What Is To Be Done?

Wednesday, November 7, AD 2012

The narrative game has begun. One of the major memes we can expect to hear now that the GOP lost the presidential race is that “extremism” is to blame. Many of us know that it was absurd to label Mitt Romney “extreme” on anything. Even those on the other side willing to concede this point will say something like “the GOP is being held hostage by the extreme right” and “the Tea Party is to blame for the GOP defeat.” This is all, of course, complete nonsense, but many Republicans will buy it.

I honestly don’t know if it is possible to isolate and eliminate the factors that are ultimately responsible for Barack Obama’s reelection and Mitt Romney’s crushing defeat last night. What I do know is this: in 2004, President Bush was said to have won primarily because of a surge of evangelical voters who stormed the polls to defeat gay marriage initiatives in key swing states. Last night, voters approved gay marriage in three states and defeated two GOP Senate candidates because of remarks they made to the media about rape and abortion. Neither “extremism” in general or the “Tea Party” is to blame; commentators have been quick to point out that Akin was not a Tea Party choice and that perfectly moderate Republicans such as Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin went down in defeat last night.

Continue reading...

25 Responses to What Is To Be Done?

  • I have lived through worse electoral disasters than this: 1964, 1974, 1976 and 1992. The saving grace after each such defeat is that it tends to bring new faces and ideas to the fore and sharpens the party for future victories. That, and the Democrats always overreach, as they will this time. The party actually is in better shape at the state level across the nation than at any time during my life. Quite a bit of potential there.

    A good post Bonchamps and I will be coming up with some other practical suggestions for the way out of the political wilderness tomorrow.

  • Leadership. The country and the conservative cause is in sore need of a strong leader. Back in the Vietnam era while I was a candidate in Officer Candidate School, I’ll never forget the description of what a true leader is; “he can tell you he’s going to take you to hell and back and you look forward to the trip!” Now theologically we as Catholics, have an issue with the details of that, but here is a point to be made by the statement. In my lifetime only one President comes to mind who fills that bill.

    The demographics of the country are rapidly changing. I have never been comfortable with the Republican strident stand on immigration. I’m not advocating amnesty, but we do need to confront reality. There needs to be a documented guest worker program to start with. In a few years, Texas may well be a purple state.

  • . There needs to be a documented guest worker program to start with. :

    Rubbish. Either allow people to settle or send them home. You import indentured servants you are asking for trouble.

  • You know, I will be quite frank about this: I am sick to death of the implications behind criticisms of the GOP’s immigration positions.

    Hispanics who are here legally ought to be in favor of upholding the nation’s immigration laws. If their position is essentially that we ought to not enforce the laws or create new laws that do nothing to address the problems associated with mass immigration, we cannot possibly endorse it. It is criminal and immoral to do so, in fact.

    We are under no obligation to endorse open borders, lax enforcement, and the cultural disintegration of our country. We have other options besides appeasing La Raza and MEChA, you know.

  • This is the kind of stuff, Bonchamps, that you’re really good at analyzing and articulating. I may not agree completely with everything in your post, but you make good sense and your facts seem correct. And since I am a nuclear engineer and not a political scientist, I will defer to your wisdom in such matters.

  • So what is the answer to selling the Conservative position to blacks and latino’s? Enlighten me. How do we get there? Or perhaps you believe it doesn’t matter?

  • I don’t know how we get there. I know what we don’t do to get wherever “there” is, though.

    Ironically, getting tougher on border issues could swing some of the black vote our way. Who do you think takes all of their jobs? Our angle could be, “vote for us – you won’t get as much welfare, but you’ll definitely have greater job opportunities as we send your main competitors packing.”

    It’s one option, anyway. But I certainly will not acquiesce to the notion that we sacrifice our cultural and territorial integrity for the sake of voters in this country who believe that the laws are meaningless and will punish the party that tries to enforce them. If that’s what this country has come to, then no election will change anything.

  • I live in Florida. I quite frankly resent the accomodations to Hispanics with language. You live here, learn the language. Music in Spanish at Mass or diocesan functions drives me nuts. Our parish as a ministry supports the mission that works with the field workers who pick the vegetables and the fruit. Americans will not do the work. They are illegal, but without them the vegetable and fruit industries are not viable. They wouldn’t be able to compete with imports from Mexico and South America. That’s what I mean by a guest worker program. Know who they are and create a record.

