"First of all, from what I understand from doctors, (pregnancy from rape) is really rare," Akin told KTVI-TV in a clip posted to YouTube by the Democratic super PAC American Bridge. "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."Or you get somebody like, say, Trent Franks (R-AZ), who, after ten years in the House of Representatives, should know better.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), whose measure banning abortions after 20 weeks was being considered in the House Judiciary Committee, argued against a Democratic amendment to make exceptions for rape and incest by suggesting that pregnancy from rape is rare.Now, let's ignore the fact that The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, who make it their business to know such things, report that ten to fifteen thousand abortions due to rape occur each year, which makes statements like that "medically inaccurate, offensive, and dangerous." And we can ignore that particular piece of data because, after all, facts don't matter to this crowd.
"Before, when my friends on the left side of the aisle here tried to make rape and incest the subject — because, you know, the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low," Franks said.
Franks continued: "But when you make that exception, there’s usually a requirement to report the rape within 48 hours. And in this case that's impossible because this is in the sixth month of gestation. And that's what completely negates and vitiates the purpose for such an amendment."
Instead, let's all try and remember a wonderful little bit of information dug up by Tim Townsend and Blythe Bernhard for the St Louis Post-Dispatch following Akin's comments.
While U.S. Rep. Todd Akin cited only "doctors" as his source of information about the rarity of pregnancy resulting from rape, it is two pages, from Mecklenburg's 1972 article, "The Indications for Induced Abortion: A Physician's Perspective," that have influenced two generations of anti-abortion activists hoping to build a medical case to ban all abortions without exception...(I just threw in that last line as a bonus.)
In supporting his claim about trauma and ovulation, Mecklenburg cited experiments conducted in Nazi death camps.
The Nazis tested this hypothesis "by selecting women who were about to ovulate and sending them to the gas chambers, only to bring them back after their realistic mock-killing, to see what the effect this had on their ovulatory patterns. An extremely high percentage of these women did not ovulate."
Finally, Mecklenburg said it was likely that the rapists — because of "frequent masturbation" — were unlikely to be fertile themselves.
So, are we clear on this? The GOP is trying to claim that there is no such thing as rape-babies, because the Nazis said there weren't. They are now basing their arguments on unscientific and inhumane experiments performed by Nazi doctors in death camps
Do you know how happy that one little fact makes me? I don't have to call the GOP racist, fascist, or Nazis! They're doing it to themselves!
Republikanische Partei über alles!
I wonder if asshats like Akin are aware of a study that I want to conduct that will prove that if I punch them in the face that their bodies will not spit out teeth or bleed?
ReplyDeleteI think that he and Franks should consider donating an organ--wait, it should be taken without their permission, yeah, that's the ticket! It's a bit extreme but they would then REALLY understand what "bodily autonomy" is all about.
Who the hell is this Godwin jerk anyway? A Karl Rove alias? The damn "law" is only a ploy to evade the fact that Hitler comes up when discussing Republicans because these bastards channel his ass ever time they open their mouths.
ReplyDeletePlease can I get in on that study? I have an old Louisville Slugger with their names on it.
Godwinning was coined by Mike Godwin:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
And, yes, I agree with you that the reptilicanz beg for it, every time they open their pieholez.
Louisville Slugger, eh? I amember when you could buy one of those for about $5; they're prolly $50, today.
I realize truth matters little on your blog but your statement of "report that ten to fifteen thousand abortions due to rape occur each year" Is false and misleading.
ReplyDeleteI should really be too old to be motivated enough by some condescending ignoramus to make a reply, but such arch tones from someone who doesn't at this late date know what hypertext is does the job.
DeleteWho the hell do you think you are that anyone should credit what you "realize" as more than uninformed opinion -- that what you think you know as truth is more than ignorance and the childish desire to look down from some imagined height on people who would scrape things more worthy from their bootsoles?
If you want to call someone a liar do so, but without any hint of contrary information and a source thereof don't expect to be taken seriously.
Skudrunner... Truth is often clouded by inaccurate and unfounded perceptions one holds on issues and or individuals.
DeleteAccusations such as you made with respect to this blog, and by extention its many authors was I believe driven by your partisan tendancy to distrust liberals simply because they are liberal. Broad brush strokes are generally a mistake as well as often being wrong.
I disagree with many positions posted on The Swash Zone and agree with others. The one thing I can say with certainty is that honesty is NOT in question here. While it is fine to attack the message it is NOT fine to attack the messenger.
