Republican Indiana Mourdock: Rape pregancies gift from God

Smallc · October 25, 2012

I am anti abortion but I understand it in cases of rape and incest, of course.

But if life begins at conception, and all life is precious, what's the difference? Your position is inconsistent.

Mr.Canada · October 25, 2012

But if life begins at conception, and all life is precious, what's the difference? Your position is inconsistent.

Our society is not black and white, it's more gray. My position is very consistent. Abortion is wrong except in cases of rape or incest. That is my position. If that's inconsistent, that's fine by me.

Smallc · October 25, 2012

It is inconsistent, most definitely.

Edited October 25, 2012 by Smallc

Mr.Canada · October 25, 2012

It is inconsistent, most definitely.

Many things are. Perhaps it's nice to think of the world in black and white but that isn't reality much of the time. The closer we move to a black and white world the closer we move to totalitarianism.

When a woman is raped conception is very low but it doesn't happen right away so their is still time to take measures to avoid conception.

msj · October 26, 2012

I am anti abortion but I understand it in cases of rape and incest, of course. Anyone who would disagree with this is insane or dishonest.

Or maybe they like getting the rapist vote?

A Fan Letter to Certain Conservative Politicians

Best of all, I get to do all that without much consequence! Oh, sure, theoretically I can get charged with rape and go to prison for it. But you know what? For every hundred men who rape, only three go to prison. Those are pretty good odds for me, especially since — again! — folks like you like to muddy up the issue saying things like “forcible rape.” Keep doing that! It’s working out great for me.
As for the kid, well, oddly enough, most women I rape want nothing to do with me afterward, so it’s not like I will have to worry about child support or any other sort of responsibility… unless of course I decide that I haven’t taught that woman a big enough lesson about who’s really in control of her life. Did you know that 31 states in this country don’t keep rapists from seeking custody or visitation rights? How great is that? That’s just one more thing she has to worry about — me crawling out of the woodwork to remind her of what I did, and am continuing to do, to her life.

Look how much control you want to give me over that woman! I really can’t thank you enough for it. It warms my heart to know no matter how much I rape, or how many women I impregnate through my non-consensual sexual battery, you have my back, when it comes to reminding every woman I humiliate who is actually the boss of her. It’s me! It’s always been me! You’ll make sure it’ll always be me. You’ll see to that.

BC_chick · October 26, 2012

But if life begins at conception, and all life is precious, what's the difference? Your position is inconsistent.

So is yours if you believe abortion is okay up to x number of weeks.

bud · October 26, 2012

abomination. aaahhh.

BC_chick · October 26, 2012

I'm just pointing out that mothers can love their child in spite of how they feel about the father, and that the child conceived of rape is as much a part of the mother as a child conceived in love; but bottom line - the value of the life created is not any less than any other, and it's not based on whether or not the mother feels love towards them. They are a life as valuable as any other.

And that is the point being made.

ETA - I don't know why the quote above says Mr. Canada. It should read American Woman.

Without having data on the issue I am probably projecting, but I would be willing to bet women who can love a rape baby equally to one conceived are very rare.

Even prolifers like Mr. Canada, Paul Ryan and Todd Akin can appreciate the difference. This statement may be consistent with a prolife view but it's absurd when taken in the context of human emotion and complexity.

That's the real issue here, IMO. Having consistency is not a good thing when it becomes tunnel-visioned. There has got to be room for negotiations because complex issues like abortion are not black or white.

What he's saying is the flip-side of supporting late-term abortions just to be 'consistent' with one's pro-choice view.

It may be consistent but it defies common sense and logic.

Edited October 26, 2012 by BC_chick

scribblet · October 26, 2012

I think people are putting the wrong spin on what Mourdock said. He believes all life is sacred, just as special, regardless of conception. He is speaking of the life, not the act of rape, not the father - nothing except the resulting "life." Is a life conceived of rape any less special? I know of/have read of women who have been raped and chose not to terminate the pregnancy and they love their child. Is this child somehow less worthy than the next? Do we visit "the sins of the father" on an innocent life?

...................

Exactly, he said that this is a willful political misrepresentation of his views. Although I disagree with his anti abortion stand, he did not say rape was a gift from God, he said Life was a gift.... Amazing what comes out of the spin machine.

msj · October 26, 2012

Exactly, he said that this is a willful political misrepresentation of his views. Although I disagree with his anti abortion stand, he did not say rape was a gift from God, he said Life was a gift....

