Republican Senate Nominee: Victims Of ‘Legitimate Rape’ Don’t Get Pregnant

Here's more of Holdren's book

In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:
Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

So I would like to know why Progressives embrace these ideas.
zombietime.com...

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by igor_ats

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Actually, this is a simple solution for the argument of life.
measure brainwaves..if there are brainwaves, the thing is no longer a thing, it is a person...anything before, its a thing..replicating mass no matter what its form.

It was said that brainwave activity starts at about the 5th month.

lets test it.

Trying to make the goalposts "brainwaves" now to overturn Roe? I've seen this argument before.

The "brain waves at 40 days" is a myth. You can get this kind of electrical excitations from a water melon. What isn't a myth is that after three months of pregnancy, the neurons which will later combine to form a brain are still migrating. Disconnected neurons do not amount to a brain.

Random energy signatures are not brainwaves. brainwaves are brainwaves. when it matches that of thought verses that of a melon, then you have life.

This happens around the 5 month area.

Personally, I favor the goalpost being the completion of the central nervous system (about 3 month area) to be arguably the beginnings of personhood..so the difference between this potential of thought, and the obvious thought at 5 months can be debated. Better to error in caution is my stand on it.

Electrical signals don't mean a formed brain, neither does a forming nervous system. And they already erred on the side of caution with making elective abortions illegal after viability.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Being you are from Missouri, I would be interested to know if you support Claire McCaskill's positions on the issues.


www.ontheissues.org...

Todd Akin on the issues

ontheissues.org...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Okay, you said so little on those couple msgs it was hard to know where you were coming from exactly. It is interesting that there is medical basis for some thinking this is a valid thing to say about Rape. I'll leave that there since pages and pages have pretty well talked it to death and I sure said my bit a couple times.. lol..


Now seeing more of your basis, I couldn't agree more on the way this is being grabbed, hung onto and milked like the golden calf or something. It's incredible as I was out a bit ago looking at the news sites and it's like they've just grabbed onto this as if it were a life raft in rough seas. The White House play in particular, is staggering, given Obama's own record, as you well note there. He's talked a great game, but then to listen to his speeches, there really isn't anyone he isn't for...supporting...or willing to lend a hand, if that is the group he's standing in front of during that speech anyway. His record...Well... Yeah, that saying about glass houses and rocks keeps coming back.

I assume you don't really want me to go down the entire list that site carries? Was there something in particular? ..and I'm being serious, not sarcastic. It's not often anyone asks about feelings in Missouri. We almost seem forgotten here in the middle sometimes...lol.

in general terms..I absolutely want Claire out of office and even told her fundraisers that in more direct language when they called pimping for donations. She sold us a bill of goods on what she would or wouldn't vote on regarding Obamacare and what was in it, then merrily did her own thing anyway. For that reason, and quite a few others...I'd vote Mickey Mouse before her... Akin just seems to have done so much damage with his big ignorant mouth...It's hard not to start feeling real hard about him.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
So stress can cause changes in body chemistry

Not that this would necessarily prevent pregnancy in a rape victim, but stress does affect hormonal balances.

So? Hormones are produced in certain circumstances.

What Atkin is suggesting is "oh she was shocked enough so hormones were produced that magically stopped pregnancy - no need for abortion or emergency contraception folks! Let's put this into law!"

In 2011 he teamed up with VP candidate Paul Ryan to co-sponsor the "No taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," which attempted to change the definition of "rape" to "forcible rape".

His statement implies that if you do get pregnant as the result sexual assaulted, deep down you weren't "shocked enough" (not really rape) to cause your body to avoid pregnancy so you don't need an abortion or emergency contraception.

Let's stop beating about the bush, this is what it's really about. Not only is it a moronic statement, but the real agenda is so obvious it's hilarious.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
So I would like to know why Progressives embrace these ideas.
zombietime.com...

Who are these "progressives"? Never seen anyone on abortion forums embrace these ideas.

Kind of like pro-lifers expecting pro-choicers to march in lock-step with Margaret Sangers other opinions who also is pro-choice.

reply to post by igor_ats
You know.... All this hate and ugliness out of the left tonight is a good reason to logoff and get some sleep before classes tomorrow.... I do want to say one thing tho.

