About Todd Akin

[preachinjesus]

About Rep Todd Akin - for you conservatives who think he should end his campaign - do you complain about Obama always using a tele- prompter
For you liberals who think Akin made a dumb statement - have you ever thought what dumb things Obama would say without a tele-prompter

I don't understand your points here. Having a teleprompter is moot.

Scarlett pretty well summed up what I've got to say but I'll add a few things:

If we listen to what Akin said and how he said it we realize there is something fundamentally wrong with his understanding of women, biology, and the nature of the most heinous crime perpetrated against someone. He truly believes what he said and it isn't a gaffe. (Granted I would hope he's gotten clarity)

His choice of words belies a broader misogyny which is neither biblical nor educated. If an elected official holds these positions he/she should be voted out of office. What is scary is that I'm pretty sure a lot of the people sitting in our pews and chairs on Sundays are where Akin is/was on this issue.

President Obama doesn't only use a teleprompter. He opens up the floor for questions, takes unplanned press engagements, makes off the cuff remarks. The obsession that some Republicans have with his teleprompter is odd, President Obama doesn't use a teleprompter nearly as much as they say he does.

Akin's comments were his honest, unfiltered beliefs. They are horrible, uninformed beliefs. Does anyone on this forum believe what he believes? The public has to endure weeks of speculations about him because he candidly replied to a question. This candidness shows what undergirds his moral theology. It is quite scary.

Rape is a terrible thing. It is the most heinous crime committed against a body. We must provide help for those who have, and will, suffer its afflictions. The crassness which Akin showed in his remarks goes to the heart of the perceptions of conservative politicians being uncaring, uninformed, and detached from reality. What makes Akin's case scarier is that he is a self-proclaimed evangelical Christian on a "quest from God" to go into public office. I don't know who his pastor is, but this merits a meeting or three.

I've really got to say that Scarlett has handled well the rest of the points I would have made.

 

[OldRegular]

WHY is it that when women are steadfast about something we're considered "too involved emotionally"? I understand what the hoopla is about..."statutory rape"...but gentlemen, Akins did NOT use the word, "statutory." You may have understood that's what he MEANT to say, but that's NOT what he said. What he DID say is offensive to women, who have been accused for generations of crying rape, for "asking for it" by dressing in a way that attracts men of that nature, or for walking alone, etc.

It is all about the semantics Lady; as your remarks demonstrate!

I am steadfast in my opposition to abortion and I get emotional; very emotional when discussing it. I am most certain it affects my response on this board to those who support abortion.

I am steadfast in my opposition to rape and I get emotional. I would get extremely emotional if it happened to one of my family, statutory or otherwise. I remember when rape called for the death penalty.

Keep to the topic and skip the personal assumptions. I mean, I could turn around and say that you're a blind, ignorant male who doesn't understand the workings of the female body....it's best to keep personalities out of it.

Dear lady I have already conceded that I am a blind ignorant male when it comes to women!

Akin is obviously not a medical doctor. That being said I doubt that many men are particularly knowledgeable about the biology, emotions, thinking of women.

And I will leave it at that other than to say I love my mother, my sister, my wife, my two daughters, and my four granddaughters. I will also add: Man has not understood woman since EVE!

 

[OldRegular]

I don't understand your points here. Having a teleprompter is moot.

Scarlett pretty well summed up what I've got to say but I'll add a few things:

If we listen to what Akin said and how he said it we realize there is something fundamentally wrong with his understanding of women, biology, and the nature of the most heinous crime perpetrated against someone. He truly believes what he said and it isn't a gaffe. (Granted I would hope he's gotten clarity)

I don't think it was a gaffe either. He obviously believed what he said. So he is not knowledgeable about conception. He used a poor choice of words to distinguish forcible rape from statutory rape. That does not make him the monster you portray. You have already committed him to the Fire!

His choice of words belies a broader misogyny which is neither biblical nor educated. If an elected official holds these positions he/she should be voted out of office. What is scary is that I'm pretty sure a lot of the people sitting in our pews and chairs on Sundays are where Akin is/was on this issue.

His choice of words have nothing to do with misogyny. Now you are not only committing Akin to the fire but countless others!

President Obama doesn't only use a teleprompter. He opens up the floor for questions, takes unplanned press engagements, makes off the cuff remarks. The obsession that some Republicans have with his teleprompter is odd, President Obama doesn't use a teleprompter nearly as much as they say he does.

And when did you become a handler for Obama. Perhaps you should "preach a little Jesus Christ" to this one who spits in the face of God, this abortionist in chief, this one who endorses, enables, advocates, the slaughter of the unborn and just born child, this one who endorses the marriage of perverted homosexuals.

