If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Rep. Phil Gingrey (R), an OB/GYN, goes full derp and defends Todd Akin's legitimate rape comments. Folks, this is the modern GOP   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 474
    More: Sick, Phil Gingrey, Todd Akin, GOP, Indiana Senate, Smyrna, Marietta Daily Journal, Richard Mourdock  
•       •       •

4091 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jan 2013 at 1:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



474 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-11 03:31:42 PM

Martian_Astronomer: Okay, the fact that you guys have followed this rabbit trail arguing over mechanics of ovulation and fertilization and implantation makes me sad. The idea that the stress of a rape may, in a few cases, prevent pregnancy is not what Todd Akin was arguing. He was arguing that the stress of rape prevents pregnancy in such an overwhelming majority of cases that pregnancy from rape is a such a negligible concern that pregnant rape victims are not worth worrying about when drafting policy. That is not partially right, or misunderstood, or an exaggeration. That is just wrong, and Gingrey's support is disingenuous.

Todd Akin was not arguing that rain may, in certain cases, put out a house fire; he was arguing that houses basically never catch fire when it's raining.


this is true
 
2013-01-11 03:32:39 PM

Kazan: all these legitimate rape guys should be sodomized with cactuses while the person repeatedly asks "is this legitimate rape? why isn't your body shutting that whole thing down?!"


Cactii? Seriously, though the Japanese have these cartoons, where the daemons have kit that makes a cactus look like a mere felafel. We should use those, the daemon schlongs, I mean.

Cheers.
 
2013-01-11 03:32:52 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: skullkrusher: lennavan: Satan's Bunny Slippers: skullkrusher:

well as I said in my titties, I have no idea why he was going there in the first place

yep. and this filter pwn really did make me snerk out loud.

That wasn't a filter pwn, which makes it even funnier ;)

I shant be filter pwnd!

Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?


I'd prefer an African Swallow than a Swallowin' African, amirite? Wait, that made no farking sense
 
2013-01-11 03:33:56 PM
From TFA:

"Mourdock basically said 'Look, if there is conception in the aftermath of a rape, that's still a child, and it's a child of God, essentially,"
Gingrey is quoted as saying Thursday.

In other words, Gingrey's saying Mourdock's God rapes children? I'm glad we got that settled.

/and a very Mary farkin' Christmas to both of these 'tards.
 
2013-01-11 03:34:13 PM
Let me summarize:
1) forcible rape has a lower chance of causing pregnancy
2) if you get pregnant, you probably enjoyed yourself
3) if you enjoyed yourself, it wasn't forcible/legitimate rape
4) if it wasn't legitimate rape, you are a whore and a liar for calling it rape

Is that about it?
 
2013-01-11 03:34:20 PM

Strix occidentalis: Someone who tries to excuse any form of rape probably oughtn't have a medical license.


And yet a lot of doctors excuse rape where the woman consented. Consent is no excuse, it's still rape!
 
2013-01-11 03:35:40 PM

skullkrusher: Satan's Bunny Slippers: skullkrusher: lennavan: Satan's Bunny Slippers: skullkrusher:

well as I said in my titties, I have no idea why he was going there in the first place

yep. and this filter pwn really did make me snerk out loud.

That wasn't a filter pwn, which makes it even funnier ;)

I shant be filter pwnd!

Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?

I'd prefer an African Swallow than a Swallowin' African, amirite? Wait, that made no farking sense


Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
 
2013-01-11 03:37:06 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pdee: Apparently you are much more likely to get pregnant by ovulating after sex than before.

Answer the question. How would adrenaline stay in the body long enough to prevent ovulation after the rape?


Yes, because the instant the adrenaline exits the system the woman ovulates. And adrenaline is the only stress related hormone involved in the process of ovulation, cortisol and norepinephrine have absolutely nothing to do with it. The woman certainly won't have nightmares after a rape, nor will she remain generally tense and agitated, because once the rape is over and she's out of that situation, she relaxes instantly. In fact, in some progressive yoga studios, they are using rape to invoke an otherworldly level of peace and tranquility.