    As to the rest of the latino community, we best recognize that their numbers are growing legally. They are becoming an ever growing percentage of the population. They vote. They have issues that need to be respected. They are by and large Catholic and family oriented. They are conservative and should be voting with us, but they are not.

  • And what are those issues, exactly?

    Open borders and handouts. That’s what they want.

  • Family oriented voters are concerned about having enough for living expenses whether or not the funds are earnings. It seems that this concern trumps all others. From Instapundit:

    ‘ “The first day of the ‘next 4 years’ is starting in a very auspicious fashion. First, the market crashes. Then, a major blue chip company, Boeing, just announced it would cut 30% of management jobs from 2010 levels. And finally, the US Treasury just added $24 billion in debt, or enough to fund Greece for over one year, sending the total debt load (the US is now at 103% debt/GDP) ever closer to the debt ceiling breaching $16.4 trillion.”

    Posted at 10:50 pm by Glenn Reynolds

    I QUESTION THE TIMING: A reader who works at Yale emails:

    I found it interesting that this email came out today from Yale benefits:

    Dear Colleagues:

    We would like to make you aware of a significant federally mandated change which will impact Yale’s healthcare flexible spending account benefit. Effective January 1, 2013, as a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the annual contribution limit will be capped at $2,500. Currently, the maximum amount of pre-tax dollars you can set aside in a healthcare flexible spending account is $12,000.

    As a participant who contributed $2,500 or more in 2012, we encourage you to keep this in mind as you begin to plan for your 2013 out-of-pocket medical, dental and vision expenses. You will soon have an opportunity to re-enroll in the flexible spending account benefit plan during Annual Benefits Enrollment (December 3-17). As a reminder, you have until March 15, 2013 to incur expenses against your 2012 contributions, and until April 30, 2013 to submit claims those for reimbursement. We hope that this grace period is helpful for maximizing your flexible spending benefit for 2012.

    If you have any further questions, please contact an Employee Services representative.

    What interesting timing! I did know about this, as a former CPA/tax accountant, but how many did?
    Today my husband came home and told me that his boss informed him today that a layoff is planned. Small aerospace/manufacturing plant.
    We are worried. We were worried before the election that if the direction didn’t change, we’d face an ugly economic future. It may already becoming true for our family.

    I think a lot of stuff will be coming out over the next few weeks and months that was carefully kept off the radar before Election Day. ‘

  • To answer Jerry’s question I think the state Republican parties are a big part of the problem. More than a few seem indolent or dysfunctional (Bob Michel syndrome). They are often exclusionary in orientation. The VA Repubs spend most of their time fighting with the :”non approved” conservative types. Their get out the vote effort in VA this election was pathetic as far as I could tell. I asked them a couple of times since they didn’t want Tea Party types then what voters were they seeking to make up the difference? Never got an answer. I fear the only remedy is to get some disaffected Dem operatives to run the effort. At least they know what they are doing. If the state and local party is doing nothing on outreach a Presidential candidate showing an ad is not very effective. You can’t show up once every four years and expect a warm welcome.

    Obama got his toughest media questions from the Hispanic media over Fast and Furious. Good grief what a missed opportunity for Romney and Ryan. Here the Admin that so loves Hispanics is covering up the murder of many many Mexicans by ATF provided weapons. Except for the first debate I don’t think Romney made much attempt to explain how his policies would be better for voters including Hispanics than the Democrats policies. Most of his ads were just awful. In a 2 party system you always need to remember voters have a choice.

    Bush 43 got plenty of Hispanic support. He spoke some bad Spanish but the Bushes had a Hispanic wife or two in the clan I believe, That kind of acceptance speaks volumes. The Dems co-opt community leaders to vouch for them. They set up media networks to promote the Dem party indirectly. They also try to make association with the Repubs a form of betrayal. That way they neutralize a Hispanic Repub. Did you see any outcry from Hispanics when Bush43’s AG Gonzalez got in trouble?

    Repubs also don’t call enough attention to Dem’s hostility to religion (except Sharia Islam).

  • PM my thoughts and prayers are with you. I’m very sorry for you and many others. This is purely a national self inflicted wound which makes it doubly frustrating. The same post election angst is occurring in Argentina and France who also have voted foolishly.

