Home Non Cigar Related

Legitimate Rape

VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,844 ✭✭✭
If I was a women, his comments I would just dismiss as those of a lunatic. But since Paul Ryan isnt too far behind on choosing womens rights......scary time for women, and for freedom as a whole. But hey....since there is "legit rape" now, looks like Saturday nights will be a lot more fun.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/19/missouri-republican-claims-legitimate-rape-rarely-results-in-pregnancy/?hpt=hp_t1
«1345678

Comments

  • beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    if you follow the real story and not a blog you will know that neither candidate is against abortion when it comes to instances rape.

    but atkins comments are pretty dumb.

    gotta paint with a smaller brush.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    after researching this a tiny bit, i think the word "legitimate" was intended to mean "actual" as in the woman believes she is being raped. again, very poor choice of words. Also, the concept of the womans body preventing conception during rape is, at its very best, an unproven theory.

    the argument that is being overlooked by the left, that i find interesting, is when he said:
    "...I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child."

    sorry vulch... kinda looks like you are trying to twist some words here. (not sure if you are but thats the impression i get) though i agree that his comment was dumb i dont think that he was trying to say that there is "legitimate rape" that is condoned in any way shape or form.


    however there may be "legitimate" or "illegitimate" rape based off of if the woman is being truthful. If a woman cries rape and there was actually no rape than it is "illegitimate"


  • y2pascoey2pascoe Posts: 1,727 ✭✭
    I'm just pumped my fiance and I no longer need contraception. Now when I blow a load she can just "shut down" her uterus. It must be like having a tiny goal tender living in your ****.

    PS - first one of you who quotes one of the founding father's speaking on "legitimate rape" wins a prize.
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    The guys not a candidate so its a non-issue. He's just a guy with an opinion and a camera on him.
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    I'm anti-abortion in all instances. Here's a neat story about the child of a rape victim
    Child of rape victim article
  • jgibvjgibv John G.Posts: 9,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    dennisking:
    I'm anti-abortion in all instances. Here's a neat story about the child of a rape victim
    Child of rape victim article
    Even instances where not having an abortion will harm the mother?

    But heck, what do I know....
    I'm a guy, and will never have the possibility to become pregnant...so I guess, IMO, it's a woman's health issue and should be decided by women and medical professionals.

    What I do know, is that as a male, I'd be upset if women were trying to make decisions about health issues that only affected men - like prostate cancer.
    Can't you just imagine the uproar if the shoe was on the other foot, so to speak.


    Edit: And at Vulchor/the original post - regardless of one's opinion on this subject, I think we'll all agree that was an extremely poor choice of words ... I don't understand how so many politicians/public figures can seem so dumb sometimes and get away with these stupid remarks.

    * I have a new address as of 3/24/18 *

  • Roberto99Roberto99 Posts: 1,077
    All instances? How about when the unborn child AND mother will die, like in an ectopic pregnancy?
  • y2pascoey2pascoe Posts: 1,727 ✭✭
    Is legitimate rape covered under Obamacare?
  • HeavyHeavy Posts: 1,591 ✭✭✭
    y2pascoe:
    Is legitimate rape covered under Obamacare?
    Yup. Don't even need to show a photo ID.
  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    I think his comments were prety stupid and completely uncalled for, but having said that, I can think of very few politicians in the arena today who haven't said or done really stupid things, for really stupid reasons. Anthony Weiner, Joe Biden, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin come to mind

    It seems to me that politicians are more concerned with pandering to their "base" than in thinking about how to solve the huge problems we are all facing. What we're seeing appears to be more the antics of middle schoolers than the actions of serious men and women of substance.

    I am convinced that the intense polarization of our politics has led to an over all loss of substance and thoughtful discourse - essentially an unwillingness to solve the problems we are facing as our system of government was designed to do; with cooperation and compromise in the best interests of the nation as a whole. Instead we have politicians who are behaving as if they were in a game show or on talk radio.
  • webmostwebmost Dull-AwarePosts: 7,107 ✭✭✭✭✭
    y2pascoe:
    PS - first one of you who quotes one of the founding father's speaking on "legitimate rape" wins a prize.
    God helps those who help themselves.
    ... Benjamin Franklin

    What do I win?