Akin's comments were his honest, unfiltered beliefs. They are horrible, uninformed beliefs. Does anyone on this forum believe what he believes? The public has to endure weeks of speculations about him because he candidly replied to a question. This candidness shows what undergirds his moral theology. It is quite scary.

To the stake with you Akin! Burn, but repent, as you go through the fire!

Rape is a terrible thing. It is the most heinous crime committed against a body. We must provide help for those who have, and will, suffer its afflictions. The crassness which Akin showed in his remarks goes to the heart of the perceptions of conservative politicians being uncaring, uninformed, and detached from reality. What makes Akin's case scarier is that he is a self-proclaimed evangelical Christian on a "quest from God" to go into public office. I don't know who his pastor is, but this merits a meeting or three.

Now we get to the crux of your diatribe. It is those conservatives, all the Conservative men are misogynists; they hate their mothers, their sisters, their wives, their daughters, their granddaughters. You should have been honest and upfront with your true leftist political views!

I've really got to say that Scarlett has handled well the rest of the points I would have made.

I believe she was honest whereas you are devious: "It is those Conservative men who hate all women!"

 

[Crabtownboy]

I don't think it was a gaffe either. He obviously believed what he said. So he is not knowledgeable about conception. He used a poor choice of words to distinguish forcible rape from statutory rape. That does not make him the monster you portray. You have already committed him to the Fire!

I have looked but have not found anywhere that Akin says he was differentiating between rape and statutory rape. If you can show me where he says this I would appreciate it.

I think he said exactly what he meant to say. If he really meant to say it was statutory rape he would nor have said legitimate rape. He simply was showing his bad attitude toward women.

His choice of words have nothing to do with misogyny. Now you are not only committing Akin to the fire but countless others!

I respectfully disagree. He is very clear that he has misogynistic feelings.

Now we get to the crux of your diatribe. It is those conservatives, all the Conservative men are misogynists; they hate their mothers, their sisters, their wives, their daughters, their granddaughters. You should have been honest and upfront with your true leftist political views!

That is an extremely silly statement.

I believe she was honest whereas you are devious: "It is those Conservative men who hate all women!"

Another silly statement.

I would take this same stance for any politician who made such outrageous statements and was so ignorant of human reproduction.

 

[Scarlett O.]

And I would like to see the statement from Huckabee that he supports that. Do you have a link?

While Akin was on his radio show, Huckabee said that some “forcible rapes’ created “extraordinary” people.


“Ethel Waters, for example, was the result of a forcible rape,” Huckabee said on his radio show, according to the Los Angeles Times. “I used to work for James Robison back in the 1970s, he leads a large Christian organization. He, himself, was the result of a forcible rape. And so I know it happens, and yet even from those horrible, horrible tragedies of rape, which are inexcusable and indefensible, life has come and sometimes, you know, those people are able to do extraordinary things.”

This came from this link: http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/08/21/huckabee-some-forcible-rapes-created-extraordinary-people/


I like Huckabee. I still do. And I do not believe that rape always justifies an abortion.

But I am sorely disappointed that even Huckabee would seemingly defend Akin by using and defending Akin's statement "forcible rape". ALL rape is forcible - whether physically or otherwise. If not, it wouldn't be rape. Therefore all rape - whether physically forcible or manipulatively forcible is legitimate. He also read the letter from Dr. Wilke which defended Akin's views.

Also, Akin has gone from saying that he meant to say "forcible rape" (which is bad enough because all rape is forcible by whatever means) and now he says he meant to say "rape when women aren't making false claims about it." (which is worse and justifies what I said in my first post). If he meant that "legitimate rapes" could not end up in pregnancy because legitimate rapes were only legitimate if a woman wasn't lying, then he believes that rape cannot lead to pregnancy.

Well, what DID he mean - he has given two different explanations and neither of them are acceptable. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2...ts-women-make-false-claims-about-being-raped/

I've upset people here and for that I am sorry. And it's my fault that Salty's thread has been derailed. So for my last statement in this thread I will answer Salty's original question in the OP.

About Rep Todd Akin - for you conservatives who think he should end his campaign - do you complain about Obama always using a tele- prompter
For you liberals who think Akin made a dumb statement - have you ever thought what dumb things Obama would say without a tele-prompter

Just saying.....

As someone who votes conservatively, and is pro-life even in most cases of rape/incest, and is anti-homosexual marriage - yes, I believe Akin should end his campaign. And yes, my complaints about Obama are concerning the darn teleprompter and so much more that there is no room to list them all here.