  • “They are by and large Catholic and family oriented.”

    this means nothing, it’s like saying that well-to-do suburban Democratic family is “conservative.” Conservatives said the same things about blacks during the Bush years, they’re more religious/socially conservative, we can get them to break. it’s not really that simple.

    the GOP will not outbid the Dems on immigration. That doesn’t mean we have to outright antagonize them/that no change is necessary, but we also don’t have to embrace a position that will earn us nothing with Hispanics and lose white working-class votes in the process

  • I think you insult the citizens of this country in your article. Mob rule? Free stuff ? How about the tens of thousands injured in the wars started by presedent bush ? Are those people just wanting free stuff from the gov.? Could it be the mothers fathers sisters brothers of the fallen who just voted the republicans ‘ s out? How about majority rule, as it should be. The country is way , way better off now than 4 years ago. Employment up, home prices up, stock market up, inovative companies, false war in Iraq over, bin laden dead. extremism not to blame for losses ha ? What planet are you on? You might as well say horendous acts against women in Afghanistan are not extreme . And I wouldn’t call a few hundred dollars a month in food stamps, which is literally just barely enogh to eat now and emergency access to a telephone endless entitlment .come on. I thought Christians were supposed to feed the hungry . Lol shrinkage of the base ha ha . Your words betray your fear . Of course its possible to figure out why republicans lost, its all over the news god your in your own little world . Time to grow up , Jesus thought outside his box , maybe you could as well . Sorry excuse for an article bud .

  • With respect, there are many palatable ways to turn the immigration problem on its head, to turn it from a losing to a winning issue for Republicans. However, we can’t respond to every proposal as though what is good for aliens is bad for America. Whether you accept it or not, our future is as tied to theirs as it has ever been.

    For example: the technology non-immigrant visa is, for the most part, the H1B. It is on this visa that most of the IT workers enter the US to underbid US jobs.

    It can get complicated but, at its core, the process entails a company filing a petition for a worker and demonstrating that 1) they have tried to fill the post and couldn’t, 2) they have work for them to do, 3) the company can pay the prevailing wage, and 4) bringing in a worker won’t violate union rules. Sounds reasonable.

    The problem is that the system was established for “brick and mortar” enterprises in the old economy. The underlying assumption is that there is A job at A location, like designing medical equipment at a plant. IT doesn’t work that way and, so, the H1B system has to be twisted to fit this important sector of the economy.

    There is rampant fraud but most is subtle and disastrous for the US economy. A common scheme is for an Indian company to send a few representatives to the US to set up an US corporation. They, in turn, petition for highly skilled computer professionals from their own corporation. They then establish a servicing contract with the foreign corporation to show cash flow. The petitioned-for aliens are then installed at large US corporations to look for work that can be outsourced to the Indian company.

    On paper, everything looks legit… US corporation? Check. Cash flow? Check. Contract requiring a worker? Check. Only it isn’t legit. The worker isn’t a $62,000/year Programmer Analyst, they are a $120,000/year manager, finding work that can be outsourced.

    So, accept for a moment that I am being truthful… That little tale should make your blood boil. It does mine and that it plays out tens of thousands of times a year concerns me greatly.

    We can get mad and insist on wiping out the program altogether but that argument, right or wrong, will never garner more than fringe support. We can impotently rage against the Indians but that is mean and stupid. We can throw up our hands – as Congress does but that just gives legislative consent to the slight of hand.

    The cleverest remedy I’ve heard is also the simplest: eliminate the petition provision so that workers can work wherever they want, for whomever they want and let the market control their wages. I favor this proposal for two reasons: any rule of law that encourages deceit is a bad rule and greed is a sound foundation for market systems.

    Whatever the IT workwr’s loyalty, they know what they can get in the open market. The Indian corporations would have to compensate sufficiently to keep that worker working for them. US corporations, unable to get discounted labor from overseas would have to at least conside hiring US workers and paying them fairly and training in-house. Finally, you wipe out the economic insentive for the dummy corporations that make the fraud work.

    There are lots of changes to immigration systems that yield high economic dividends for the US economy and advance the interests of legitimate immigrants. We won’t reach them though if we on the Right react negatively to immigrants generally and immigration proposals as though they are inherently bad because they benefit immigrants.