RN,
DeleteThank you for your comment and for expressing confidence in us.
Speaking of Godwin's Law, the anonymous commenter - the one who has been harassing and stalking you lately - made an unwelcome visit to the Zone earlier today. Predictably, the predator dropped the "Holocaust" bomb and other ugly stuff. No need to fill you in on the details, I tossed the comment into spam PURRgatory where, no doubt, our resident cat will torment it to death.
And since skudrunner has no blog history or bio info we can safely assume he/she is one of our trolls. Oh how we luvs them trolls! :)
DeleteSkud,
ReplyDeleteIn the above post, do you see any lines of text highlighted in blue? These are called “live links.” When you click on a live link, a new page opens to a source document, defined as the place where the information can be found. A live link is akin to a footnote in a term paper and is not connotative of “foot-in-mouth” disease unless you happen to be a troll.
In this case, the source of this information, i.e. ten to fifteen thousand abortions due to rape occur each year, is the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecologists. So which is it: Do you believe this blog is disseminating false and misleading information, or the medical association known as ACOG? Were you too lazy to click on the blue highlighted link and discover the source for yourself? Are you damn stupid, or just too damn lazy, or both?
Shaw, your troll infestation is spreading through the neighborhood. Someone, anyone, please call Terminix.
All,
ReplyDeleteThe title of this post poses a question, but good ole Godwin has not commented here ... yet. So your good ole intrepid cephalopod offers this inkeroo:
I don’t think Mike Godwin intended to set forth an actual “law” governing discourse on the Internet but merely to make a critical point: Extreme hyperbole is a bad faith debating tactic employed by comment bullies, trolls, and Internet thugs. Even Godwin himself readily acknowledges:
"Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust," Godwin states.
Godwin’s “Law” reveals an inherent flaw in the use of analogies, which are all too often imprecise, ill-thought, over-broad, and overboard. Hardnosed critics scorn the use of analogies as brute force instruments of mass destruction when a simple fly swatter will do. (Personally, I like analogies. I find them colorful, even satirical, when artfully used. I am especially fond of mixed metaphors.)
With regard to the Holocaust, point taken. The gratuitous use of this word offends me too. It defiles the memory of its victims.
How about other historical events associated with the rise of Hitler and Nazism? Starting with propaganda tactics such as hatred, incitement, derision, deception, and demagoguery; how about street tactics such as bullying and outright violence! If we refer to the brandishing of firearms at town hall meetings, then our analogy should be drawn with this qualification: “Intimidation reminiscent of Hitler’s brown shirts.” If a comment by a GOP aspirant for public office resembles a discredited Nazi death camp experiment, then the analogy is apt.
I believe America has always had a neo-fascist streak. Shall we mention Father Coughlin, Joseph McCarthy, and Rush Limbaugh, as examples! Shall we include the lunatic fringe of today’s GOP! There is no hyperbole or fallacy in pointing out similarities of tactic and rhetoric, and I don’t think Godwin would disagree.
I'm always aware of the limits of arguing by analogy, but the rise of Hitler and the Nazis is, to me, a more seminal, important tale than any of the baseless religious myths we cling to because it is far from unique in any way but perhaps for the extent it reached. Hitler always happens when we let it and Hitler is always with us and more importantly Hitler is the result of something in our nature. I think the Shoach, the Inquisition and the Crusades are as important to the understanding of human history and nature as Darwinism is to the understanding of nature and the history of life.
DeleteCaptain,
DeleteI'm almost, I repeat "almost" ashamed to admit the vicarious thrill I get in pulling the wings off insect trolls. So easy! So much fun!
Perhaps it is a good thing the dinosaur is not here right now to growl at me. We'll have to clear away the evidence before the really BEEG critter returns.
Octo,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the condescending post I do know what live links are and I read the one you used. You were partially correct but left something out, I will have to assume by mistake, and that is abortions due to incest
"Each year in the US, 10,000–15,000 abortions occur among women whose pregnancies are a result of reported rape or incest."
The figures are indeed skewed but abortions due to rape or incest are about 2% of all abortions. I do not approve or disapprove of abortion since it is a personal decision that a women has to make.
I do find it interesting that the crowd who most approves of abortion, or killing babies, is the same crowd who is against protecting oneself. Of course that is the same crowd who spews hate towards those who may disagree with there beliefs. They seem to be conflicted.
Killing babies? Spewing hate? Crowd? Who called whom a liar here? Um, that would be you - and if you'd read enough here to have any actual idea of what the discussions have been as concerns gun control and stand your ground legislation you might not have tried this one-trick troll approach.
