Rape babies are a blessing, and rape makes awesome people. So sayeth the GOP.

http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-official-says-god-chooses-to-bless-raped-women-with-pregnancy

http://gawker.com/5936386/mike-huck...at-rape-has-created-some-extraordinary-people

Anonymous wrote:
Well what do you mean by rape? I mean, we probably would have heard about it had he legitimately raped someone but you know that marital rape and date rape aren't really actual rape. It's a gray area.

Excuse me? Rape is non-consensual intercourse. That means that one party does not agree to the act. Where does non-consensual get excepted because the parties are married or have agreed to a date? If the one party does not want to participate, it's wrong and should be punishable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what sort of rape is "good"? somebody explain to me please?

he is not talking about degrees of rape. He is actually referring to women LYING about being raped in order to get an abortion. "legitimate" rape means a rape that actually occurred, and was "forcible".

So he's not saying rape is good, he is saying women cry rape and are liars.

No, you are wrong. He and several Republicans are trying very hard to differentiate "date rape" or "domestic rape" (e.g. spouse on spouse or significant other on significant other) from other rape. This is what they mean by forcible (e.g. a husband cannot forcibly rape a wife or a date cannot forcibly rape their companion of the night).

Yes, they are trying to split hairs. Rape is wrong and there should be no attempt to try to qualify rape. A sexual act where one party is not voluntarily participating is rape and it is wrong.

And I'm a man, one that's disgusted by this type of posturing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what sort of rape is "good"? somebody explain to me please?

he is not talking about degrees of rape. He is actually referring to women LYING about being raped in order to get an abortion. "legitimate" rape means a rape that actually occurred, and was "forcible".

So he's not saying rape is good, he is saying women cry rape and are liars.

even if im to believe your nonsense, how does that justify the whole "womans body shuts down and cant get pregnant" bullshit?

Clinton is a woman hater. He's kicking off the dem convention. Dems have to accept the loss of the high ground on women's issues

Anonymous wrote:what sort of rape is "good"? somebody explain to me please?

he is not talking about degrees of rape. He is actually referring to women LYING about being raped in order to get an abortion. "legitimate" rape means a rape that actually occurred, and was "forcible".

So he's not saying rape is good, he is saying women cry rape and are liars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until he has a credible rape charge like Clinton, this guy is easily presidential material. Why are democrats so worked up about a guy who didn't even rape anybody or have a lifetime of predatory behavior like the guy who will be kicking off the democrat convention? because they hate women and are happy the mostly women get aborted.

How do you know Akin didn't rape anyone? What, do you think he's so stupid, he would just announce it if he had? In my experience, rapists don't announce this and a lot of rape survivors keep quiet.
BTW - no argument from me about Clinton. He's a sleaze.

Well what do you mean by rape? I mean, we probably would have heard about it had he legitimately raped someone but you know that marital rape and date rape aren't really actual rape. It's a gray area.

Anonymous wrote:Until he has a credible rape charge like Clinton, this guy is easily presidential material. Why are democrats so worked up about a guy who didn't even rape anybody or have a lifetime of predatory behavior like the guy who will be kicking off the democrat convention? because they hate women and are happy the mostly women get aborted.

How do you know Akin didn't rape anyone? What, do you think he's so stupid, he would just announce it if he had? In my experience, rapists don't announce this and a lot of rape survivors keep quiet.
BTW - no argument from me about Clinton. He's a sleaze.

and why are we bringing up bill clinton? do some of you realize that many in the GOP didnt wait a second to renounce Akin? there wasnt days of heeing and hawing and then folks like romney etc went out and said Akin was talking bullshit. the reaction was immediate.

whats the point of "defending" akin at this point? and im tired of adults playing 5 year old games of seeking an apology for some other non-related bullshit. if something is wrong its wrong. i dont care what party. i dont know why we get stuck on first finding out whether said person is a D or R before commenting on it.

bill clinton is a womanizer. i dont think thats a secret. apparently none of his bad deeds cost him anything. thats not democrats fault. society decided to move on and let him live. john edwards on the other hand cant run for anything the rest of his life. not one democrat much less a rational human being thinks anything he did was excusable.

so john edwards is trash and bill clinton is hailed as "great". i dont know who made the rules but i know that nobody on the dem sides hides from the fact that clinton is probably a piss poor husband and a womanzier. now what else do you guys need from us?

Anonymous wrote:what sort of rape is "good"? somebody explain to me please?

did anyone say there was such a thing as good rape?

what sort of rape is "good"? somebody explain to me please?

One remark in Akin's favor (sort of): It's clear to everyone that he meant "legitimate" in the sense of "actual", not in the sense of "acceptable", but some of the criticism is twisting that. It's a minor point, given that his comment was disgusting anyway, but that's all the more reason not to pull a "you didn't build that" type of misinterpretation into the discussion.

Saying "actual" rape is okay? C'mon, that's still assuming their is rape and also some kind of psuedo rape. Obama got it right: rape is rape.

How can there be two kinds of rape??

LOL ...remember when the democrat white house under Clinton tried to railroad Monica as a "stalker" until the sperm stain emerged? now THAT is woman hate at the highest level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until he has a credible rape charge like Clinton, this guy is easily presidential material. Why are democrats so worked up about a guy who didn't even rape anybody or have a lifetime of predatory behavior like the guy who will be kicking off the democrat convention? because they hate women and are happy the mostly women get aborted.

I'll grant that (assuming the stories to be true, which I'd rate as likely) Clinton was a sleaze in his private life, and it certainly tainted an otherwise admirable presidency. But it still affected just a few women, and was not a policy that would affect the entire country.

One remark in Akin's favor (sort of): It's clear to everyone that he meant "legitimate" in the sense of "actual", not in the sense of "acceptable", but some of the criticism is twisting that. It's a minor point, given that his comment was disgusting anyway, but that's all the more reason not to pull a "you didn't build that" type of misinterpretation into the discussion.

putting a known predator and probable rapist up on a pedestal to be cheered at the democrat convention sends the wrong message to boys and men. the subordination of women-hate that liberals have applied to Clinton makes every word they have on the subject meaningless and empty.

Anonymous wrote:Until he has a credible rape charge like Clinton, this guy is easily presidential material. Why are democrats so worked up about a guy who didn't even rape anybody or have a lifetime of predatory behavior like the guy who will be kicking off the democrat convention? because they hate women and are happy the mostly women get aborted.

I'll grant that (assuming the stories to be true, which I'd rate as likely) Clinton was a sleaze in his private life, and it certainly tainted an otherwise admirable presidency. But it still affected just a few women, and was not a policy that would affect the entire country.

One remark in Akin's favor (sort of): It's clear to everyone that he meant "legitimate" in the sense of "actual", not in the sense of "acceptable", but some of the criticism is twisting that. It's a minor point, given that his comment was disgusting anyway, but that's all the more reason not to pull a "you didn't build that" type of misinterpretation into the discussion.