  • Ben,

    I approved your pathetic comment just to pick it apart for fun. I wish I didn’t have so much time on my hands.

    “I think you insult the citizens of this country in your article. Mob rule? Free stuff ?”

    Yes, you know, the stuff Obama pays for from his “stash”, i.e. our tax dollars, things like free birth control for Sandra Fluke. Yes, mob rule, the people who threatened to riot and murder if Romney was elected. I know the media outlets you likely frequent don’t bring such things to your attention. Time to leave the MSM bubble perhaps. Google is your friend.

    “How about the tens of thousands injured in the wars started by presedent bush ? Are those people just wanting free stuff from the gov.?”

    Who said anything about that? Let me clue you in: as anyone who frequents TAC will tell you, I am opposed to Bush’s wars and think all troops should be brought home immediately. Sorry to burst your bubble on that one. And veterans are entitled to benefits, because national defense and related matters fall under the Constitutionally legitimate duties of the federal government. I know its hard for you to imagine a consistent political philosophy, but it does exist, I do espouse it, and you should look before you leap and make assumptions about others.

    “Could it be the mothers fathers sisters brothers of the fallen who just voted the republicans ‘ s out?”

    The military usually goes Republican. I know some soldiers. They’re all either GOP supporters or 3rd party. And they all despise Obama.

    “How about majority rule, as it should be.”

    Who said anything against it?

    “The country is way , way better off now than 4 years ago.”

    Excuse me while I finish LMAO.

    “Employment up,”

    Real unemployment is higher than it has been since FDR’s administration – 17% and rising.

    “home prices up,”

    They had nowhere to go but up, and it has nothing to do with Obummer’s policies. They would have gone up under McCain too.

    “stock market up,”

    The stock market tanked as soon as Obama’s reelection was called. So did the dollar, because the rest of the world knows that Obama will print trillions more dollars, creating imaginary money to pay for political fantasies.

    “inovative companies,”

    ::laughs hysterically::

    “false war in Iraq over,”

    Bush began the withdrawal process, and Obama is murdering innocent children with drones in Pakistan. Your president is as much a warmonger as W.

    “bin laden dead.”

    Well, I’m a crazy conspiracy theorist. I think he died in 2002 or sometime shortly thereafter, having already been on kidney dialysis well before that, and that whomever they bagged wasn’t bin Laden. We’ll never know, since Seal Team 6 was, on an entirely unrelated note, placed on a defective, outdated helicopter that blew up and killed them all.

    “extremism not to blame for losses ha ? What planet are you on?”

    No, poor discipline is to blame. Discipline is required to defeat the kind of people who mislead simple people, like yourself.

    “You might as well say horendous acts against women in Afghanistan are not extreme .”


    “And I wouldn’t call a few hundred dollars a month in food stamps, which is literally just barely enogh to eat now and emergency access to a telephone endless entitlment .”

    Its endless when it doesn’t end, when it becomes a way of life sustained by the labor of others.

    “come on. I thought Christians were supposed to feed the hungry .”

    Yeah. We’re supposed to do it as a free act of love, not because men with guns and badges will throw us in prison if we don’t.

    “Lol shrinkage of the base ha ha . Your words betray your fear . Of course its possible to figure out why republicans lost, its all over the news god your in your own little world . Time to grow up , Jesus thought outside his box , maybe you could as well . Sorry excuse for an article bud .”

    Well, given the level of basic grammar and command of the relevant political facts, I don’t think I’m going to take your criticism too poorly.

  • “home prices up,”

    “They had nowhere to go but up, and it has nothing to do with Obummer’s policies. They would have gone up under McCain too.”

    How true. Most homes around the nation during the reign of the Southside Messiah have lost 20 to 30 percent of value. I would wager that Ben does not own a home.

  • Sure he does… If by “own” you mean “borrow” and by “home” you mean “mother’s basement.”

  • Seriously though, “you can’t fix stupid” and the West is becoming increasingly stupid.

    Ignorance can be addressed in individuals. It tend to think of the word in a positive way, as in “I don’t know anything about that. Could you tell me something more so that I am not as ignorant?”

    Stupid strikes me as willful: as iin “I voted for Obama because Romney didn’t have an economic plan.” You see, in this statement, I betray that 1) having an economic plan is not really a requirement or I’d know that Obama didn’t present one and 2) I know that having an economic plan would be a positive thing for a candidatet but I choose to not investigate the matter.