Akin said something stupid. He isn't a real bright bulb...and that's pretty obvious. Whatever the background or reason he thought it might be true, politically tone deaf is such an understatement in his case, I'm not sure what the right term WOULD be.


However. AKIN... Not RYAN...said the stupid thing. Akin said it about RAPE..he didn't say a thing in this case about abortion. The blatant and just outright vile efforts across the media tonight to link Akin's moment of brain dead speech to the emotional bonfire and passions of the Abortion issue hits ENTIRELY new lows and speaks to me, to how much psychological warfare tactics really are playing into the strategy of the parties.

I wonder....if it's even possible to keep the screw up of one person's judgement TO ONE PERSON.....or must any slight gaffe by anyone even connected to a Republican be turned into a national media bonanza?

reply to post by KilrathiLG


Well in all fairness why should he get out? This is the Republican agenda, this is their platform for 2012. This was the agenda they tried pushing earlier this year. This is not only the party agenda it is the Romney/Ryan agenda. Sure they came out against how he said it but doesn't change that they back what he says, just in different words.

Ryan, a 28-year-old first-time candidate, said he has consistently opposed legal abortion and makes only one exception -- cases in which a doctor deems an abortion necessary to save the mother's life. He favors overturning the Supreme Court's landmark Roe vs. Wade decision that made most abortions legal, Ryan said, and would let states decide what criminal penalties would be attached to abortions. Ryan said he's never specifically advocated jailing women who have abortions or doctors who perform them, but added, "If it's illegal, it's illegal."

September 26, 1998
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Paul Ryan Has a New Abortion Stance

This is why they are trying to use junk science to say that women who have been raped cannot get pregnant. It is how they justify their extremist views. If you are raped and pregnant you could not have possibly been raped. This is how they logically justify their views. They couldn't get this type of legislation passed in Mississippi, the conservative paradise. That should be enough to tell you just how extreme and draconian this is.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


No there is no real basis for what this moron said. It is pure junk science. Is there a small part of truth in there yes, but that is what junk science does use a grain of truth and make unfounded claims to suit your agenda. "God's little shield" does not exist. There are no specific hormones that are released when a woman is raped that will prevent a woman from getting pregnant. If you ever had a girlfriend for a substantial period of time you would know, that something as simple as stress can cause an acceleration or deceleration of her cycle. It is subject to a dizzying array of possible triggers.

A close family members death could cause an interruption in her cycle. An unexpected financial calamity could do it. A stressful period at work can do it. It all comes down to the person and how they physiologically deal with trauma and stress. It has zero to do with rape other than it being a type of stress and trauma.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
[Stat Rape? Swedish law where it's not even THAT much and still prosecuted under the title of Rape? The world has gone mad.

mad in the sense of insane? yes, probably, but what motive could they have for muddying the waters like that? who gains? lawyers, rapists and false rape-accusers?? i'm not saying that it's all 100% deliberate, just that there's a fraction in these societies who seem to gravitate towards such issues and love to compound them.


==============================================================================

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
More on stress
...
www.webmd.com...

Have a great night all you brilliant doctors in the house

chronic stress might do that, acute won't have time to take effect, if ovulation has already occured how can fertilisation be reliably prevented? i fail to see the mechanism, tbh and from that point on, (certain) people will argue it's abortion.


=============================================================================

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


are you being sarcastic or just trying to tarnish the thread?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
However. AKIN... Not RYAN...said the stupid thing. Akin said it about RAPE..he didn't say a thing in this case about abortion. The blatant and just outright vile efforts across the media tonight to link Akin's moment of brain dead speech to the emotional bonfire and passions of the Abortion issue hits ENTIRELY new lows and speaks to me, to how much psychological warfare tactics really are playing into the strategy of the parties.

So you're saying he doesn't support that thing he co-signed? You don't think this has nothing to do with the real underlying issue of abortion access?

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by The Old American

 

Did Charles Rangel make ignorant comments like Akin did?

Did he?

If not? Ding ding ding! You have no argument!

No, Rangel was only convicted of 11 ethics violations and censured by Congress.

Akin said some stupid words.

