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.

(Huffington Post)   GOP Rep Trent Franks: "The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low." Sounds legitimate   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 108
    More: Asinine, humans, The Arizona Republic, House Judiciary, Equal Pay Act, St. Louis Public Radio, Paycheck Fairness Act, Jerry Nadler, obstetrics  
•       •       •

855 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Jun 2013 at 8:12 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-13 08:15:16 AM  
third-wave.org
 
2013-06-13 08:17:09 AM  
Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.
 
2013-06-13 08:17:24 AM  
Is this an inaccurate statement?
 
2013-06-13 08:18:29 AM  
He could very well be right about that fact, but it's a stupid basis for his position. What the hell does the incidence rate have to do with anything?
 
2013-06-13 08:21:09 AM  

randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?


See my above post.
 
2013-06-13 08:21:53 AM  
Another GOP politician that doesn't want to be re-elected, I see.
 
2013-06-13 08:22:03 AM  
The incidence rate of people killing someone who's attempting to murder them is low, so there shouldn't be an exemption for that.
 
2013-06-13 08:22:52 AM  

RussianPooper: He could very well be right about that fact, but it's a stupid basis for his position. What the hell does the incidence rate have to do with anything?


Well it would only be a few women that are forced to carry their rapist's baby. So it's basically no big deal.
 
2013-06-13 08:25:16 AM  
I would guess it is lower than the incidence from mutually consensual sex.

Mainly because science says women are hornier when they are fertile, so this would probably make it more likely that they are having consensual sex at that time.  Where as rapes would happen at a random time in their cycle.

The source of all of this information is a vaguely recalled article and my ass.
 
2013-06-13 08:25:29 AM  

randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?


Simple answers, yes.
 
2013-06-13 08:25:46 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-06-13 08:26:21 AM  

randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?


Are you really asking that question? Even after all the threads we had about Todd Akins on this very subject?

Oh who am I kidding, of course you are.

/shouldn't feed the trolls
 
2013-06-13 08:26:29 AM  

RussianPooper: He could very well be right about that fact, but it's a stupid basis for his position. What the hell does the incidence rate have to do with anything?


Exactly.  If this is true, then allowing the victims of rape the ability to control whether or not they go through the additional trauma of a 9 month pregnancy and prevent the government from forcing her to give birth to her rapist's baby should be even more of a no brainer, since it would occur "so rarely."

As for the "fact" that rape rarely results in pregnancy, you'd also have to look into how often pregnancies due to rape are prevented by the use of emergency doses of birth control which are given at the time rape kits are taken.  Birth control which many evangelicals would like to see outlawed.
 
2013-06-13 08:28:17 AM  

MmmmBacon: Another GOP politician that doesn't want to be re-elected, I see.


It isn't the getting re-elected that's the issue.  Mostly it's that it, once again, confirms the status of the party when it comes to being wholly ignorant about a potential 50% of the voters.

I gotta wonder if the DNC offices are just closing early on Friday and they're going to play mini-golf and have a few rounds when things like this happen.
 
2013-06-13 08:28:32 AM  

hobberwickey: randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?

Simple answers, yes.


Simple answer, irrelevant. Arguing if the statement is true or not just gets on a tangent from the main point. His premise, true or not, does not support his conclusion.
 
2013-06-13 08:28:57 AM  
I think the whole "rape exception" argument is beyond stupid.  Either you are allowed to abort or not.  Just because you don't like the father shouldn't change one thing about however you view an embryo and its relevance to the abortion question.  If it does you are a hypocrite.

The entire argument is ridiculous.
 
2013-06-13 08:31:33 AM  

thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.


He didnt say that women who get raped are less likely to get pregnant. He said the incident of pregnancy resulting from a rape is low. There is a big difference there. I dont have the numbers so I have no idea how accurate of a statement it was, but youre just reading what you want to read with no regard to what was actually said.
 
