Calls For U.S. Rep. Akin To Drop Out Of Senate Race Over Rape Comments

[News_Editor]

Calls for U.S. Rep. Akin to drop out of Senate race over rape comments < br />

2012-08-21 00:37:58 GMT+7 (ICT)

JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI (BNO NEWS) -- U.S. Senator Scott Brown on Monday called on fellow Republican Todd Akin to withdraw from the U.S. Senate race in Missouri, a day after Akin suggested during a television interview that instances of "legitimate rape" rarely result in pregnancy.

Akin, who has served as the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district since January 2001 and is currently locked in a hard-fought campaign to unseat Democratic U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill, made the controversial remarks during an interview on KTVI-TV on Sunday morning.

"First of all, from what I understand from doctors, [pregnancy from rape] is really rare," Akin said when defending his position on abortion. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let's assume that maybe that didn't work or something. I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child."

The remarks immediately set off a firestorm of criticism, and even fellow Republicans joined in to distance themselves from Akin's remarks.

Republican Scott Brown, the U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, called on Akin to withdraw from the U.S. Senate race in his state. "As a husband and father of two young women, I found Todd Akin's comments about women and rape outrageous, inappropriate and wrong," Brown said. "There is no place in our public discourse for this type of offensive thinking. Not only should he apologize, but I believe Rep. Akin's statement was so far out of bounds that he should resign the nomination for U.S. Senate in Missouri."

McCaskill also condemned Akin's remarks but said it should be up to voters to decide whether he is fit to be a U.S. Senator. "It is beyond comprehension that someone can be so ignorant about the emotional and physical trauma brought on by rape," she said. "The ideas that Todd Akin has expressed about the serious crime of rape and the impact on its victims are offensive."

Akin later released a statement in which he said he misspoke, but did not apologize. "In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year," he said.

He added: "I recognize that abortion, and particularly in the case of rape, is a very emotionally charged issue. But I believe deeply in the protection of all life and I do not believe that harming another innocent victim is the right course of action. I also recognize that there are those who, like my opponent, support abortion and I understand I may not have their support in this election."

On the national stage, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney described Akin's remarks as "inexcusable." "Congressman's Akin comments on rape are insulting, inexcusable, and, frankly, wrong," Romney told the conservative website National Review Online. "Like missions of other Americans, we found them to be offensive."

If Akin wants to withdraw from the U.S. Senate race, he would have to do so before 5 p.m. local time on Tuesday, the deadline set by Missouri election law.

McCaskill's campaign used Akin's remarks on Sunday to highlight several other controversial incidents in his past. The campaign noted that Akin co-sponsored a bill last year which would redefine a ban on federal funding for abortions to exempt only "forcible rape" and not rape in general, which critics said could include statutory rape or rape through the use of drugs or verbal threats.

And according to a local newspaper report in May 1991, Akin voted for an anti-marital-rape law but only after questioning whether it could be misused. Akin was reportedly concerned that the anti-marital-rape law could be misused in a "real messy divorce as a tool and legal weapon to beat up on the husband."

Additionally, in 2005, Akin was among about 50 congressmen who voted against the creation of a national sex offender registry database that required those convicted of a sex crime to register before completing a prison sentence, The Hill newspaper reported earlier this month. The bill also increased mandatory sentences for those convicted of molesting children.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-08-21

[Mosha]

He's right up there with Rick Santorum and his "Pregnancy through rape is God's gift." Where do you folks find you politicians, Arkham Sanitarium?

[Ulysses G.]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

[chooka]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

Agree, Politics world wide doesn't actually attract the cream of the crop. Unfortunately the best prospects are running the large corporations where the real money is

[KeyserSoze01]

"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

Priceless.

Please. force this pro-life nut job out of the race. We have enough idiots in Washington and no, we don't need any more.

[geriatrickid]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

Why? He represents the views of a large number of Republicans? Shouldn't they be allowed to voice their views? The man is but the the edge of the wedge that distinguishes so many who want the GOP to win the election in November so that they can further impose their views on the rest of the USA. I hope he stays in so that the public can see what the GOP represents.

[Ulysses G.]

Nonsense. Most Republicans do not believe that that raped women have natural impediments to prevent pregnancy. Akin is a nut case.

Edited August 21, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Scott]

During the Bosnian war, there were women who were intentionally raped until they got pregnant. In one instance a woman who had been raped and given birth did not want the child. Rather than free the child for adoption--as she wanted--some high level quasi-government agencies and NGO's poured a great deal of time and money into getting the mother to accept and care for the child.

At her first opportunity, she killed the child.