Corvus, and it's hard to tell what your original point was after all of your fun strawman arguments about driving, but if I'm reading correctly, you're basing your argument on saying that Akin said that a woman will NEVER get pregnant from a "legitimate" rape, right? Which is at odds with what Akin's comment actually was:

"from what I understand from doctors, [pregnancy from rape] is really rare." -Todd Akin

Now what Gingrey is saying is that, yes, elevated stress hormones in the body, such as those produced from the traumatic incident of rape, can, in fact, increase the likelihood that ovulation that might have happened in the couple of days after the attack will not happen, or that those same elevated stress hormone levels can play a role in an embryo not attaching to the cervical lining, or even result in a early term miscarriage. This is all true. In fact, when dealing with fertility issues, reducing stress levels is one of the first interventions that is tried. What Gingrey didn't say, but implied, is that Akin's comment is partly correct in that the presence of stress hormones can make conception difficult, but that to say that pregnancy from rape is really rare is overreaching.

Should he have gone out of his way to say it? Hell, no. Is it just digging up a colossal blunder to mention it again four months later? Yep, it sure is. Is rape a horrible thing and in no way shape or form should we force women who were raped to carry their babies to term? Absolutely. Hell, I'm pro-choice, pro-cover-it-under-federal-healthcare-dollars.
 
2013-01-11 03:37:17 PM

Twilight Farkle: "Mourdock basically said 'Look, if there is conception in the aftermath of a rape, that's still a child, and it's a child of God, essentially,"
Gingrey is quoted as saying Thursday.


No, it's not a "child of God," you ninny, it's the child of a vicious criminal and his victim. What none of the rest of us can figure out is why you think that victim should have to be reminded of the man who raped her every day for the rest of her life, when she looks in her child's face. Did they cover that in OB/GYN school, asshole?
 
2013-01-11 03:38:07 PM

mrshowrules: Let me summarize:
1) forcible rape has a lower chance of causing pregnancy
2) if you get pregnant, you probably enjoyed yourself
3) if you enjoyed yourself, it wasn't forcible/legitimate rape
4) if it wasn't legitimate rape, you are a whore and a liar for calling it rape

Is that about it?


That was a summary of Akin's comments, not this guy. This guy is more like:

A) forcible rape causes stress
B) stress reduces ovulation
C) reduced ovulation reduces chances of getting pregnant
D) Akin was partially right, see #1 above in your summary of Akin's argument

As is being discussed elsewhere, this guy is conflating acute with chronic stress.
 
2013-01-11 03:39:03 PM

Martian_Astronomer: Okay, the fact that you guys have followed this rabbit trail arguing over mechanics of ovulation and fertilization and implantation makes me sad. The idea that the stress of a rape may, in a few cases, prevent pregnancy is not what Todd Akin was arguing. He was arguing that the stress of rape prevents pregnancy in such an overwhelming majority of cases that pregnancy from rape is a such a negligible concern that pregnant rape victims are not worth worrying about when drafting policy. That is not partially right, or misunderstood, or an exaggeration. That is just wrong, and Gingrey's support is disingenuous.

Todd Akin was not arguing that rain may, in certain cases, put out a house fire; he was arguing that houses basically never catch fire when it's raining.


You are 100% correct. We can all point and laugh at Todd for misrepresenting the facts to support his religious beliefs. There is no harm in admitting that his statement had some factual basis even if they were in the majority incorrect. There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.
 
2013-01-11 03:39:56 PM

DeaH: PsiChick: DeaH: Next time my insurance causes me to find yet another ob-gyn, I am going to look at political affiliation. Republicans simply do not do science well.

Yeah, gotta say, I feel sorry for anyone reading this article and going "Oh,  fark, that was my ob-gyn!". Malpractice investigations might be warranted here.

Of course, I feel like I am being a little unfair.

It's not just matters gynecological at which they stink. Remember Dr. Frist and the Schiavo case?


I was too young to pick up on that more than pepherially, but damn, that looks like a mess.
 
2013-01-11 03:40:27 PM

lennavan: mrshowrules: Let me summarize:
1) forcible rape has a lower chance of causing pregnancy
2) if you get pregnant, you probably enjoyed yourself
3) if you enjoyed yourself, it wasn't forcible/legitimate rape
4) if it wasn't legitimate rape, you are a whore and a liar for calling it rape

Is that about it?

That was a summary of Akin's comments, not this guy. This guy is more like:

A) forcible rape causes stress
B) stress reduces ovulation
C) reduced ovulation reduces chances of getting pregnant
D) Akin was partially right, see #1 above in your summary of Akin's argument

As is being discussed elsewhere, this guy is conflating acute with chronic stress.


which is something an OBGYN shouldn't do with regards to this topic. Lots of people being right for the wrong reasons in here.
 