    People are ignorant until they are informed but you can’t inform the stupid.

    The GOP can’t reach the stupid and we shouldn’t try, lest we be dragged down to their inarticulate, carping fom the sidelines of life existence. Don’s post above, forgive me for paraphrasing, calls for the GOP to inform, to correct ignorance. We simply can’t fix the Ben’s of the world; only He who let the blind man see can.

  • The analysis needs to go further. The very conversation itself here is using Liberal Democrat terms and concepts. Class designations are the tools of the left and the GOP cannot win any debate using concepts and descriptions created by the enemy.

    Republicans need to create a brand new paradigm from the ground up, standing on the principle of servant leadership, using the essences of Scriptural wisdom. No more collectivist terminology regarding race, sex, or any other demographic facet. That language must be continually attacked as dehumanizing and insulting to the sanctity of the individual person, from conception to natural death.

    The whole “War on Women” theme could have been wiped off the map, simply by saying “Our mothers, sisters and daughters are, like our fathers, brothers and sons, full and necessary participants in a society whose goals are civil prosperity, secure families and communities, and respect for every individual person regardless of station or circumstance. If all you believe women to be are mobile genitals, then you have that right, but we take a higher view.” Not just once, but time after time after time, from male and female spokespeople, and every variation on the theme should have been based on that principle.

    As well, compartmentalization of issue is a Leftist weapon. It must be recognized that all issues today, from business overregulation to gay marriage, are inter-connected and that by appealing to the commonality that all share – while pointing out the politically-motivated faux issues created by the left to maintain class warfare and societal division – the whole tone of the battle can be changed.

    The media will be the easiest target since they’re the least intellectually nimble of the bunch. All that’s needed are disciplined, principled and consistent answers to any given challenge on any given aspect of the paradigm, and the respondent silence will speak as loudly as any other potential reaction. Akin and Mourdock failed because they were politicians and not principled public servants. The GOP can turn those losses into huge gains by learning and applying the lessons. They must take the example of Edmund Burke, as posted today by Don, of service before office and the nobility of sacrifice of privilege for the sake of principle. This will be the greatest weapon, if in fact the Republicans can find enough principled people to wield it.

  • And THAT, WK Aiken is the best articulation of the issue I’ve seen in years. Thank you!

  • Bonchamps, you overgeneralize the “Hispanic” vote as badly as the Democrats. Hispanics are the single largest demographic in Texas, yet Texas voted red as blood. Ted Cruz is a Tea Party candidate and considered “extreme” right.

    Aiken is right – dump the demographic paradigm. Clinton was right – it is the economy. The GOP did not do enough on calling out the MSM on their lies about the state of the economy. I would have taken EVERY announcement of job cuts over the last four years and put that front and center.

  • Rozin @ 11:56: That comment was only an observation for the demographic discussion, meaning that it seems that living expenses are a basic concern for voters across the differing constituencies, not a personal statement about my preferences. The D campaign used the strength of that interest in a different way from the R campaign. Each side ‘scared’ the other as to income security, so I thought it might be something to look at by campaign planners. That for the good thought though.

  • You know, I will be quite frank about this: I am sick to death of the implications behind criticisms of the GOP’s immigration positions.


    Bonchamps, you overgeneralize the “Hispanic” vote as badly as the Democrats. Hispanics are the single largest demographic in Texas, yet Texas voted red as blood. Ted Cruz is a Tea Party candidate and considered “extreme” right.

    The “Hispanic” vote means that section that votes on open borders and support for the same. It doesn’t include the folks who vote conservative because that’s the world-view they have, same way that I’m not part of the “women’s vote”– abortion, birth control and single parenthood support– because I am a conservative.
    That is what the terms mean when the Dems use them, and if we talk about taking that group, we’re about the same sub-section.

    The GOP deals with what people think instead of what they were born. Buying into the Dem’s “born that way” mindset is dangerous, and seems to be getting more popular. (followed by those buying in being unable to figure out why they’re not as good at it as the guys they’re copying)

  • There was nothing wrong with Romney. We lost because of turnout – period. The democrats have a great ground game going now. The republicans are still relying on the appeal of common sense. It does not work this way. A community organizer can beat a republican time and time again.