/TOA

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I know what Akin said pissed people off...and it ought to. Not for what it MEANT though....and this is IMPORTANT in why I do not just go off about the guy. He was describing a medical process...a complex bio-medical process to prevent pregnancy by the emotional state caused in a rape. He's totally WRONG and no such process exists, but that's the point.

That's fair enough.

He wasn't hateful in saying this... I wish he were.

And I in fact think your wish has been granted. There is an innate hate of women in these people, for religious/peer group/whatever wacky reasons. I mean seriously, imagine someone tells a lady who was (tragically) raped that she doesn't need the day after pill, because if it was a "legitimate" rape, her body would take care of the problem.

Well,
a) as you said, this is bullsh!t
b) the "legitimate" is NOT a slip of the tongue. What it conveys is that some women are sluts and will later PRETEND it was a rape, and whoever does get pregnant, is a liar as she is.

C'mon now, this is really transparent stuff.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Here's more of Holdren's book
....

So I would like to know why Progressives embrace these ideas.
zombietime.com...

edit on 22-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

In order to Deny Ignorance...The idea that Holdren believed this has been debunked...in 2009:

Smear: John Holdren Favors "Forced Abortions, Mass Sterilization"

These sources were debunked

Sources Zombietime Glenn Beck Fox News WorldNetDaily

This is what Holdren said

Dr. Holdren Doesn't Believe "Determining Optimal Population" Is The Role Of Government. During his confirmation hearing, Dr. Holdren was asked by Sen. David Vitter, "Do you think determining optimal population is a proper role of government?" Dr. Holdren responded: "No, Senator, I do not. And I did not certainly intend that to be the implication of that sentence. The sentence means only what it says, which is that people who've thought about these matters come out in different places.

It is wrong to say that this is what Progressives believe. Plus, show me where this thinking is trying to be placed in the Democratic Party platform, unlike extremist conservatives (like Ryan and Akin) trying to place "no abortion exceptions for rape" in the the current GOP platform.

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
SIGH!

Todays Republicans are SCARY STUPID!!!!!!!

edit on 19-8-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)

This sums it up, and the thread should end right there. I see there's many more pages for me to laugh at, so I will continue until the real fun starts and I begin to see the supporters try to defend this guy.
Oh pleeeeeeeeeez defend him. pleeeeez!

Akin definitely drinks Brawndo and tells people to go away when He's "batin'".

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

I am in favor of mandatory (reversible) sterilization of all men until they pass a series of tests, to determine their relative merit and worth.

There should be no pregnancy -- ever -- unless the penis in the equation is determined to be fit, functional, and of worth, both socially and financially.

Violators should be tied to ant-hills, and smeared with honey, and left to die.

Sound fair to you?

edit on 22-8-2012 by 0zzymand0s because: (no reason given)

Sounds a bit insane.
Actually, not a bit..totally.

We all have our opinions guys....... Personally, I am voting for Ryan and his stance on abortion makes him MORE attractive, not less so. Akin? Well.. at this point, that little bundle of bad judgement can go seek life elsewhere as far as I'm concerned....Missouri doesn't need that kind of Tasmanian devil blowing through our state and raising 10 kinds of hate and discontent. We have enough problems without the Poster boy for the ignorant in this nation becoming 50% of our voice in the Senate.


Again though.... it's a very clear thing. Ryan is Ryan... Akin is Akin.... Are we pissed at what Akin said or is he now simply a means to an end and a handy tool to use politically against Ryan and Romney? The latter is one pathetic excuse for a way to handle a campaign.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorusHere's more of Holdren's book

In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

So I would like to know why Progressives embrace these ideas.
zombietime.com...

edit on 22-8-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Glad to see a reasonable post on this horrid topic.

Czar Holdren is a monstrosity.......and an Obamian one at that, along with many others.

BTW "Progressives" is a liberal euphemism for MARXISTS!!!

Here's another criminal monster hired by BHO - >
Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein resigns - hopefully Holdren will do the same........these monsters are all Marxists and they wouldn't hesitate to kill YOU and your baby (in and out of the womb) in a second.

reply to post by de_Genova


Is it in the Democratic Party Platform? If not, it's just one guys' opinion, as people are TRYING to say about Akin, but they are wrong. Akin's position (Rape is not a good reason for abortion) is the GOP official platform.