In response to:

Legitimate Rape Arguments

shubi_ Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:16 AM
OK Adams, you are out of your depth. The science shows a female reacts to violent rape in such a way the chances of pregnancy are reduced. Dr. Wilke wrote a book detailing how it works. Also, there are only about 200 pregnancies due to violent rape a year, but 1.2million murders of babies through abortion. Akin was right to point out the insignificance of rape compared the socialists desire to continue murdering 40 million babies worldwide per year.
wordsPerMinute Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:31 AM
Adams is exemplary in his logic and concrete in his morality and not out of depth. Just a tiny bit critical of Akin for not reading this column first before making his comments. :)
inkling_revival Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:26 AM
The point is that they are not defending abortion for rape victims, they are defending abortion for personal convenience. The sooner you get the rape victims out of the way, the better. You do that by getting them to admit that what they want is abortion for non-rape cases, which is the majority of abortions.
inkling_revival Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:24 AM
He's not out of his depth, he's writing about rhetorical tactics. The scientific truth is not important to our opponents, and on this particular issue, the scientific truth is not even relevant. The "rape exception" argument cannot be rebutted by the rarity of rape conceptions unless the number conceived is zero, or very near zero. You have to address the fact that some (small) number of conceptions do occur.

The correct way to do this is the way Adams outlined, which does include the same comparison you provided: small number of rape pregnancies, 1.2 million abortions. Grant them the exception for the sake of argument IF they will agree to ban all other abortions; they'll decline. End of argument.
wordsPerMinute Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:24 AM
Shubi I also have taken a more moderate reaction to the Akin comment. I thought the GOP reacted like panicky little girls (sorry little girls out there). Missouri is voting on an administrative type person not someone to fill the shoes of Aristotle, or Bertrand Russell. The country needs a collaborative negotiator with tendencies towards conservatism if not Christian moral conservatism.

DoctorRoy Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:38 AM
I don't think there is much chance of Akin being confused with Aristotle or Bertrand Russell. In fact if his IQ gets any lower they'll have to water him twice a day.
Otho Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:46 AM
And, DoctorRoy, you have never misspoken? Ever? Granted, I don't think you've misspoken for the television cameras before, but never? Not once? If you have misspoken, should we then consider your IQ equal to that of a plant? Truly?

Akin has removed his foot from his mouth, apologized, and has decided to stay in the race. If we truly want to gain a majority (preferably a filibuster-proof majority), we should get behind him and point out the inanity of his detractors.
DevilDogReturns Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:56 AM
which will only be one fourth the time they water roy
arpiem Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 2:10 PM
He's an engineer. And you?
Todd Akin’s grossly irresponsible remarks about “legitimate rape” and conception have received much media attention. As well they should. The sheer weirdness of the remarks calls into question both his intelligence and his personal integrity. How could someone conclude logically that a rape victim’s body has the capacity to prevent conception in the wake of sexual assault? And why would someone assert that the conclusion had been supported by doctors with whom he had spoken? Clearly, Akin contrived the idea on the spot and then contrived the claim that there were doctors who had informed and/or supported his assertion. All of...