2013-01-11 03:40:51 PM

Martian_Astronomer: Okay, the fact that you guys have followed this rabbit trail arguing over mechanics of ovulation and fertilization and implantation makes me sad. The idea that the stress of a rape may, in a few cases, prevent pregnancy is not what Todd Akin was arguing. He was arguing that the stress of rape prevents pregnancy in such an overwhelming majority of cases that pregnancy from rape is a such a negligible concern that pregnant rape victims are not worth worrying about when drafting policy. That is not partially right, or misunderstood, or an exaggeration. That is just wrong, and Gingrey's support is disingenuous.

Todd Akin was not arguing that rain may, in certain cases, put out a house fire; he was arguing that houses basically never catch fire when it's raining.


Or, if I shoot someone in the stomach with a small caliber gun, the odds are that modern medicine will save the life of the person in the majority of cases.  Therefore it really isn't attempted murder.
 
2013-01-11 03:41:29 PM

pdee: There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.


Supports? Perhaps not. Displays an epic quantity of insensitivity and lack of empathy every time the subject is raised? Abso-farking-luteky.
 
2013-01-11 03:42:07 PM

pdee: There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.


This is the moment I imagine you typing with pants on your head.
 
2013-01-11 03:42:10 PM

pdee: Martian_Astronomer: Okay, the fact that you guys have followed this rabbit trail arguing over mechanics of ovulation and fertilization and implantation makes me sad. The idea that the stress of a rape may, in a few cases, prevent pregnancy is not what Todd Akin was arguing. He was arguing that the stress of rape prevents pregnancy in such an overwhelming majority of cases that pregnancy from rape is a such a negligible concern that pregnant rape victims are not worth worrying about when drafting policy. That is not partially right, or misunderstood, or an exaggeration. That is just wrong, and Gingrey's support is disingenuous.

Todd Akin was not arguing that rain may, in certain cases, put out a house fire; he was arguing that houses basically never catch fire when it's raining.

You are 100% correct. We can all point and laugh at Todd for misrepresenting the facts to support his religious beliefs. There is no harm in admitting that his statement had some factual basis even if they were in the majority incorrect. There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.


Even the Democrats support rape as they haven't passed any laws prohibiting consensual rape yet.
 
2013-01-11 03:42:18 PM
Rep. Gingery, do you see that horse racing at breakneck speed down the road?  That's your political career.  And turn around...do you see that big barn door?  The one standing wide open?  The one you just flung open?

Or should I draw you a picture?
 
2013-01-11 03:42:22 PM

BMulligan: Twilight Farkle: "Mourdock basically said 'Look, if there is conception in the aftermath of a rape, that's still a child, and it's a child of God, essentially,"
Gingrey is quoted as saying Thursday.

No, it's not a "child of God," you ninny, it's the child of a vicious criminal and his victim. What none of the rest of us can figure out is why you think that victim should have to be reminded of the man who raped her every day for the rest of her life, when she looks in her child's face. Did they cover that in OB/GYN school, asshole?


Given that Mourdock, who actually made the comment, studied Geology, not medicine, I'd guess that he probably didn't get any bedside manner training. But wait, you quoted it too, so you must also believe it as well. And since I quoted it too, I must believe it too.

Don't confuse the message and the messenger.
 
2013-01-11 03:42:26 PM

lennavan: mrshowrules: Let me summarize:
1) forcible rape has a lower chance of causing pregnancy
2) if you get pregnant, you probably enjoyed yourself
3) if you enjoyed yourself, it wasn't forcible/legitimate rape
4) if it wasn't legitimate rape, you are a whore and a liar for calling it rape

Is that about it?

That was a summary of Akin's comments, not this guy. This guy is more like:

A) forcible rape causes stress
B) stress reduces ovulation
C) reduced ovulation reduces chances of getting pregnant
D) Akin was partially right, see #1 above in your summary of Akin's argument

As is being discussed elsewhere, this guy is conflating acute with chronic stress.


If she's so acute, she probably asking for it anyways.
 
2013-01-11 03:43:40 PM
There is something to be said about these common rape threads: PEOPLE FARKING LOVE FLAMING ABOUT VAGINAS, RAPE AND POLITICS.
 