Women do get raped and children do suffer as a result.

[Neurath]

Scott Brown is a buffoon and clearly an inarticulate fool. However, the argument or point he was trying to make was about the right to life. Regardless of the criminality of the act involved in conception - rape for example - the conceived child has a right to life and should not be executed because of a criminality that s/he had no part of. This right outweighs any argument made by the person carrying the child. This is why Paul Ryan does not believe that abortion is warranted or should be legal when conception is a consequence of rape. This is a position held by many in the Christian Republican movement and a principle upon which this movement would have Supreme Court Justices appointed.

[GentlemanJim]

The whole issue is offensive. At the end of the day, regardless of your religious or moral beliefs, what a woman chooses to do if she becomes pregnant after rape is non of our god dam_n business and should be no business of the law either. Non of us have to live the rest of our lives with the consequences of the law forcing a woman to have a child as a result of rape. How could a woman EVER forget the experience when every day she would look into the eyes of her child and remember. If some of these politicians stepped off the pile of soap boxes they stood on they would find themselves back in the holes where they belong.

[Credo]

I would have a lot less trouble with this guy, and other's position, but they are the same ones who don't want their tax dollars going to support these, or other, children.

[KeyserSoze01]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

Why? He represents the views of a large number of Republicans? Shouldn't they be allowed to voice their views? The man is but the the edge of the wedge that distinguishes so many who want the GOP to win the election in November so that they can further impose their views on the rest of the USA. I hope he stays in so that the public can see what the GOP represents.

Bullshit. How can you tie his errant view on abortion to the entire GOP. Time to put down the fire water and come to your senses. Wait, after re-reading your post, you don't have any sense, so you get lumped into the "tar everyone with the same brush" crowd. See how that works.

[Neurath]

"A 110-member committee endorsed the new platform in the lead-up to next week's Republican convention in Tamp, Florida. “Faithful to the 'self-evident' truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed,” says the document.

........

“We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children.”" smh.com.au August 22nd.

Representative Akin seems to have fallen for that old chestnut that if a women is sexually aroused she is more likely to conceive. His immense cognitive powers reversed this old chestnut and came up with the idea a women who is not sexually aroused will not conceive. Still, his position on abortion is in full agreement with the vast majority of his Party, the Party base, the Party Activists and the Party Platform.

No abortion, and certainly not in the case of rape. The right to life over-rides all other concerns. This is Representative Akin's position (very poorly put admittedly) and it is the Party's position. The platform will be pursued through constitutional amendment and through decisions by and case brought to the Supreme Court.

[meatballs]

Pfff. Much ado about nothing. Nobody can ever offend the feminists.

Oh well. It's a republican. They never make any sense anyways.

[geriatrickid]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

Why? He represents the views of a large number of Republicans? Shouldn't they be allowed to voice their views? The man is but the the edge of the wedge that distinguishes so many who want the GOP to win the election in November so that they can further impose their views on the rest of the USA. I hope he stays in so that the public can see what the GOP represents.

Bullshit. How can you tie his errant view on abortion to the entire GOP. Time to put down the fire water and come to your senses. Wait, after re-reading your post, you don't have any sense, so you get lumped into the "tar everyone with the same brush" crowd. See how that works.

On the contrary, a large portion of the GOP support the "no abortion" policy. Does this fact cause you some discomfort? Are you embarrassed by the truth? In this specific case, the man has never hidden his views and yet he was elected to multiple terms with decisive majorities. He is no knuckle dragger. He is educated and has a masters degree in divinity. The man represents his constituents. If they were sufficiently disturbed by his anti abortion views they would not have elected him would they?

A large segment of the GOP also believe that "man" co-existed with dinosaurs, These are their views. Would you prefer that these views not be expressed until after the election? Do you think these supporters understand the concept of the seperation of Church and state? Mr. Ryan and others believe that rights come from "God". If Mr. Ryan had no hesitation in stating the following;

"Our rights come from nature and God, not from government. That's right. That's who we are, that's how we built this country. That's who we are. " Unfortunately, the same point of view also gives rise to people that espouse the view that the government should control a woman's uterus. These are the people that elected Mr. Akin and these are the people that support people like Sarah Palin and Rick Santorum and they are the most powerful segment in the GOP today. Moderates are a thing of the past.

[Jingthing]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

His positions are very close to Paul Ryan's and the republican party platform. Uh oh!

[meatballs]

"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

Priceless.

Please. force this pro-life nut job out of the race. We have enough idiots in Washington and no, we don't need any more.

I pretty much consider myself pro choice. Not because I support the feminists but because I'm an atheist and usually the only ones supporting this pro life rubbish are the bible belt types.