​

 

[saturneptune]

I see. I am an emotional and lying female. Thanks for the heads up.

Having worked with young people over the years, I have born witness to several between the ages of 10 and 15 who were not physically forced into sex, but were emotionally, spiritually, mentally, and intellectually manipulated into it - by their fathers, "friends of the family", and others who were all over 40 years of age. In each case, there was no physical force, but the manipulation lasted for a long period of time.

By all appearances, the young people (I am thinking of two boys and three girls) didn't not "fight back". But they were manipulated into believing that the men "meant no harm" and "loved them".

Until you have worked with these teens who have been manipulated like this, boys and girls, their gender is irrelevant - I guess some people do see them as culpable for the action of the grown men.

But these were legitimate rapes. Statutory as they were - they were legitimate.

I stand by what I said. I believe that I interpreted what he said pretty darn closely. And neither my gender, my feelings on the matter, nor my words, which are not lies, disprove what I said.

Having read all of your posts carefully, I agree with your feelings, as this has nothing to do with politics, left, right, liberal, or conservative. I am at least as conservative as the other posters, probably more.

The central focus of this issue is human dignity and respect. It has nothing to do with the election, except perception. The only link one can make to politics is to ask, regardless of how liberal or conservative Akin is, do we want this man as one of the leaders of this nation? The voters of Missouri can figure that one out, but I have a feeling he may have handed the Democrats the Senate and Presidency on a silver platter.

Since retiring, I now work in a day care type setting for the mentally challanged. We teach them basic life skills, basic educational courses, and take them out in the community on outings like bowling, shopping or volunteering themselves for several things. I feel a real connection with these people, and they are God's creation, and are some of the kindest human beings I ever met. Ireally do not know how to put this into words except to say that Mr. Akin would not last long here. The mindset to work here should make it apparant that his comments are way out of line. He is entitled to his opinion, and we are entitlted not to let him be a leader of the United States.

I have been married 35 years, and do not see how anyone could think in such a manner and still be married. At best, if one ignores the lack of respect, it shows a total lack of common sense. I probably agree with most of his stands on issues over his opponent, but this transcends everything.

This is the kind of issue that is hard for me to put into words, so Scarlett, sorry for any part not clear.

 

[OldRegular]

I have looked but have not found anywhere that Akin says he was differentiating between rape and statutory rape. If you can show me where he says this I would appreciate it.

I think he said exactly what he meant to say. If he really meant to say it was statutory rape he would nor have said legitimate rape. He simply was showing his bad attitude toward women.

Frankly crabtownboy because you are a strong supporter and enabler of the slaughter of unborn girls and boys I don't think you have the moral authority to judge Akin. As a professing Christian who supports, condones, and enables the slaughter of the unborn you have no moral authority at all as far as I am concerned. Sure you have the Constitutional right so enjoy it while you can. Four more years of Barak Hussein Obama and who knows!

I would take this same stance for any politician who made such outrageous statements and was so ignorant of human reproduction.

:laugh::laugh:Sure you would as long as they were Republicans/Conservatives and not your tin god leftists! :laugh::laugh:

 

[Crabtownboy]

Frankly crabtownboy because you are a strong supporter and enabler of the slaughter of unborn girls and boys I don't think you have the moral authority to judge Akin. As a professing Christian who supports, condones, and enables the slaughter of the unborn you have no moral authority at all as far as I am concerned. Sure you have the Constitutional right so enjoy it while you can. Four more years of Barak Hussein Obama and who knows!

You continue to falsely accuse me. That is really quite dishonest of you. Should I accuse you of defending rape in every other thread you post? So using your logic as you support rape you have no moral authority to defend Akin.

Now, please be honest in the future. I, and I expect others on the BB, would appreciate it very much.

Sure you would as long as they were Republicans/Conservatives and not your tin god leftists! :laugh::laugh:

No it would not matter about which party the silly man or woman was a part of, I would say their statement was indefensible. How can you defend rape?

And you support cutting funding to programs like Meals on Wheels. How can you advocate such spending cuts that will cause some sick and elderly folk to starve?

So, where does Akin claim he was differentiating statutory rape from legitimate rape ? whatever in the world your or he means by legitimate rape.

 

[Matt Black]

This was not just a "dumb statement". It was a statement - supported apparently by a lot of people, including Huckabee - which revealed the man's ignorance of the female body and of what constitutes rape.

I started a thread already and had to leave it because it was asserted that young girls who experience "statutory rape" are "whores" and "the Bible says so". And not one man on this board who read those words came to the defense of young women who are intellectually, spiritually, mentally, or emotionally manipulated by older men into having sex. "The Bible says that they are whores". The statement still stands

Um...I think I supported you with my comment that it was sexual predation and that it would apply equally if it was a 45-year old 'cougar ' seducing a 15-year old boy.