2013-01-11 03:44:43 PM

Martian_Astronomer: I'm going to go ahead and spell it out for the couple of people who're popping in here and accusing Farkers of ignoring what the article says:


Using the word "people" a bit loosely, aren't you?
 
2013-01-11 03:45:12 PM

skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: "We tell infertile couples all the time that are having trouble conceiving because of the woman not ovulating, 'Just relax. Drink a glass of wine. And don't be so tense and uptight because all that adrenaline can cause you not to ovulate."

educate yourself on the mechanics of impregnation and it'll make sense.

So how does this have ANY bearing on someone being raped less likely to get pregnant?

you couldn't have possibly educated yourself on the mechanics of impregnation that quickly.

Can you answer?

So how does this have ANY bearing on someone being raped less likely to get pregnant?

ok, since you are apparently not going to educate yourself, allow me.
Did you know that you can get pregnant up to a week after intercourse? Did you know that ovulation after intercourse is enough to become pregnant? If you prevent ovulation in some way - by means of a hugely stressful occurrence, for example - you have reduced the likelihood that that act of intercourse will result in pregnancy?

As the doctor said, if the woman has already ovulated, it has no bearing on the situation. That's why Akin was wrong.

Put another way - a completely stress free woman has intercourse at some random time during her cycle. That exact same woman undergoes some extremely stressful event right before having intercourse at some other random time during her cycle. All things considered, she is more likely to become pregnant in the first scenario than the second.


Did you know that your 7 days applies to a woman who is already ovulating? That otherwise, without the protective mucous secreted during ovulation, the vaginal canal is relatively hostile to sperm? Did you realize that your second point is contraindicted by the general thrust of your argument? Did you relize that the argument you are defending (even if only partially, and in a pedantic rather than meaning seeking manner) hinges on it's OK to deny an abortion to a rape victim because if it's legitimate rape, the woman's body simply won't get pregnant? The fact is that most ejaculations into the vagina do not culminate in impregnation. Some do and this is based on physical cycles and chance. At the end of the day, the fact is a small number of women who are raped become pregnant. Defending a guy whosays that they shouldn't have access to an abortion because if they didn't really want to be raped they wouldn't be pregnant is wholly repugnant. I understand that you may think you are defending a point of rhetoric, but for the love of god man...
 
2013-01-11 03:45:28 PM
pdee: .

You are 100% correct. We can all point and laugh at Todd for misrepresenting the facts to support his religious beliefs. There is no harm in admitting that his statement had some factual basis even if they were in the majority incorrect. There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.


And you just got yourself Farkied as a reasonable individual.
 
2013-01-11 03:45:52 PM

wjmorris3: consensual rape


Look at how stupid you are.

abrannan: Don't confuse the message and the messenger.


Don't confuse merely repeating what someone said with making excuses for what was said. The latter comes perilously close to an endorsement.
 
2013-01-11 03:46:52 PM
I used to eat a lot of Williamson BBQ in Cobb County. About the same time their food went to hell (buns that smell like a moldy kitchen and cold, undercooked BBQ) they developed a Gingrey fetish to the point where their lobby looked like a shrine. I'd rather eat McDonald's.
 
2013-01-11 03:46:55 PM

skullkrusher: which is something an OBGYN shouldn't do with regards to this topic


I honestly don't think he did it intentionally. My PubMed skills might be failing me today but as far as I can tell, there is no literature on acute stress and fertility/ovulation. There's a causative link between chronic stress and ovulation but that's easy to identify -- Women who are stressed don't get their monthly visit from Aunt Flo.

And he might be right. I don't see any data on it and I have no idea how you would possibly get any data on it. I know that CNN article above had an MD saying acute stress plays no role but I don't see anything on PubMed yet to support that.
 
2013-01-11 03:47:31 PM

BMulligan: Twilight Farkle: "Mourdock basically said 'Look, if there is conception in the aftermath of a rape, that's still a child, and it's a child of God, essentially,"
Gingrey is quoted as saying Thursday.

No, it's not a "child of God," you ninny, it's the child of a vicious criminal and his victim. What none of the rest of us can figure out is why you think that victim should have to be reminded of the man who raped her every day for the rest of her life, when she looks in her child's face. Did they cover that in OB/GYN school, asshole?


While I support a women's right to choose remember you are arguing the point with people who believe abortion is murder.

They believe adoption is better than abortion. So no looking at rapist Jr.
They believe rapist J. is innocent child who did nothing to deserve death.
 