    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • The_KidThe_Kid Posts: 7,871 ✭✭✭
    Are you kiddin me,, I understand completely what he mean by legitimate,, IT wasnt or not if the rape was justified it was if it was an ACTUAL Rape. My god have some common sense and try to have an open mind no matter who is in question. While Morally opposed to abortion I feel its the womans right to choose! Especially in a case of rape
  • The_KidThe_Kid Posts: 7,871 ✭✭✭
    kuzi16:
    after researching this a tiny bit, i think the word "legitimate" was intended to mean "actual" as in the woman believes she is being raped. again, very poor choice of words. Also, the concept of the womans body preventing conception during rape is, at its very best, an unproven theory.

    the argument that is being overlooked by the left, that i find interesting, is when he said:
    "...I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child."

    sorry vulch... kinda looks like you are trying to twist some words here. (not sure if you are but thats the impression i get) though i agree that his comment was dumb i dont think that he was trying to say that there is "legitimate rape" that is condoned in any way shape or form.


    however there may be "legitimate" or "illegitimate" rape based off of if the woman is being truthful. If a woman cries rape and there was actually no rape than it is "illegitimate"


    Wow I just read this response and I agree 100% with this!!!
  • stadstad Posts: 396 ✭✭
    dennisking:
    I'm anti-abortion in all instances. Here's a neat story about the child of a rape victim
    Child of rape victim article
    Big +111 my mother was raped and gave birth to a son. He was adopted and raised by a good family that was better suited to the task. My mom went on to have 5 more children and has been married for 41 years to my dad. We got to meet my half brother after 41 this year! I am so glad my then teen mother put her child before herself and made the difficult but right choice to allow her son to be adopted, instead of killed.
  • The_KidThe_Kid Posts: 7,871 ✭✭✭
    stad:
    dennisking:
    I'm anti-abortion in all instances. Here's a neat story about the child of a rape victim
    Child of rape victim article
    Big +111 my mother was raped and gave birth to a son. He was adopted and raised by a good family that was better suited to the task. My mom went on to have 5 more children and has been married for 41 years to my dad. We got to meet my half brother after 41 this year! I am so glad my then teen mother put her child before herself and made the difficult but right choice to allow her son to be adopted, instead of killed.
    Wow amazing story,, Now how bout that DC #??
  • webmostwebmost Dull-AwarePosts: 7,107 ✭✭✭✭✭
    JDH:
    I think his comments were prety stupid and completely uncalled for, but having said that, I can think of very few politicians in the arena today who haven't said or done really stupid things, for really stupid reasons. Anthony Weiner, Joe Biden, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin come to mind

    It seems to me that politicians are more concerned with pandering to their "base" than in thinking about how to solve the huge problems we are all facing. What we're seeing appears to be more the antics of middle schoolers than the actions of serious men and women of substance.

    I am convinced that the intense polarization of our politics has led to an over all loss of substance and thoughtful discourse - essentially an unwillingness to solve the problems we are facing as our system of government was designed to do; with cooperation and compromise in the best interests of the nation as a whole. Instead we have politicians who are behaving as if they were in a game show or on talk radio.
    I don't know that his comments were stupid and uncalled for so much as he phrased them inaptly. It has become the custom in this media age for partisans to hunt for an inapt phrase and weaponize it. I can't see where glibness always is a virtue in a politician. That nor circumspection.

    The notion that compromise is always the best solution is a classic logical fallacy and leads to much wickedness. For example, given the alternative between torture on the rack and no torture at all we compromise on water boarding. In so many cases, one side is right, the other wrong, and compromise is still wrong.

    As men, we should keep our noses out of certain things. Abortion is one. This is an issue between a girl and at most her mother. Even Dad does not need to know. We ought to just shut up and leave it to them. Not our problem; not ours to solve.

    ________________________________

    No, you're right. I have not seen such a polarized public since the Vietnam War. The present Administration seems to be at war with the American way of life. Some of us resent it. Those at war with American ideals resent us. These are the lines of battle: Individual versus State, Liberty versus Collectivity, Freedom versus Regulation, Opportunity versus Envy, Capitalism versus Fascism. Those in favor of the state are on the verge of victory, so are bending every effort to complete the transformation. Those for the Individual see that appalling victory looming near, and so their clamor becomes more strident. It is the moment when the barbarians are storming the walls.

    In the end, the transformation appears certain. Every former civilization we know of has lost its moral compass in about two hundred years. No matter what form of government you start with, submission to oligarchy eventually prevails. When it does, when the counts of finance and the barons of bureaucracy completely dominate the individual, when the powerful tell him when he may be greedy, what he may think, down to whether he may smoke a cigar, drink a soda, or even use a certain cooking oil, whether he may utter the F word, the N word, the Q word, in short, when the powers that be own his body, his mind, his labor, his heart, and the substance of all his progeny for mountains of debts heaped up without amortization, what then? How long will that dark ages last? Will it take another millennia before a brave experiment like this America plants itself against all odds?