Sure, but he also said "... that God intended to happen..." with the "that" not only being a reference to the ends (the new life growing in the forcibly impregnated woman) but also the means (the rape itself).

Edited October 26, 2012 by msj

Black Dog · October 26, 2012

Of course, we're supposed to look the other way when Obama supports legislation that virtually legalises infanticide.

I love how Bob goes from scolding punked for regurgitating content from elsewhere and then immediately trundles out shopworn spin from the deepest depths of the circle jerk that is the conservative web-o-sphere.

October 27, 2012

Without having data on the issue I am probably projecting, but I would be willing to bet women who can love a rape baby equally to one conceived are very rare.

I won't disagree with you, but whether or not the birth mother loves the baby doesn't make the baby's life any more or less valuable. It's still a life, same as any other. An innocent life. And I would argue that adoptive parents love their adopted baby conceived by rape as much as any other.

Even prolifers like Mr. Canada, Paul Ryan and Todd Akin can appreciate the difference.

And that somehow makes it right? Perhaps they don't share Mourdock's view that all life is just as precious, just as valuable - and that life begins at conception. I'll ask you this - if you were to know that someone was conceived by rape, would you think less of them? Would you think that their life if less valuable than yours, for instance? Would you think that they have less of a right to be on this earth than you do?

This statement may be consistent with a prolife view but it's absurd when taken in the context of human emotion and complexity.

He's not speaking of human emotion and complexity - he's speaking solely of the life involved. I don't believe abortion is an "emotional issue;" ie: allowable only under specific emotions and complexities; I believe it's a choice women should have until the fetus is viable, regardless of the circumstances. I believe it's an issue that needs to be resolved on women's rights, not on emotion. As I said previously, it's his anti-choice stance that I take issue with. His stance, considering his belief, is not absurd. It's just as illegal to kill a child conceived of rape as it is a child conceived under any other circumstances. Emotions do not play into it.

That's the real issue here, IMO. Having consistency is not a good thing when it becomes tunnel-visioned. There has got to be room for negotiations because complex issues like abortion are not black or white.

It is to those who truly believe abortion is murder. How can one compromise such beliefs? How can they say, "well, murder is ok in this instance..." any more than they can say it's acceptable to murder a child conceived of rape?

What he's saying is the flip-side of supporting late-term abortions just to be 'consistent' with one's pro-choice view.

No it isn't. My pro-choice stance is based on the idea that a woman should not be forced to carry a life that is entirely dependent on her; that a woman should not be forced to be a host to a life that is not able to survive without her. Once the fetus is viable, able to survive on its own, there is no need for abortion, and it becomes a different issue. When there is a conflict of 'rights,' I say the rights of he living, breathing independent life takes precedence over the embryo/fetus. Once that fetus becomes self-sustainable, that principle does not apply.

It may be consistent but it defies common sense and logic.

To me it defies common sense and logic to believe that life begins at conception but it's ok to take that life in some instances.

msj · October 27, 2012

It is to those who truly believe abortion is murder. How can one compromise such beliefs? How can they say, "well, murder is ok in this instance..." any more than they can say it's acceptable to murder a child conceived of rape?

I bet you these people have no problem justifying capital punishment.

Especially for poor people, coloured people, and/or less intelligent people.

Edited October 27, 2012 by msj

Sleipnir · October 27, 2012

I also think its up to the women that carry the child and the only judge is God that they have to answer to.

Abortion is common in nature, would that mean God permits abortion? If so, why would any creatures have God to answer to if God allowed it?

God...a complicated subjective term.

punked · October 27, 2012

The republican party in one picture.

clay_bennett_gop_hanger.jpeg?1351348511

Mr.Canada · October 27, 2012

abomination. aaahhh.

Catholics believe that gay people are a sick, diseased people that need to be treated with love, respect and compassion so that they may lead a celibate life devoted to God instead of the popular gay lifestyle we see everyday. Wild drunken orgies, sex with multiple partners, public sex during Pride, etc.

punked · October 27, 2012

Catholics believe that gay people are a sick, diseased people that need to be treated with love, respect and compassion so that they may lead a celibate life devoted to God instead of the popular gay lifestyle we see everyday. Wild drunken orgies, sex with multiple partners, public sex during Pride, etc.

They believe the same thing about all people who fornicate out of wedlock. It ends there. What a crazy belief.