[Ulysses G.]

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

His positions are very close to Paul Ryan's and the republican party platform.

Horse manure. The Republican party has withdrawn funding and asked him to withdraw from the race. The controversy is about his claims that raped women have natural impediments to prevent pregnancy, not that he is against abortion. The majority of Americans are pro-life and there is nothing wrong with that.

Personally, I have always supported abortion, but I also understand why many people are against it. I think that there is truth on both sides and judging others for not wanting to destroy human life would be hypocritical.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[geriatrickid]

New York Times has an interesting article;

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/us/politics/todd-akin-controversy-may-hurt-republican-chances.html?pagewanted=all

Some highlights;

-On Tuesday, Republicans approved platform language for next week’s nominating convention that calls for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

-Mr. Akin and Mr. Ryan each have voted in this Congress for 10 abortion-restricting measures as well as those that limited other family planning services

[GentlemanJim]

Pfff. Much ado about nothing. Nobody can ever offend the feminists.

Oh well. It's a republican. They never make any sense anyways.

"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

Priceless.

Please. force this pro-life nut job out of the race. We have enough idiots in Washington and no, we don't need any more.

I pretty much consider myself pro choice. Not because I support the feminists but because I'm an atheist and usually the only ones supporting this pro life rubbish are the bible belt types.

The right to choose whether you have an abortion after a post rape pregnancy is nothing to do with being feminist, please stop implying that. Also, just because you are an atheist does not mean you cannot be pro life. I think that if two people willingly copulate, knowing the potential consequences then should the woman become pregnant they both ought to face their responsibilities, but for a woman that has been raped, the choice is hers alone and nobody elses. I could imagine in the US a raped woman choosing to have an abortion and the jailed rapist father taking out a successful lawsuit to prevent her from doing so on account the child is also his!!

For once in a very long time I am in kilter with GK in that these people are nut jobs, as is anyone that considers humans and dinosaurs co-existed together. Still in the land that brought us the Flintstones, why am I not surprised! The only thing I disagree with in GK's post no 15 above is that I don't believe Ryan is educated (as his comments regarding orgasm and conception illustrate). One can hardly call a masters degree in Divinity a real degree, its a bit like having a degree in media studies, and it is a far cry from the education one would find desirable for someone vying for one of the worlds most powerful positions, a pastor at your local church, maybe, VP of the USA no way.

AND......lastly! When you folks in the USA are voting for these douche bags who try to win votes by claiming the sanctity of life etc, please remember that these guys don't give a &lt;deleted&gt; for the sanctity of life when they construct Foreign policy strategies that result in the wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands of children in Afghanistan, Iraq, Africa, Vietnam, Korea etc etc etc. A pox on all politicians!

Edited August 22, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[geriatrickid]

Bullshit. How can you tie his errant view on abortion to the entire GOP. Time to put down the fire water and come to your senses. Wait, after re-reading your post, you don't have any sense, so you get lumped into the "tar everyone with the same brush" crowd. See how that works.

Errant view? The head of the GOP disagrees with you. Responding to the negative reaction to the GOP platform language for next week’s nominating convention that calls for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest, that was passed unopposed, Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, tried to deflect questions on behalf of Mr. Romney, saying on Fox News that “this is the platform of the Republican Party , it is not the platform of Mitt Romney.”

So will you and Ulysees,Koheesti and the other one inform Mr. Priebus that the RNC are wrong? I don't have any senses according to you, but I believe your comment is more appropriate for you. The RNC platform position was UNOPPOSED. Unopposed means that no one objected. it is the position of the GOP. I commend the party for its honesty in being upfront. Let America see what the party is all about.

Good job RNC

And good job Mr. Akin for ensuring the re-election of the Democrat senator and helping to keep the senate Democrat influenced.

[Ulysses G.]

On the contrary, a large portion of the GOP support the "no abortion" policy.

It must be nice to be so sure about when human life really begins, or maybe that does not concern you. Many people believe that human life starts when a woman first becomes pregnant and that it is wrong to destroy it. I can not condemn them for that as you seem intent on doing.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[GentlemanJim]

New York Times has an interesting article;

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

Some highlights;

-On Tuesday, Republicans approved platform language for next week’s nominating convention that calls for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

-Mr. Akin and Mr. Ryan each have voted in this Congress for 10 abortion-restricting measures as well as those that limited other family planning services

Well for that alone the Republicans deserve to stay out of power for the next 20 years.

Isn't it gratifying that the worlds largest nuclear arsenal will at some point be controlled by religious nut jobs, still it brings closer the prophecies of the Book of Revelations, albeit they will be both man made and religiously assured.

