Originally Posted by Cookie2
Sorry - HuffPo is NOT a credible news source to me. Nor do I think working on a bill that differentiates forcible rape from statutory rape automatically evil.
Yes, a lot of conservatives (i.e.: Republicans) DO believe there shouldn't be exclusions to abortion for rape or incest. Finally, Akin stood up and said it! You have to at least admit he is willing to stand by his beliefs. He never apologized for that. He apologized for being wrong about the number of women who get pregnant after a rape, being wrong about the biology and for using the word "legitimate" which was taken to mean, perhaps, much differently than how he intended
HuffPo is very credible. I read a lot of articles on there and they are credited to Reuters, BBC, Washington Post, all sorts of news sources. I see the exact same articles on other news sources. What makes it different is that it also carries a lot of opinion pieces, columnists, blog writers. One must know the difference between the two.
I have seen the information I posted above on other news sources since, and I saw it being reported on TV last night (DH was watching some news show - don't know what it was as I don't much watch TV news).
I think you are making a huge assumption when you say that trying to define "forcible" rape is because they are trying to differentiate that from statuatory rape. Frankly, that is a load of bull. The fact that statuatory rape is already classified with the word "statuatory" means it is already in its' own category of rape. Why would it need another qualifier? And how does the word "forcible" classify it as statuatory? Instead, it muddies the water. Is date rape forcible? What if you are raped by your husband? How can a husband rape his wife? What if you were drugged or drunk? I think they are back-peddling around using the word "legitimate" NOT because he misspoke, but because he revealed a greater truth about the beliefs of the far right of the republican party. They want to redefine rape (have tried to - Paul Ryan co-sponsored that bill); they want to get rid of Planned Parenthood, and they want to get rid of birth control. So, they want poor women to have kids they don't want and can't afford, then cut welfare spending programs, education programs, give the rich tax breaks, and this will return us to some sort of bizarro-world "glory days". Makes me sick.
I agree that it's good that Akin is standing by his beliefs instead of blowing with the seasons like so many politicians. The fact that his beliefs date back to the middle ages are disappointing. He doesn't understand the science of egg meeting sperm, yet he's on the Science Committee.