    “It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)


  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    webmost:
    JDH:
    I think his comments were prety stupid and completely uncalled for, but having said that, I can think of very few politicians in the arena today who haven't said or done really stupid things, for really stupid reasons. Anthony Weiner, Joe Biden, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin come to mind

    It seems to me that politicians are more concerned with pandering to their "base" than in thinking about how to solve the huge problems we are all facing. What we're seeing appears to be more the antics of middle schoolers than the actions of serious men and women of substance.

    I am convinced that the intense polarization of our politics has led to an over all loss of substance and thoughtful discourse - essentially an unwillingness to solve the problems we are facing as our system of government was designed to do; with cooperation and compromise in the best interests of the nation as a whole. Instead we have politicians who are behaving as if they were in a game show or on talk radio.
    I don't know that his comments were stupid and uncalled for so much as he phrased them inaptly. It has become the custom in this media age for partisans to hunt for an inapt phrase and weaponize it. I can't see where glibness always is a virtue in a politician. That nor circumspection.

    The notion that compromise is always the best solution is a classic logical fallacy and leads to much wickedness. For example, given the alternative between torture on the rack and no torture at all we compromise on water boarding. In so many cases, one side is right, the other wrong, and compromise is still wrong.

    As men, we should keep our noses out of certain things. Abortion is one. This is an issue between a girl and at most her mother. Even Dad does not need to know. We ought to just shut up and leave it to them. Not our problem; not ours to solve.

    ________________________________

    No, you're right. I have not seen such a polarized public since the Vietnam War. The present Administration seems to be at war with the American way of life. Some of us resent it. Those at war with American ideals resent us. These are the lines of battle: Individual versus State, Liberty versus Collectivity, Freedom versus Regulation, Opportunity versus Envy, Capitalism versus Fascism. Those in favor of the state are on the verge of victory, so are bending every effort to complete the transformation. Those for the Individual see that appalling victory looming near, and so their clamor becomes more strident. It is the moment when the barbarians are storming the walls.

    In the end, the transformation appears certain. Every former civilization we know of has lost its moral compass in about two hundred years. No matter what form of government you start with, submission to oligarchy eventually prevails. When it does, when the counts of finance and the barons of bureaucracy completely dominate the individual, when the powerful tell him when he may be greedy, what he may think, down to whether he may smoke a cigar, drink a soda, or even use a certain cooking oil, whether he may utter the F word, the N word, the Q word, in short, when the powers that be own his body, his mind, his labor, his heart, and the substance of all his progeny for mountains of debts heaped up without amortization, what then? How long will that dark ages last? Will it take another millennia before a brave experiment like this America plants itself against all odds?

    Whatever...
  • wwesternwwestern Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭
    webmost:
    y2pascoe:
    PS - first one of you who quotes one of the founding father's speaking on "legitimate rape" wins a prize.
    God helps those who help themselves.
    ... Benjamin Franklin

    What do I win?

    I think I may piss my pants! Send me your addy webmost is y2 won't bite I will lol.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,844 ✭✭✭
    When Barack makes a comment, its him being a socialist or an idiot. Biden is a moron. However, when a repub does it....just a slip of the tongue. And Im the one who's one sided here huh?
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,844 ✭✭✭
    Perhaps Kuz the point here is that if upper class white men with titles would let women decide what they want for their body and the fetus inside it we wouldnt have to talk about legitimate rape in the first place. Roe v Wade is decided folks----deal with it. Doesnt matter if you like it or not, its the way it is.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,844 ✭✭✭
    beatnic:
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
    Didnt say that, but thanks for the mocking tone.
  • beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    Vulchor:
    beatnic:
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
    Didnt say that, but thanks for the mocking tone.
    You didn't use those words, but you mysteriously tied the man's comments to the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. Ergo, he must hate women also. Oh, and the mocking? Yes, I discovered that it was a tool of the left, used to cause their opponents to shut up.
  • JDHJDH Posts: 2,107
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    beatnic:
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
    Didnt say that, but thanks for the mocking tone.
    You didn't use those words, but you mysteriously tied the man's comments to the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. Ergo, he must hate women also. Oh, and the mocking? Yes, I discovered that it was a tool of the left, used to cause their opponents to shut up.
    Mr. Ryan has said that abortions should not be allowed in the instance of rape, and he supports a ban on all abortions except when the mother's life is in danger. Both Ryan and Akin have worked on legislation that would narrow the definition of "rape". I believe that is the heart of the "gaffe" by candidate Akin. I believe that, if given the chance, he would restrict abortions even for rape victims. Therefore, I see no difference between Akins and Ryans position on this topic.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    Vulchor:
    Perhaps Kuz the point here is that if upper class white men with titles would let women decide what they want for their body and the fetus inside it we wouldnt have to talk about legitimate rape in the first place. Roe v Wade is decided folks----deal with it. Doesnt matter if you like it or not, its the way it is.
    hmmm
    "deal with it"
    interesting.
    i think that is exactly what we are all attempting to do here.