 

[OldRegular]

You continue to falsely accuse me. That is really quite dishonest of you.

As long as you support the party whose continual call is for the slaughter of the unborn you are supporting abortion! That is a fact!

Should I accuse you of defending rape in every other thread you post? So using your logic as you support rape you have no moral authority to defend Akin.

Can you not read CTB?

I am steadfast in my opposition to abortion and I get emotional; very emotional when discussing it. I am most certain it affects my response on this board to those who support abortion.

I am steadfast in my opposition to rape and I get emotional. I would get extremely emotional if it happened to one of my family, statutory or otherwise. I remember when rape called for the death penalty.

I am not defending Akin. I simply think the Inquisition has sentenced him too quickly to Auto-de-fe!

 

[Crabtownboy]

As long as you support the party whose continual call is for the slaughter of the unborn you are supporting abortion! That is a fact!

So as long as you defend Akin it is just as logical to say your are supporting rape.

I am not defending Akin. I simply think the Inquisition has sentenced him too quickly to Auto-de-fe!

There is no inquisition. He did this to himself. You are defending him and, by the logic you use to accuse me of being pro-abortion, you are pro rape.

And as long as you support cutting funds to social program, like meals on wheels, again by your logic, you are supporting the starvation of our sick and elderly.

Now either start being honest or I will continue to use your illogical logic.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Um...I think I supported you with my comment that it was sexual predation and that it would apply equally if it was a 45-year old 'cougar ' seducing a 15-year old boy.

[You did. My apologies.]

 

[Aaron]

Rape is NEVER political. It's ALWAYS personal. Ask any woman (or man) who has been raped. Bet you never thought of men being raped. It's degrading and very personal.

Was the 16 or 17 year old who wanted it from a a 45 year old raped?

And, please, spare us the tired old "A-sixteen-or-seventeen-year-old-can't-know-or-understand" lie.

I'm not asking whether it was right or wrong, or whether or not it should be legal. I'm asking whether or not it should be called rape.

 

[preachinjesus]

I don't think it was a gaffe either. He obviously believed what he said. So he is not knowledgeable about conception. He used a poor choice of words to distinguish forcible rape from statutory rape. That does not make him the monster you portray. You have already committed him to the Fire!

His choice of words have nothing to do with misogyny. Now you are not only committing Akin to the fire but countless others!

Perhaps we can step back for a second here...I'm not "committing" someone to "the Fire" (which is clearly an exaggeration of my point.) My above post is calling to task the spirit of a) anti-intellectual misogyny that is ripe in our culture and b) pointing out that someone who sits on the House Science Committee should be more aware of actual science in order to merit his appointment.

And when did you become a handler for Obama. Perhaps you should "preach a little Jesus Christ" to this one who spits in the face of God, this abortionist in chief, this one who endorses, enables, advocates, the slaughter of the unborn and just born child, this one who endorses the marriage of perverted homosexuals.

Red herring, I've stated exhaustively elsewhere my views on all these subjects. Please focus and stay on topic.

Now we get to the crux of your diatribe. It is those conservatives, all the Conservative men are misogynists; they hate their mothers, their sisters, their wives, their daughters, their granddaughters. You should have been honest and upfront with your true leftist political views!

I believe she was honest whereas you are devious: "It is those Conservative men who hate all women!"

Yeah, again I guess you've not actually read my reply but are hopelessly mired in a kind of disingenuous polarization of its actual points. Honestly OldRegular, it is becoming increasingly difficult to converse with you when you take such stark stands.

Well I've not done anything that you're purporting. I've not said that conservatives are these things. Please go back and c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y read my post, I said this is the perception of them.

An example: The other day I was involved in what I had been told was going to be an honest discussion about the role of women in ministry. During this panel, in which I represented the complementarian position, the feminist representative bashed me for being a misogynist who was out to remove shoes from women and push them back to a life of abuse and neglect. (She was subsequently removed from the panel by the moderator) All this to say that the perception among many is that conservatives (and particularly evangelicals) are misogynistic pervades how they engage with us. When men like Akin get up and give such poor remarks regarding their views of women, rape, conception, and justice I shudder that this only reinforces those views.

Now, again OldRegular, you've essentially taken my post and smeared with some kind of overreaching ad hominem mischaracterization. Please understand that it is not in my post where I say any of the things you're purporting. If you cannot engage with me, or other posters, in a rational conversation that appreciates differences in positions and respectfully represents what we've typed than I might suggest you should step away.