2013-06-13 08:31:45 AM  

Zeno-25: [i.imgur.com image 850x322]


I take issue with Paul Ryan being "defeated."  He kinda got brought along by Romney to sew up a major credibility issue he had.  It took the GOP so long to fall in line and even then they weren't wild about the decisions.

Once he isn't holding public office in D.C. then I would say he deserves the designation.  But he was just along for the ride.
 
2013-06-13 08:32:05 AM  
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-06-13 08:32:27 AM  

Slam Dunkz: I think the whole "rape exception" argument is beyond stupid.  Either you are allowed to abort or not.  Just because you don't like the father shouldn't change one thing about however you view an embryo and its relevance to the abortion question.  If it does you are a hypocrite.

The entire argument is ridiculous.


I can see why we might let someone avoid turning a single trauma into a nine month trauma.
 
2013-06-13 08:32:51 AM  
What peer reviewed study is his opinion based on?

FTFA: "Like Akin's, Franks's claim is not supported by research. Medical experts agree that rape does not lower the incidence of pregnancy, and one study by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology found that more than 30,000 pregnancies result from rape in the United States each year."

well, 30,000 is a pretty low number...
 
2013-06-13 08:34:21 AM  

I alone am best: thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.

He didnt say that women who get raped are less likely to get pregnant. He said the incident of pregnancy resulting from a rape is low. There is a big difference there. I dont have the numbers so I have no idea how accurate of a statement it was, but youre just reading what you want to read with no regard to what was actually said.


I would also guess the incidence of pregnancy from unprotected consensual sex is also low.  Some couples couples try for months and months.
 
2013-06-13 08:34:55 AM  

Skarekrough: MmmmBacon: Another GOP politician that doesn't want to be re-elected, I see.

It isn't the getting re-elected that's the issue.  Mostly it's that it, once again, confirms the status of the party when it comes to being wholly ignorant about a potential 50% of the voters.

I gotta wonder if the DNC offices are just closing early on Friday and they're going to play mini-golf and have a few rounds when things like this happen.


I get that, but you would think the GOP would be extra-sensitive to statements like this, knowing it cost them many key races in 2012, and that the DNC will use these statements as a bludgeon every chance they can in 2014 and beyond. Any politician who would make such a foolhardy mistake is either deliberately trying to tank their own chances for re-election or too stupid to tie their own shoes.
 
2013-06-13 08:36:25 AM  
You know what I find amazing?  It's not that he thinks how many women would have to carry their rapists baby to term makes a difference on whether ANY should be forced to.

No, what I can't fathom is why the National Republican Congressional Committee hasn't gone around to every Republican congressman, Senator, and candidate and waterboarded them until they develop a psychological block against saying the word 'rape' - in any context.

NRCC: Trent.  Say 'rape'.
Rep: It's a crime to rape.
NRCC: Douse him boys.
...
NRCC: Trent.  Say 'rape'.
Rep: .... potato?
NRCC: That's a good boy.  Have a cookie.
 
2013-06-13 08:37:52 AM  
I honestly believe these people don't actually want bans on abortion because it would take away that arguing chip that makes them look like big men to their idiot supporters.

For all the taxpayer dollars wasted on bringing these proposals forward over the years, each state could receive small coffers to establish pregnancy resource centers. The one in my former town of Clearwater was self-reliant in 4 years - using thrift store sales and local donations to keep going.

They do a far better (and far more compassionate) job at reducing abortion numbers than these ridiculous proposals and slut-shaming could hope to do.

If legislators truly cared about life, they would work in that direction. They don't. They care about getting reelected.

Very sad.
 
2013-06-13 08:39:48 AM  
www.contractortalk.com
 
2013-06-13 08:39:59 AM  

thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.


I'm no doctor, but how is it easier for a fertilized egg to implant itself within the uterus when the vagina has all the trauma?

/legit question, I don't understand how that would work.
 
