Update: "Legitimate Rape" Edition

In a previous post, we explored current Republican contender for Missouri senator Rep. Tod Akin's controversial statements regarding "legitimate rape", and his curious notion that in the event of a legitimate rape, the human female body is capable of "shutting the whole thing down", and preventing pregnancy.  There have been several new developments since then.

The first development is that despite many calls from fellow Republicans, Akin has not stepped down and quit his Senate campaign.  Republicans believe that he will hurt other Republicans nationwide, as his presence forces the electorate to consider social issues, when Republicans would prefer that voters focus solely on the economy.  The Republican establishment has vowed to cease all help with his Senate operations, despite the fact that if they want to take back the Senate, this is a seat that they desperately need to win, as McCaskill's was considered the most vulnerable Democratic seat in the Senate.  Even Romney, after some predictable waffling, has decided that it would be best for Akin to step down.  Yesterday was the deadline for Akin to withdraw easily from the Senate race, allowing the Republicans to quickly pick a new candidate, although Akin has another month to petition the court to withdraw from the race.



Yes, we too, are surprised you are losing to "that guy."

And indeed, why should Akin withdraw?  In another development, polls taken after his statements became widely known shows that he is still leading McCaskill in the Senate race, though his support has dropped some.  I previously  asked why we keep getting these type of ignorant leaders?  Perhaps with our insistence on electing them, we are getting exactly the kind of leaders that we deserve.  Akin apparently believes that the controversy swirls around his misuse of one word, that if he had used "forcible" instead "legitimate" then there would not have been such a firestorm.  Perhaps he is correct.  As others have pointed out, Akin is hardly alone in his musings about what constitutes "real rape", deserving of sympathy and the full protection of the law, as opposed to "sorta rape", where it's mostly the fault of the woman who should have made better choices.

Others have pointed the hypocrisy regarding the whole Akin controversy.  Many people believe that it is morally inconsistent to have an abortion exception for rape or incest.  If the fetus really is a life, then why does it matter how the life came about?  We don't allow people to kill infants who are the product of rape, so why should killing fetuses, if you really do consider them alive, be treated any differently?  Doesn't allowing a rape/incest exception feed into the notion that pregnancy is a punishment for the promiscuous amongst us, and that only "good girls" who were "really raped" "deserve" an abortion?  In that sense one can see that it really isn't about the life of the fetus at all, but the actions of the women, and the intent to control those actions.  Republicans are at least morally consistent, their abortion plank is strictly anti-abortion, having no exceptions for rape, incest, or even the life of the mother.

Last, but not least, let us not forget that Todd Akin is the real victim of a forcible assault here.  Yes, that's right, with a straight face Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association compared Todd Akin to a rape victim, and suggested that Akin has it worse.  Fischer supported Akin’s comments, stating that the trauma from “real, genuine rape” interferes with the normal processes that occur during conception.

Everyone just please remember to vote this November.