    i wasnt attacking you. heck, i kinda agree with you here. it was a very dumb comment. i dont know if it was intentional or not. i dont know what is in the man's heart. only he does.

    abortion is a very interesting and tricky issue for me.

    as many of you know, i base all of my political theories on the rights of the individual. so the question with abortion is:
    "at what point do we have to take the rights of the baby into account?"
    and the thing is, roe v wade didnt exactly decide that. what it did decide is that what happens between a person and a doctor is nobodys business but the person and the doctor. and i do agree with that 100%
    ... but back to the question at hand. at what point do we take the baby's rights into account? another way to ask this question is "when does life start?"

    i cant speak for anyone else, but personally, i do not know. Is it at conception? or at the first heart beat? or when the baby first can feel pain? or when it would be able to survive out of the womb? or is it when the head crowns? I have no clue.
    i doubt that anyone here actually does 100% for sure either.

    this is where Roe v. Wade comes in.
    this decision is left up to the woman and the doctor. right now, with the technology and understanding of life at hand R.v.W. is the best compromise we have. it errs on the side of caution, and by that i mean: the known adult individual. if we cant pinpoint when the baby has rights/is viable/is life, we have to divert to the rights of the people that clearly have rights and are alive. and that is what Roe v. Wade does.

    am i for abortion?
    hell no.
    i would never think that it is ever a good idea for a woman to have an abortion. however, i am not a dictator, i am not God, and i certainly do not know when life begins, therefore i cannot tell others what to do.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    JDH:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    beatnic:
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
    Didnt say that, but thanks for the mocking tone.
    You didn't use those words, but you mysteriously tied the man's comments to the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. Ergo, he must hate women also. Oh, and the mocking? Yes, I discovered that it was a tool of the left, used to cause their opponents to shut up.
    Mr. Ryan has said that abortions should not be allowed in the instance of rape, and he supports a ban on all abortions except when the mother's life is in danger. Both Ryan and Akin have worked on legislation that would narrow the definition of "rape". I believe that is the heart of the "gaffe" by candidate Akin. I believe that, if given the chance, he would restrict abortions even for rape victims. Therefore, I see no difference between Akins and Ryans position on this topic.
    Mitt is not against abortion in instances of rape. this is only an issue if Ryan is president.

    given the political waters, and views of the country i doubt that ryan could get legislation passed that would take away that right in cases of rape.
    hell, even sean hannity is ok with abortion in cases of rape. it wouldt pass so fretting about it is kind of a waste of time.
  • jthanatosjthanatos Posts: 1,571 ✭✭✭
    Vulchor:
    Roe v Wade is decided folks----deal with it. Doesnt matter if you like it or not, its the way it is.
    Vulchor:
    I dont give too much faith for good moral judgements to "dem legal type folk".
    So if they side with you, "dem legal type folk" are good people? Dred Scott was decided at one point too... I kid, I kid.

    But seriously, this is a non issue. Everyone... Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Parrots.... Everyone has a slip of the tongue now and again, and it is frustrating to watch these tiny soundbites be torn out of context. Obama had one not to long ago, with the "You didn't build it" fiasco, and many treated him unfairly regarding that statement. People say dumb things, it happens, especially when not scripted. I just wish both sides would calm down, and stop shouting past the other side.

    Call me naive if you will, but I truly believe most people on both sides of the aisle want what is best for the country. I may not always agree with how they plan to do it, but I don't think either side is planning to "destroy the country". Frankly, the most frustrating thing about politics to me is we rarely get to hear how someone is going to make things better, but instead the talk is how the opponent is going to make things worse. Worse still, the loudest voices on both sides are the most extreme, most vehement, and usually the least representative of either side as a whole. I don't know how or if we can fix this situation, but it is tiring to have to spend so much time digging to find a politicians true stance on issues. Also, frankly, I don't care who started the BS mudslinging... It just smacks of childishness to worry about who used what unfair tactic first, and my side is justified in being underhanded because your side is too. Again, I guess I am just naive to hope to see adult debates from those chosen to represent me.