DeleteNobody cares about you, your opinions, your bullshit concepts of truth and your smug goddam attitudes. For the last fucking time, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is the origin of that figure while your alleged figures are, without any evidence of being other than the product of your colon - worthless and deceitful propaganda. Once again, the blue text is a hyperlink and you apparently still don't understand or won't understand.
Asshole.
Skud,
DeleteJe vous en prie (you are welcome for my condescending remark). When you visit a blog and leave this comment, “I realize truth matters little on your blog …,” surely you must realize that the inhabitants of the realm will not respond to a hostile introductory statement with an offer of cold beer from the refrigerator. A more gracious introduction on your part might have merited a more gracious reply from one of us.
More enigmatically, i.e. churlishly immature, is the internal inconsistency of your reply. On one hand, you “ do not approve or disapprove of abortion since it is a personal decision that a women has to make.” In your next paragraph, however, you attribute a false motive to members of this community, accusing us by implication of condoning this: “killing babies.”
A more astute and mature person might have been more circumspect, asking beforehand: What is your position on abortion? For my part, I might have replied, “it is a personal decision that a women has to make.” – a virtually identical response to yours.
But noooo! You didn’t come here to be honest or gracious. You came here to annoy, to call attention to yourself. That is why you were treated as a garden pest.
skud - are you implying that incest is somehow not related to rape? Incest infers that the rape is committed by a family member instead of a stranger so where is the great discrepancy?
DeleteAgainst protecting oneself? What does that mean exactly? You seem rather conflicted.
"Shall we mention Father Coughlin, Joseph McCarthy, and Rush Limbaugh, as examples!"
ReplyDeleteYou forgot Charles Lindbergh and Prescott Bush.
DC,
ReplyDeleteI didn't forget them. There are simply too many to name, and more spring to life with each new generation - like the latest crop of crap starting with Ted "The Crud" Cruz. We have a big job ahead of us ... keeping the neo-fascists contained.
Skud,
ReplyDeleteYup. I left off two words. I don't feel particularly guilty about it, since they're two words that don't particularly change the meaning of the sentence.
You know why that is? Because rape tends to be the most underreported crime, with an estimated 16% of rapes ever coming to light. On top of which, it's difficult to separate incest from rape, because both are considered criminal sexual activity. Incest is rarely consentual, and even when it is, it is most often coerced, and/or the female is rarely of an age where her "consent" would even be considered by the court. (Since the question is abortion, we're not going to bother considering the cases of male rape/incest.)
Here. A lot of statistics there, and a lot of the problems with those statistics. And it isn't an exhaustive paper, either. (I know you're not going to read it - you aren't here to learn, just snipe.) For example, it explains some of the problems with that "2%" (actually 1%) statistic you gave - not nearly all, since the guy who collected it is opposed to abortion. But he's at least relatively honest.
And I'm going to leave out a lot of other factors that apply here, because entire books are written on the subject, and I'm not going to educate you anyway. You're obviously just trolling - we don't object to conservatives too much, and we don't mind people who disagree. Some of us like a good healthy debate. But when trolls pop up, we get to play whack-a-mole. It's a hobby, and we enjoy it too much to quit.
Here's the ultimate stick-in-the-eye for red-meat conservatives that's really not off-topic at all. What the hell is up with all the rape, sexual assault, harassment and victimization of women in the military you so fervently worship? It's a national disgrace and a stain on the uniform.
ReplyDeleteWhy, in the name of all that is holy and good, would the misogynist republican politicians and military brass circle the wagons to preserve the status quo, protect their criminal comrades and circumvent any changes in the UCMJ that would seek to protect the precious women who give so much to this country with their military service?
Answer that one! I dare you.
Doesn't seem we'll get one, but it's a hell of a question. There are probably a lot of explanations, but the mistrust of and contempt for women is a visible part of that thing they want to call "conservatism"
ReplyDeleteTo acknowledge the size of the problem would undermine the 'warrior' worship and perhaps give the impression that our military enterprises aren't always praiseworthy.
No one condones sexual assault in any form. One of the issues with the military is more women are enlisted and they are mainstream in with the men doing jobs they weren't allowed to do in the past. That is still no excuse but I doubt it is a republican issue just as it is not the commander in chief's fault.
ReplyDeleteThe dismissive attitude toward rape victims and the opposition to equal treatment for women and reproductive rights in general are primarily Republican issues.
ReplyDelete