Mr.Canada · October 27, 2012

They believe the same thing about all people who fornicate out of wedlock. It ends there. What a crazy belief.

How about Muslims. They believe that anyone leaving the faith is to be killed. That gays and women who are educated should likewise be killed. That sounds sane.

punked · October 27, 2012

How about Muslims. They believe that anyone leaving the faith is to be killed. That gays and women who are educated should likewise be killed. That sounds sane.

Some Muslims believe that but they have no head of the church or central authority that can pass that belief down and say it is the word of God. Some Muslims believe what you say many do not. Although that sounds crazy as well. Any intolerance that comes from a central church is crazy Mr. Canada. God may very well exist but he is not talking to anyone here on this planet so everything these people say is crazy.

Mr.Canada · October 27, 2012

Some Muslims believe that but they have no head of the church or central authority that can pass that belief down and say it is the word of God. Some Muslims believe what you say many do not. Although that sounds crazy as well. Any intolerance that comes from a central church is crazy Mr. Canada. God may very well exist but he is not talking to anyone here on this planet so everything these people say is crazy.

I doubt you have spoken to the almost 7 billion people on this planet or even close. God speaks to each of us every single day. Whether you choose to listen to God or not is your choice as it all of our choices. That voice in your head when you're alone....isn't your thoughts, that is God and/or the devil speaking to you. Open your heart and listen.

punked · October 27, 2012

I doubt you have spoken to the almost 7 billion people on this planet or even close. God speaks to each of us every single day. Whether you choose to listen to God or not is your choice as it all of our choices. That voice in your head when you're alone....isn't your thoughts, that is God and/or the devil speaking to you. Open your heart and listen.

Yah OK God speaks to US and he is telling the Muslims one thing, he is telling you another and someone else to run for President. He is either a very confused God OR MAYBE he isn't speaking to anyone and people are hearing what they want to hear.

WIP · October 27, 2012

Catholics believe that gay people are a sick, diseased people that need to be treated with love, respect and compassion so that they may lead a celibate life devoted to God instead of the popular gay lifestyle we see everyday. Wild drunken orgies, sex with multiple partners, public sex during Pride, etc.

You have just informed us as to why there are so many gay priests who take great interest in young teenage boys!

I'm just glad that most Catholics are not walking, talking automatons who regurgitate every stupid idea that the Vatican hands down from on high! All of your finger pointing at Muslims shows that you condemn their religion for the same behaviour as Christian fundamentalists. Didn't Jesus have a parable or something about the hypocrisy of pointing out faults in others without considering one's own faults? I'll have to check my bible again....I'm sure it's there somewhere.

Mr.Canada · October 27, 2012

Yah OK God speaks to US and he is telling the Muslims one thing, he is telling you another and someone else to run for President. He is either a very confused God OR MAYBE he isn't speaking to anyone and people are hearing what they want to hear.

God and the devil speaks to us everyday. it is up to the person which side they choose to listen to. In oder to be saved by God a person must make the choice for themselves.

You have just informed us as to why there are so many gay priests who take great interest in young teenage boys!

i'm not sure I understand. Gay priests were allowed into the Church during the 60's and 70's but are no longer allowed in today.

punked · October 27, 2012

God and the devil speaks to us everyday. it is up to the person which side they choose to listen to. In oder to be saved by God a person must make the choice for themselves.

Or those are just voices in your head.

WIP · October 31, 2012

i'm not sure I understand. Gay priests were allowed into the Church during the 60's and 70's but are no longer allowed in today.

For the record, most gay men do not prey on children or teenage boys, but mostly pair up with men in their own age group....similar to most straight guys do not prey on 16 year old girls. The core problem is the high expectations put on priests - where they are commanded to live sexless lives whether they are gay or straight. My guess would be that while sexual offender-priests might be the minority, the number of priests who have actually followed that vow of life without sex are probably even a smaller minority of the priesthood.

The number one problem for the Catholic Church and other patriarchal religions is they want the wrong kind of person for the job in the first place! If you consider that, aside from the Sunday services, most of the priest or minister's work during the week could be described as social work; it is a role that....based on the odds is better performed by a woman or a large number of gay men, but NOT very many typical, average men. So, the Catholic Church is looking for masculine, heterosexual men who are willing to live the rest of their lives as eunuchs! Any wonder why there is a shortage of priests?