2013-06-13 08:40:12 AM  

EvilEgg: Slam Dunkz: I think the whole "rape exception" argument is beyond stupid.  Either you are allowed to abort or not.  Just because you don't like the father shouldn't change one thing about however you view an embryo and its relevance to the abortion question.  If it does you are a hypocrite.

The entire argument is ridiculous.

I can see why we might let someone avoid turning a single trauma into a nine month trauma.


If you're pro-choice it's a moot point.  The whole "rape exception" thing is used in cases where people think abortion is wrong and they are providing an exception for rape/incest.  If you think abortion is wrong because it's a life and should be allowed to live, even in cases of rape/incest it's *still* a life.  That doesn't change.  That's where the hypocrisy comes in.
 
2013-06-13 08:40:19 AM  

randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?


Since you're too malicious to care that he's minimizing rape victims you could at least try being smart enough to care that the only reason you had to ask that question is because he didn't back up the claim with any facts.

/ haha... facts and randomjsa... funny joke....
 
2013-06-13 08:40:21 AM  

thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.


And it's a fact that per encounter male potency is higher for a first/single encounter than in a long term relationship (look up the concept of "sperm warfare") so even without the trauma factor a rape is more likely to lead to pregnancy than if the woman slept with a long-term partner.

It's true that rape doesn't usually lead to pregnancy, but that's just because the likelihood of any single sexual encounter leading to a successful birth is very low. Considering there are ~200,000 sexual assaults in this country every year, trying to say "it's more likely you won't get pregnant than you will from a rape!" doesn't mean that pregnancy from rape is a non-issue.
 
2013-06-13 08:42:43 AM  

Knight of the Woeful Countenance: thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.

I'm no doctor, but how is it easier for a fertilized egg to implant itself within the uterus when the vagina has all the trauma?

/legit question, I don't understand how that would work.


It doesn't.  This is someone parroting bullshiat they read somewhere.  The research showed no discernible effect on pregnancy rates due to rape.
 
2013-06-13 08:45:15 AM  

Grungehamster: It's true that rape doesn't usually lead to pregnancy, but that's just because the likelihood of any single sexual encounter leading to a successful birth is very low. Considering there are ~200,000 sexual assaults in this country every year, trying to say "it's more likely you won't get pregnant than you will from a rape!" doesn't mean that pregnancy from rape is a non-issue.


tl;dr: it's at least no lower than any consensual sexual encounter and that number is non-zero.

Conclusion: Rep. Trent Franks is provably ignorant, possibly stupid and likely a misogynist.
 
2013-06-13 08:45:49 AM  
The pro-rape party speaks again.
 
2013-06-13 08:45:52 AM  

RyogaM: RussianPooper: He could very well be right about that fact, but it's a stupid basis for his position. What the hell does the incidence rate have to do with anything?

Exactly.  If this is true, then allowing the victims of rape the ability to control whether or not they go through the additional trauma of a 9 month pregnancy and prevent the government from forcing her to give birth to her rapist's baby should be even more of a no brainer, since it would occur "so rarely."

As for the "fact" that rape rarely results in pregnancy, you'd also have to look into how often pregnancies due to rape are prevented by the use of emergency doses of birth control which are given at the time rape kits are taken.  Birth control which many evangelicals would like to see outlawed.


You miss that the point they want to make is that they want people to believe pregnancy is evidence of consensual sex and as a result women claiming they need an abortion as a result of being raped are probably lying to try to justify their poor decisions.

Because as we all know, the problem with rape is that women are far too prone to reporting it when it doesn't happen, am I right?
 
2013-06-13 08:46:53 AM  

phenn: I honestly believe these people don't actually want bans on abortion because it would take away that arguing chip that makes them look like big men to their idiot supporters.

For all the taxpayer dollars wasted on bringing these proposals forward over the years, each state could receive small coffers to establish pregnancy resource centers. The one in my former town of Clearwater was self-reliant in 4 years - using thrift store sales and local donations to keep going.

They do a far better (and far more compassionate) job at reducing abortion numbers than these ridiculous proposals and slut-shaming could hope to do.