Often when I see individuals who overreact in such a way, particularly about political issues, I gently point out that when we polarize positions in such a way it means we've overly committed to a position and it is defining our reactions. This is not a healthy way to proceed.

 

[DiamondLady]

Was the 16 or 17 year old who wanted it from a a 45 year old raped?

And, please, spare us the tired old "A-sixteen-or-seventeen-year-old-can't-know-or-understand" lie.

I'm not asking whether it was right or wrong, or whether or not it should be legal. I'm asking whether or not it should be called rape.

Yes, sir. Even if the 16 year old girl willingly took off her clothes and crawled into bed with him, it's rape. HE is a sexual predator. NO whole, healthy, sane 45 year old man should be seeking intercourse with a 16-year-old girl. Even if she wanted it....I would remind you, sir, that 16-year-olds rarely know what they want (which you is evidenced by the number of boyfriends they go through before they finally get married...but they're positive they're "in love" with each one of them!)

Rape, by definition, is about power. It's never about the actual act. It makes the 45-year-old man feel virile to think at 16-year-old girl finds him sexy and attractive. He is old enough, and certainly should be mature enough, to make decisions using wisdom and common sense. 16-year-olds have neither.

BTW, I do not go in for...how was it you said it, "tired, old, lies." It's not that the 16 or 17 year old can't "understand"...they very well understand the functions of their bodies. What they often fail to think through is the consequences of the actions they're undertaking. They still believe that they're young and nothing bad can happen to them. They believe the old wives tales which have been around, and disproved endlessly, since time began. They do not consider the cost of the road they are taking. That's what the 45-year-old man counts upon, and that's why it's definitely rape.

 

[Aaron]

mistaken post

 

[Aaron]

Yes, sir. Even if the 16 year old girl willingly took off her clothes and crawled into bed with him, it's rape.

Wouldn't God call that whoredom?

 

[OldRegular]

Was the 16 or 17 year old who wanted it from a a 45 year old raped?

And, please, spare us the tired old "A-sixteen-or-seventeen-year-old-can't-know-or-understand" lie.

I'm not asking whether it was right or wrong, or whether or not it should be legal. I'm asking whether or not it should be called rape.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A perfect example of this is the rape of the White House intern by the misogynist Billy boy Clinton.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Wouldn't God call that whoredom?

And what name would you call the boy or man?

 

[OldRegular]

Perhaps we can step back for a second here...I'm not "committing" someone to "the Fire" (which is clearly an exaggeration of my point.) My above post is calling to task the spirit of a) anti-intellectual misogyny that is ripe in our culture and b) pointing out that someone who sits on the House Science Committee should be more aware of actual science in order to merit his appointment.

Red herring, I've stated exhaustively elsewhere my views on all these subjects. Please focus and stay on topic.

Yeah, again I guess you've not actually read my reply but are hopelessly mired in a kind of disingenuous polarization of its actual points. Honestly OldRegular, it is becoming increasingly difficult to converse with you when you take such stark stands.

Well I've not done anything that you're purporting. I've not said that conservatives are these things. Please go back and c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y read my post, I said this is the perception of them.

An example: The other day I was involved in what I had been told was going to be an honest discussion about the role of women in ministry. During this panel, in which I represented the complementarian position, the feminist representative bashed me for being a misogynist who was out to remove shoes from women and push them back to a life of abuse and neglect. (She was subsequently removed from the panel by the moderator) All this to say that the perception among many is that conservatives (and particularly evangelicals) are misogynistic pervades how they engage with us. When men like Akin get up and give such poor remarks regarding their views of women, rape, conception, and justice I shudder that this only reinforces those views.

Now, again OldRegular, you've essentially taken my post and smeared with some kind of overreaching ad hominem mischaracterization. Please understand that it is not in my post where I say any of the things you're purporting. If you cannot engage with me, or other posters, in a rational conversation that appreciates differences in positions and respectfully represents what we've typed than I might suggest you should step away.

Often when I see individuals who overreact in such a way, particularly about political issues, I gently point out that when we polarize positions in such a way it means we've overly committed to a position and it is defining our reactions. This is not a healthy way to proceed.

You have the audacity to say your remarks about Akin were not over reacting. That is comical; you tried, convicted, and sentenced him when you could not possibly know the man. All you know is he made an ignorant statement that involved women and abortion.

If you are personally acquainted with this man and the facts then tell the Board. In that event your condemnation may be warranted but certainly his crime does not justify the extreme statements made about him in your post and others. "That is not a healthy way to proceed."