    Finally, on abortion... This is a really difficult subject, mostly because both sides come at it with a different initial supposition. Either you believe life begins at conception, or you don't. With such vastly different starting points, it is no wonder that neither side of the issue can understand the other. I know I believe the former, and am therefor opposed to abortion other than as a life saving measure for the mother, and I will admit I don't understand the other side. I don't know if there is anyway to bridge this gap, but what I do know is the most vocal on both sides don't help anything. Once again, intelligent dialogue is discouraged, vocal pro-choice likens pro-life to a desire to control all of woman's life and bar her from medical treatment. Vocal pro-life calls the other side murders and worse. The whole debate is sh!tty as hell, and would be helped...once again...by people listening and talking instead of labeling and dividing.

    To summarize... 1. everyone makes mistakes, judge by intent, not by words. 2. If someone, on either side, only talks about how the other side is out to get you... stop listening to them. 3. Finally, and most important to me, our politicians and media need to grow up and discuss things like adults.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    Vulchor:
    Roe v Wade is decided folks----deal with it. Doesnt matter if you like it or not, its the way it is.
    just an interesting thought here again...

    Jim Crow was decided. people couldnt deal with it.
    just because something is law at the moment does not mean that it is right, fair, popular, or permanent.

    this is a dynamic society.
    however, as i stated above, i dont have much issue with R.v.W.

    like i said, a passing thought.
  • beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    JDH:
    beatnic:
    Vulchor:
    beatnic:
    Ergo, all Republicans are evil. Yes, we know Vulch.
    Didnt say that, but thanks for the mocking tone.
    You didn't use those words, but you mysteriously tied the man's comments to the Republican's vice-presidential candidate. Ergo, he must hate women also. Oh, and the mocking? Yes, I discovered that it was a tool of the left, used to cause their opponents to shut up.
    Mr. Ryan has said that abortions should not be allowed in the instance of rape, and he supports a ban on all abortions except when the mother's life is in danger. Both Ryan and Akin have worked on legislation that would narrow the definition of "rape". I believe that is the heart of the "gaffe" by candidate Akin. I believe that, if given the chance, he would restrict abortions even for rape victims. Therefore, I see no difference between Akins and Ryans position on this topic.
    I'm disturbed whenever someone advocates for the killing of unborn babies, for whatever reason. Limiting abortions is noble in my eyes.
  • beatnicbeatnic Posts: 4,133
    kuzi16:
    Vulchor:
    Perhaps Kuz the point here is that if upper class white men with titles would let women decide what they want for their body and the fetus inside it we wouldnt have to talk about legitimate rape in the first place. Roe v Wade is decided folks----deal with it. Doesnt matter if you like it or not, its the way it is.
    hmmm
    "deal with it"
    interesting.
    i think that is exactly what we are all attempting to do here.

    i wasnt attacking you. heck, i kinda agree with you here. it was a very dumb comment. i dont know if it was intentional or not. i dont know what is in the man's heart. only he does.

    abortion is a very interesting and tricky issue for me.

    as many of you know, i base all of my political theories on the rights of the individual. so the question with abortion is:
    "at what point do we have to take the rights of the baby into account?"
    and the thing is, roe v wade didnt exactly decide that. what it did decide is that what happens between a person and a doctor is nobodys business but the person and the doctor. and i do agree with that 100%
    ... but back to the question at hand. at what point do we take the baby's rights into account? another way to ask this question is "when does life start?"

    i cant speak for anyone else, but personally, i do not know. Is it at conception? or at the first heart beat? or when the baby first can feel pain? or when it would be able to survive out of the womb? or is it when the head crowns? I have no clue.
    i doubt that anyone here actually does 100% for sure either.

    this is where Roe v. Wade comes in.
    this decision is left up to the woman and the doctor. right now, with the technology and understanding of life at hand R.v.W. is the best compromise we have. it errs on the side of caution, and by that i mean: the known adult individual. if we cant pinpoint when the baby has rights/is viable/is life, we have to divert to the rights of the people that clearly have rights and are alive. and that is what Roe v. Wade does.

    am i for abortion?
    hell no.
    i would never think that it is ever a good idea for a woman to have an abortion. however, i am not a dictator, i am not God, and i certainly do not know when life begins, therefore i cannot tell others what to do.
    The key words being "conception" or "conceive". Look up the definition. That's when it begins. Period. You can't change the meaning of words.
Sign In or Register to comment.