If legislators truly cared about life, they would work in that direction. They don't. They care about getting reelected.

Very sad.


That would be believable if there hadn't already been a lot of Republican led state legislatures that have passed, or are trying to pass, legislation to make getting an abortion harder or impossible.  Look at the states that have passed mandatory ultrasounds, 2-3 day waiting periods, and laws specifically created to target women's health clinics that MAY provide abortion services.

No, I think they want it to happen, but there are still some people with a shred of sense that are trying their damnedest to stop them.
 
2013-06-13 08:50:03 AM  
I didn't see in the article where Trent went to medical school. He is a doctor? Right?
 
2013-06-13 08:52:50 AM  
What he said was not what he meant, and how dare you criticize what he meant based on what he said. So what he said is clearly valid because of what he meant. Liberals just can't stand someone who stays consistent on what they say, err meant to say. Look, it's all about what our morals mean not what we say. So ha!
 
2013-06-13 08:53:53 AM  

phenn: For all the taxpayer dollars wasted on bringing these proposals forward over the years, each state could receive small coffers to establish pregnancy resource centers. The one in my former town of Clearwater was self-reliant in 4 years - using thrift store sales and local donations to keep going.


I've come to believe that the real reason they push these sorts of things is that they want to punish what they perceive to be "immoral" women.

I think these idiots and their supporters earnestly believe that women are raped because either:

a) They don't have a man around to protect them or
b) They "dress like sluts" and engage in activities that make them "deserving" of rape

I honestly don't believe people like Franks see rape victims as victims. I think they see rape victims as women who got what was coming to them and that now they're just looking to further destroy "moral fabric" by killing a "child".

I don't believe these.... things.... like Franks, see women as equals and they're taking their frustrations over modern views of a woman's place in society out by pushing this sort of malicious legislation. I think they believe women should be subservient to men in all facets of life and they're quietly boiling with rage that their troglodyte views on the matter are dying.

The GOP simply hates any woman who doesn't fit into their bullshiat views of the picturesque 1950s America that never actually existed anywhere but their own twisted brains.
 
2013-06-13 08:54:58 AM  

EvilEgg: I would guess it is lower than the incidence from mutually consensual sex.

Mainly because science says women are hornier when they are fertile, so this would probably make it more likely that they are having consensual sex at that time.  Where as rapes would happen at a random time in their cycle.

The source of all of this information is a vaguely recalled article and my ass.


This is exactly how the GOP spreads it's message, by starting with something completely inaccurate, and having enough idiots repeat it until people who can't be bothered to actually research what they're saying (and why would they research something so stupid) start to try to figure out why so many people are saying this seemingly stupid thing. Our brains are very good at rationalizing things even when they don't make sense, so once people start to think about 'why are so many people saying this' they come up with some stupid reason why it could possibly be true and from there, as the lie is repeated over and over that 'possibly true' becomes 'I don't know' becomes 'the science is still out' becomes 'DERP THE GOVERNMENT IS KEEPING THIS FROM US DERP'.

Admittedly the science on this is a little tougher to dig up than on some other subjects since no one wants to talk about rape, but the science is out there and it's conclusive that there's no difference in chances of getting pregnant from being raped than from having consensual sex. Here's a great article on the actual science of it http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/context-and-variation/2012/08/20/ h ere-is-some-legitimate-science-on-pregnancy-and-rape/. Note the actual studies and real numbers.

Just for comparison's sake, here's a Christian "it doesn't happen that much" article.http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/rape-pregnancies -are-rar e-461. Note the numbers pulled almost entirely out of thin air. 

Basically the moral is that if you find yourself thinking, 'well I guess that could be true' take 20 minutes out of your day and look at the science behind this stuff and vote these idiots out of office.
 
2013-06-13 08:55:02 AM  
I'm torn between PLEASE SHUT THE HELL UP FOR THE REST OF YOUR MISERABLE LIFE, and
"please proceed, keep pulling your party straight down the shiatter".