[Ulysses G.]

Actually, the amendment does not clarify its stand on cases of rape or incest , but Romney is the one running for president and he supports the legality of abortion in those cases.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[chuckd]

Actually, the amendment does not clarify its stand on cases of rape or incest , but Romney is the one running for president and he supports the legality of abortion in those cases.

Easy, there, UG. Don't confuse some of these liberals with facts, their minds are made up.

[GentlemanJim]

Actually, the amendment does not clarify its stand on cases of rape or incest , but Romney is the one running for president and he supports the legality of abortion in those cases.

Easy, there, UG. Don't confuse some of these liberals with facts, their minds are made up.

So between them they have both choices of the electorate covered. I don't much like Obama, but faced with the alternative, a religious nut job and a member of a cult this year it will be a tough outcome whatever. I suppose it doesn't really matter anyway as whoever wins will simply have to do the bidding of the corporations anyway and their decisions are already made.

[Exsexyman]

New York Times has an interesting article;

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

Some highlights;

-On Tuesday, Republicans approved platform language for next week’s nominating convention that calls for a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

-Mr. Akin and Mr. Ryan each have voted in this Congress for 10 abortion-restricting measures as well as those that limited other family planning services

Also the BBC reporting today that Mitt Romney has called for Akin to withdraw. " But even as top conservatives were lambasting the congressman, the Republican Party was reportedly ratifying a call for a constitutional ban on abortion, without any exception for rape or incest". Whichever way you look at it there is the whiff of hypocrisy here. Romney clearly is on a damage limitation exercise, but surely if this is ratified it will be official Republican Party policy. Will Romney go against this, at the risk of alienating a large swathe of his supporters?

[Jingthing]

<p>

What an idiot. Hopefully, he will drop out immediately.

His positions are very close to Paul Ryan's and the republican party platform.

Horse manure. The Republican party has withdrawn funding and asked him to withdraw from the race. The controversy is about his claims that raped women have natural impediments to prevent pregnancy, not that he is against abortion. The majority of Americans are pro-life and there is nothing wrong with that.

Personally, I have always supported abortion, but I also understand why many people are against it. I think that there is truth on both sides and judging others for not wanting to destroy human life would be hypocritical.

You are so wrong! The VAST MAJORITY of Americans are for abortion to be LEGAL. I am kind of shocked if you really didn't know that. That's why the Romney-Ryan team is freaking out big time. They know how damaging it can be if this radical right wing war on women gets too much play in the election, and the PAC ads. The REALITY is if Ryan-Romney wins, their supreme court picks will definitely have an acid test with a clear agenda to overturn Roe vs. Wade and make ALL abortion illegal. Back to the back alley, clothes hanger abortions ... This is political poison for the Republicans and they bloody well deserve the label.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/23/fewer-americans-pro-choice-abortion

Two-thirds believed it should be legal in all or certain circumstances, while only 20% believe it should be illegal in all circumstances.

Ryan-Romney-Republicans represent the radical right wing fringe 20 percent. This is huge.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Jingthing

[DP25]

The article you link says 50% of Americans say they are pro life vs 40% pro choice. 2/3rds believe it should be allowed in all OR in certain circumstances, but it doesn't break down what those circumstances are. Health threat to the mother, rape, incest, etc. The 20% are the people who think it shouldn't be allowed, even if the abortion is to save the mother's life. Your article also says only 25% think it should be legal in all circumstances. In my experience opinions on this issue are deeply divided and there is no real majority either way.

I'm not pro life but not allowing an exception for rape is intellectually consistent with being against abortion. If you believe a fetus is a citizen and deserves legal protection, and that the rights of that fetus outweigh the rights of the mother to control her body, then it doesn't matter who the father is. It is a fairly common opinion among pro choice politicians.

What is news is the comment about rape, that a woman can't pregnant if she is raped because her body won't allow itself to get pregnant. That is just crazy. Not sure where he got this from.

[Jingthing]

You don't get it. They want to make ALL abortion illegal. ALL. Through the supreme court by making an additional pick or two to the supreme court. This is no secret. This is against what Americans want.

Politically this is a nightmare for the republicans.

Exceptions to abortion restrictions, which carve out different rules for rape victims, force the politics and principles into a head-on collision. While about half of American voters identify as pro-life, a full 75 percent thought abortion should be legal in cases of rape or incest, according to a Gallup poll in 2011. Only 20 percent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all situations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/21/in-akins-remarks-a-clash-between-pro-life-politics-and-principles/ Edited August 22, 2012 by Jingthing