2013-01-11 03:47:58 PM

abrannan: And you just got yourself Farkied as a reasonable individual.


garrettmyler.files.wordpress.com

Get a room.
 
2013-01-11 03:48:34 PM

Mike_1962: I understand that you may think you are defending a point of rhetoric, but for the love of god man...


You're right. We should never try to understand nuanced arguments. Because somebody says something that we disagree with, we must vehemently and vociferously denounce every last word they've said. After all, look where that sort of tactic got the GOP.
 
2013-01-11 03:48:56 PM

BMulligan: wjmorris3: consensual rape

Look at how stupid you are.

abrannan: Don't confuse the message and the messenger.

Don't confuse merely repeating what someone said with making excuses for what was said. The latter comes perilously close to an endorsement.


It is misogynist to consider any sexual act committed by a man against a woman anything other than rape.
 
2013-01-11 03:49:55 PM

Mike_1962: Did you relize that the argument you are defending (even if only partially, and in a pedantic rather than meaning seeking manner) hinges on it's OK to deny an abortion


The argument you are referring to does not hinge on its OK to deny an abortion. That is the conclusion being drawn from their argument. Their argument hinges on whether one potential accurate way to determine if a woman was actually raped or not is whether or not she gets pregnant.
 
2013-01-11 03:51:23 PM

Mike_1962: skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: "We tell infertile couples all the time that are having trouble conceiving because of the woman not ovulating, 'Just relax. Drink a glass of wine. And don't be so tense and uptight because all that adrenaline can cause you not to ovulate."

educate yourself on the mechanics of impregnation and it'll make sense.

So how does this have ANY bearing on someone being raped less likely to get pregnant?

you couldn't have possibly educated yourself on the mechanics of impregnation that quickly.

Can you answer?

So how does this have ANY bearing on someone being raped less likely to get pregnant?

ok, since you are apparently not going to educate yourself, allow me.
Did you know that you can get pregnant up to a week after intercourse? Did you know that ovulation after intercourse is enough to become pregnant? If you prevent ovulation in some way - by means of a hugely stressful occurrence, for example - you have reduced the likelihood that that act of intercourse will result in pregnancy?

As the doctor said, if the woman has already ovulated, it has no bearing on the situation. That's why Akin was wrong.

Put another way - a completely stress free woman has intercourse at some random time during her cycle. That exact same woman undergoes some extremely stressful event right before having intercourse at some other random time during her cycle. All things considered, she is more likely to become pregnant in the first scenario than the second.

Did you know that your 7 days applies to a woman who is already ovulating? That otherwise, without the protective mucous secreted during ovulation, the vaginal canal is relatively hostile to sperm? Did you realize that your second point is contraindicted by the general thrust of your argument? Did you relize that the argument you are defending (even if only partially, and in a pedantic rather than meaning seeking manner) hinges on it's OK to deny an abortion to a rape victi ...


this is one of those threads you should read from newest posts to old.
 
2013-01-11 03:52:06 PM

pdee: While I support a women's right to choose remember you are arguing the point with people who believe abortion is murder.


So, because they're loons, I'm supposed to avoid calling them loony?
 
2013-01-11 03:53:05 PM

wjmorris3: BMulligan: wjmorris3: consensual rape

Look at how stupid you are.

abrannan: Don't confuse the message and the messenger.

Don't confuse merely repeating what someone said with making excuses for what was said. The latter comes perilously close to an endorsement.

It is misogynist to consider any sexual act committed by a man against a woman anything other than rape.


Good thing you won't need to worry about that, then.
 
2013-01-11 03:53:14 PM

lennavan: skullkrusher: which is something an OBGYN shouldn't do with regards to this topic

I honestly don't think he did it intentionally. My PubMed skills might be failing me today but as far as I can tell, there is no literature on acute stress and fertility/ovulation. There's a causative link between chronic stress and ovulation but that's easy to identify -- Women who are stressed don't get their monthly visit from Aunt Flo.

And he might be right. I don't see any data on it and I have no idea how you would possibly get any data on it. I know that CNN article above had an MD saying acute stress plays no role but I don't see anything on PubMed yet to support that.


well I suppose that is what Gingrey's claim hinges on
 
2013-01-11 03:54:04 PM

BMulligan: No, it's not a "child of God," you ninny, it's the child of a vicious criminal and his victim. What none of the rest of us can figure out is why you think that victim should have to be reminded of the man who raped her every day for the rest of her life, when she looks in her child's face. Did they cover that in OB/GYN school, asshole?