Just can't decide.
 
2013-06-13 08:55:07 AM  

roadkillontheweb: I didn't see in the article where Trent went to medical school. He is a doctor? Right?


No, but he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once.
 
2013-06-13 08:57:04 AM  

RussianPooper: hobberwickey: randomjsa: Is this an inaccurate statement?

Simple answers, yes.

Simple answer, irrelevant. Arguing if the statement is true or not just gets on a tangent from the main point. His premise, true or not, does not support his conclusion.


I disagree, holding elected officials to factually correct statements, especially on topics as important as this (can you imagine being forced to give birth to your rapists kid? I know I can't / don't want to) is never irrelevant. But yeah I agree that his premise doesn't support his conclusion either way.
 
2013-06-13 09:01:58 AM  
Sure if your talking about two dudes.
 
2013-06-13 09:03:21 AM  
Since about 10% of rapes are male on male, of course this true.
 
2013-06-13 09:03:25 AM  

D135: What peer reviewed study is his opinion based on?

FTFA: "Like Akin's, Franks's claim is not supported by research. Medical experts agree that rape does not lower the incidence of pregnancy, and one study by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology found that more than 30,000 pregnancies result from rape in the United States each year."

well, 30,000 is a pretty low number...


Whoa, a GOP rep spouting off on a topic he knows nothing about?
I'm shocked......SHOCKED!
 
2013-06-13 09:08:37 AM  

D135: What peer reviewed study is his opinion based on?

FTFA: "Like Akin's, Franks's claim is not supported by research. Medical experts agree that rape does not lower the incidence of pregnancy, and one study by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology found that more than 30,000 pregnancies result from rape in the United States each year."

well, 30,000 is a pretty low number...


Since the estimated occurance of sexual assaults is ~200,000 a year, that just means you have, what, a 15% chance of pregnancy resulting from rape? One in seven rapes ending in pregnancy means it's a non-issue!
 
2013-06-13 09:09:26 AM  

MmmmBacon: Skarekrough: MmmmBacon: Another GOP politician that doesn't want to be re-elected, I see.

It isn't the getting re-elected that's the issue.  Mostly it's that it, once again, confirms the status of the party when it comes to being wholly ignorant about a potential 50% of the voters.

I gotta wonder if the DNC offices are just closing early on Friday and they're going to play mini-golf and have a few rounds when things like this happen.

I get that, but you would think the GOP would be extra-sensitive to statements like this, knowing it cost them many key races in 2012, and that the DNC will use these statements as a bludgeon every chance they can in 2014 and beyond. Any politician who would make such a foolhardy mistake is either deliberately trying to tank their own chances for re-election or too stupid to tie their own shoes.


The running theme for the GOP has largely been to not quash anything.

The first time the issue came up something from Reince should have gone out stating that anyone who uses the word "rape" in any context will no longer receive any funding ever again.  But it didn't.  And to make it worse their platform in 2012 confirmed what America collectively gasped in horror as to how they could be so ignorant about.
 
2013-06-13 09:20:32 AM  
*Sigh*, yet another entry in the "You're not helping" column of the GOP...
 
2013-06-13 09:20:44 AM  
RE:   randomjsa's post

Guys - thread dumps should be flushed.  Not played with in the bowl.
 
2013-06-13 09:21:27 AM  

Knight of the Woeful Countenance: thatboyoverthere: Oh fark you. Women are more likely to get pregnant from a rape since the vaginal trauma makes it more likely for a fertilized egg to implant.
/Of course I'm using big words that would just make him scream liberal at me.

I'm no doctor, but how is it easier for a fertilized egg to implant itself within the uterus when the vagina has all the trauma?

/legit question, I don't understand how that would work.


From what I understand it's more surface area. Or it gets stuck into one of the microscopic tares in the uterine wall. Something like that. It's unlikely that only one time is able to fertizlie an egg properly but if it does get fertilized it's more likely to implant.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report