of someone who rapes her. Adecent number of pro-lifers agree with that (or maybe I should say a number of decent pro-lifers agree with that), but many don’t. That group includes Paul Ryan and its view are reflecteded in the 2012 Republican Party platform, as they have been for years.
Well yes. My mother had me out of wedlock, and it was assumed by many people I would be exactly the same, loose morals and all that. It carries through the blood, they say.
Actually, they are refusing to respond to that concept, by making up a bunch of idiotic mumbo jumbo to deny that it ever happens.
Oh, and in other news Sarah Palin calls for a third-party run against Akin:
This story is a perfect distillation of the Palin phenomenon: ignorance (she obviously never heard of Missouri’s “sore loser” law that bars failed primary candidates from the general-election ballot), vapidity (“The status quo has got to go”?? What, no “Hey Hey Ho Ho”?), and ego (“I won’t gloat about it, but I was right” – neener neener!).
Ok, yes, that’s what Akin did. But if you exclude believers in the superintelligent uterus theory, that’s what some of them are responding to. They don’t think rape victims are being forced to have abortions, they think rape victims shouldn’t have a choice about their pregnancies.
Also, an older woman is more likely to be in a committed relationship and if a rape results in her pregnancy, chances are very few people will ever know that child was a “rape baby”…the woman and her partner may not even know for sure and may prefer not to know.
I would even go so far as to suggest that the alleged paucity of “rape babies” is not due to biology but to the fact that many pregnant women, regardless of whether they choose to get an abortion or to carry the child to term, never acknowlege to strangers, the government, or the Republican Party the fact of the child being a “rape baby”.
My mother is one of those who believe that there should be no exceptions in the case of rape. I have no idea what she would think if she knew one of her daughters, a fine upstanding Christian, had an abortion.
I say we deny him an abortion and make him carry the remark to term.
Huh. I did not know that. A quick trip down Wiki Lane reveals that most states have either a “sore loser” law or have the registration deadlines for the primary and general election on the same day to effectively prevent sore loser campaigns (although those rules typically don’t apply to presidential campaigns). Wiki says that the only states that allow sore loser campaigns are CT, IA, VT, and NY. I had no idea. You learn something new every day.
Why oh why didn’t the Missouri GOP listen when the Tea Party voters said “Don’t nominate Akin, he’s bound to say something about rape that would be translated into legislation in a way we agree with?”
It’s OK, I heard from a doctor that people who are “forcibly assaulted” are protected against the consequences. I won’t go into the details as it is very technical, but it has something to do with juices and stuff.
Fuck. My cousin just posted this on her face book.
Nelson is one of the Mormon top leaders, so my cousin is spouting Mormon lines to support this fool.
Ever wonder why I fled to Japan to get the hell out of Salt Lake?
And it’s time to unfriend her and block this woman. This pisses me off even more because her father was a sexual predator, and molested at least one other cousin from a different family, as well as committed statutory rape with underage junior high school student in his care. He was finally found with kiddie porn.
I disagree with this, but it is at least something on which you can have an opinion. What I don’t get is how people can continue to defend this guy when he spouts absurd medical theories with not only no evidence, but plenty of studies that have conclusively shown he is wrong. We even have people who are the result of a rape coming out and backing this moron.