Another great example of I agree with your conclusion but not your reason. Why the fark would who the father is matter? You're arguing as if the child would have different rights if his father was a nice guy. How the fark is that the child's fault?

If your big problem is the mother looking the baby in the eye every day, she can always adopt it out.

I'm not telling you to change your conclusion, I'm telling you your reasoning needs work.
 
2013-01-11 03:54:25 PM

pdee: Miss Nova: Dear Repubs:

You know how you keep arguing again and again for special circumstances in which rape is okay? That tells me you want to rape. A lot. It tells me that you can't stop thinking about rape.

You are some sad, sick farks.

No one ever said rape is ok.

I know that demagoguing works and that's why BOTH sides keep doing it. But we really should look at its consequences. What Akin said is stupid enough to be refuted with facts. The lesson we are sending to our politicians is never engage in facts. Keep statements in the 'i love mom and apple pie' meaningless BS or just make promises you know you will never keep 'I will cut the deficit in half in 4 years'. If a politician says anything factual he gets killed.


Well, if one uses the same kind of logic you use in your arguments to defend these asshats...well, hey, you should have said rape twice...so we know you really, really like rape.
 
2013-01-11 03:54:32 PM
BMulligan: The latter comes perilously close to an endorsement.

And yet, it's still not an endorsement. Just as I, in trying to explain the (somewhat twisted) logic that Akin and Gingrey present am not in any way endorsing what they've said. I don't even think he was making excuses for Akin, he was saying, basically, that Akin and Mourdock were lousy at making their arguments, and as a result the GOP lost two house seats. Now he came close to making the same mistake, seeing how this is playing in the media, but he's not in the middle of campaigning for re-election, so this is likely to be a minor issue that will pop up when he does run.
 
2013-01-11 03:56:41 PM

skullkrusher: well I suppose that is what Gingrey's claim hinges on


The point here is that his claim is irrelevant. The fact remains that Gingrey was willing to step in and attempt to rationalize Mourdock's idiocy, which makes Gingrey an idiot once removed.

Look, suppose Mourdock's claim was factually correct, that women who are "legitimately" raped don't get pregnant. So what? What change in policy or law should follow? Because if someone doesn't have a good answer to that question, maybe they should just avoid the whole subject.
 
2013-01-11 03:56:56 PM

deanis: There is something to be said about these common rape threads: PEOPLE FARKING LOVE FLAMING ABOUT VAGINAS, RAPE AND POLITICS.


This is the Politics thread.  The greatest global issue in politics today is traditionalism versus modernity.   I can't think of a bigger issue in global politics.  Theocracy versus secularism and socialism versus capitalism is even less fundamental today and is more derivative than anything else.

The fight against modernity is the root cause of most of the shiat happening in the world.  The single biggest piece of modernity is women's equality.  The cornerstone of women's equality is control of their reproductive rights.

I suggest control of women's reproductive rights is the most important political issue in the world today.

/i'm a dude
 
2013-01-11 03:58:31 PM

lennavan: You're arguing as if the child would have different rights if his father was a nice guy. How the fark is that the child's fault?


We're not talking about a child. We're talking about a fetus, to which concepts such as "rights" and "fault" do not apply.
 
2013-01-11 03:58:54 PM

pdee: We can all point and laugh at Todd for misrepresenting the facts to support his religious beliefs. There is no harm in admitting that his statement had some factual basis even if they were in the majority incorrect. There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.


Be honest. In this case, misrepresenting the facts to support his religious believes = implying that conception due to rape is an insignificant problem.
 
2013-01-11 03:58:57 PM

skullkrusher: lennavan: skullkrusher: which is something an OBGYN shouldn't do with regards to this topic

I honestly don't think he did it intentionally. My PubMed skills might be failing me today but as far as I can tell, there is no literature on acute stress and fertility/ovulation. There's a causative link between chronic stress and ovulation but that's easy to identify -- Women who are stressed don't get their monthly visit from Aunt Flo.

And he might be right. I don't see any data on it and I have no idea how you would possibly get any data on it. I know that CNN article above had an MD saying acute stress plays no role but I don't see anything on PubMed yet to support that.

well I suppose that is what Gingrey's claim hinges on


Right. So I would amend his statement from "Akin is partially right" to "Akin might be partially right." A different argument Akin could have taken on but didn't was from that CNN article, rapists ejaculate less often (presumably because rape is about power not sex?). Either way, Pincy asked the best question of the thread (IMO).

Pincy: Please, explain to us one more time why it is important to have everyone understand that a woman might be less likely to get pregnant from a rapist than she would from a consensual partner.


What do we have to do to get a reporter to ask this to the next jackass who continues this line of argumentation?
 
2013-01-11 04:00:45 PM

abrannan: BMulligan: The latter comes perilously close to an endorsement.

And yet, it's still not an endorsement. Just as I, in trying to explain the (somewhat twisted) logic that Akin and Gingrey present am not in any way endorsing what they've said. I don't even think he was making excuses for Akin, he was saying, basically, that Akin and Mourdock were lousy at making their arguments, and as a result the GOP lost two house seats. Now he came close to making the same mistake, seeing how this is playing in the media, but he's not in the middle of campaigning for re-election, so this is likely to be a minor issue that will pop up when he does run.


I'm not talking about you; I'm talking about Gingrey. I understood you to say that Gingrey should not be held accountable for Mourdock's comments, and I'm saying that Gingrey implicitly endorsed Mourdock's comments by attempting to rationalize them.
 
2013-01-11 04:01:37 PM

BMulligan: skullkrusher: well I suppose that is what Gingrey's claim hinges on

The point here is that his claim is irrelevant. The fact remains that Gingrey was willing to step in and attempt to rationalize Mourdock's idiocy, which makes Gingrey an idiot once removed.

Look, suppose Mourdock's claim was factually correct, that women who are "legitimately" raped don't get pregnant. So what? What change in policy or law should follow? Because if someone doesn't have a good answer to that question, maybe they should just avoid the whole subject.


if the point of the thread was whether Gingrey is an idiot, you'd be right. Whether he is 100% indisputably correct, it takes a pretty dumb politician to dredge this whole thing up again.
 
2013-01-11 04:01:54 PM

someonelse: pdee: We can all point and laugh at Todd for misrepresenting the facts to support his religious beliefs. There is no harm in admitting that his statement had some factual basis even if they were in the majority incorrect. There is harm in pretending that he or other GOP candidates supports rape.

Be honest. In this case, misrepresenting the facts to support his religious believes = implying that conception due to rape is an insignificant problem.


I don't see that happening.
 
2013-01-11 04:02:52 PM

lennavan: Pincy: Please, explain to us one more time why it is important to have everyone understand that a woman might be less likely to get pregnant from a rapist than she would from a consensual partner.

What do we have to do to get a reporter to ask this to the next jackass who continues this line of argumentation?


dunno. I suppose it was to downplay the necessity of rape exemptions but it indisputably does happen so you still need the exemption even if you are considering a ban
 
2013-01-11 04:03:09 PM

BMulligan: We're not talking about a child. We're talking about a fetus


You called it a child, not me. I agree fetus is the better word but don't come attacking me for using the wrong word, I let it go in an attempt to move the discussion forward. See:

BMulligan: No, it's not a "child of God," you ninny, it's the child of a vicious criminal and his victim.


BMulligan: We're not talking about a child. We're talking about a fetus, to which concepts such as "rights" and "fault" do not apply.


Also, I have a few questions for you.

1) Should it be legal to abort a child for the sole reason of its gender?
2) Should it be legal to abort a child for the sole reason of its hair will be brown?
3) Should it be legal to abort a 39 week old fetus not born yet?

If you answer no to any of these questions, then you join a huge majority of the country in also believing rights apply to the fetus. If not, seriously, what the fark is wrong with you?
 
2013-01-11 04:03:39 PM

lennavan: Pincy: Please, explain to us one more time why it is important to have everyone understand that a woman might be less likely to get pregnant from a rapist than she would from a consensual partner.

What do we have to do to get a reporter to ask this to the next jackass who continues this line of argumentation?


It's simple. In their mind, they want a no exceptions clause added to any anti-abortion bill. In order to do so, they have to legitimize the concept that there is no need for a rape exception, just as they've gone after the health of the mother exceptions and incest exceptions. They have to continually prove that they are More Conservative than Thou so that they can trumpet that to their evangelical constituents. They are the embryo equivalent to gun nuts, where the only acceptable answer is "more embryos".
 
Displayed 50 of 474 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report