    How do we rebound? We need to get organized and galvanized around a single carefully selected leader. We need to stop thinking of our individual causes and start thinking about whether this country will exist for our children and grandchildren.

Akin Comeback?

Friday, November 2, AD 2012

The Democrats thought they had a silver bullet with Todd Akins’ “legitimate rape” comment in explaining why he does not support a rape exception in regard to abortion.  Akin was inarticulately attempting to distinguish forcible rape from statutory rape where consent is given.  He also, once again inarticulately, was attempting to state something that I believe is true:  women under stress are less likely to conceive than women who aren’t.  Never mind.  Akin became a cause celebre for a few weeks and seemed to be the poster child for the Democrat’s War on Women Meme.  He was left as road kill by the Republicans.  Vastly underfunded in comparison to his opponent, he stayed in the race, fought it out and has battled back to a statistical dead heat.   With Romney poised to win Missouri by double digits next Tuesday, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him take the Senate seat from the highly unpopular Claire McCaskill.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Akin Comeback?

  • I speculated elsewhere that there could be reverse Bradley effect at work in this race as people responding to pollsters might be wary of admitting they are voting for Akin, but when faced with the choice of re-electing McCaskill, ultimately will pull the lever for him.

  • I will wager that if the GOP establishment had any nerve or loyalty to social conservatives, this would have blown over much more quickly. I am hoping the voters of Missouri stick a thumb in their poltroonish little eyes.

Enough is Enough: Rape Babies Don’t Deserve Death

Sunday, October 28, AD 2012

Thank the Good Lord I am not a politician. If I were running for office, what I am about to write would undoubtedly cause me to plummet in the polls and induce a heart attack for my campaign manager. It is up to us – bloggers, polemicists, wags, editorialists, etc. – to say plainly and boldly what politicians cannot say. By now hundreds if not thousands of us on the pro-life side of the spectrum have weighed in on the mountain that the Obama campaign and the leftist media have made out of the molehill of the “rape exception” that many self-identified pro-lifers hold. FYI: it is a molehill not because rape is no big deal, but because less than 1% of abortions are performed on rape babies. I don’t know if what I have to say will be different from what you have read, but I’m about to douse this issue in gasoline and light a match, so check yourselves now.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to Enough is Enough: Rape Babies Don’t Deserve Death

  • ” … I believe penalties for rape should be severe enough to serve as a real deterrent, which they never will as long as left-wing lawyers and judges dominate the judicial system. I believe radical pro-choice outfits should stop harassing pro-life pregnancy centers and other organizations that are out there providing millions of women with financial, social and emotional support. …”

    Add on severe penalties for life-threatening criminal activity in general, and watch them think before acting.

    Harassment is becoming something dangerous, as this election season is revealing it. We have leaders so irresponsible as to incite their base, rather than to caution about right and wrong or to give them credit for brains.

    The Richter Scale has numbers that apply exponentially to damage potential. The law does not. Killing children, and using Roe v. Wade for political gain and division of citizens, is not high-minded or related to peace.

  • Ditto, Bonchamps! – “Well, how about this: I support the second amendment rights of women, so that they can obtain weapons and defend themselves. I support laws that allow them to do so with lethal force and without fear of juridical reprisal. I believe penalties for rape should be severe enough to serve as a real deterrent, which they never will as long as left-wing lawyers and judges dominate the judicial system. I believe radical pro-choice outfits should stop harassing pro-life pregnancy centers and other organizations that are out there providing millions of women with financial, social and emotional support. And at the end of the day, I don’t believe that women who actually go through with an abortion under such circumstances should be thrown in prison, but I do believe that the medical frauds who kill babies for a living should be tossed into a dungeon and the keys jettisoned into outer space.”

  • Pingback: Enough is Enough: Rape Babies Don’t Deserve Death
  • I’ve got a rather scathing response about my knowledge of basic biology meaning that I recognize an embryo is human from conception, and likewise is alive, and that if I were going to kill someone involved in a rape it would be the rapist, not someone who has the horrible luck to be genetically related to him.

  • Not doubting your 1% statistic but wondering where it comes from? I have heard it often but have never seen a source.

  • The less than 1% result keeps showing up, even in pro-abortion studies.

    Victims suggest that 1) a lot of rapes resulting in pregnancy aren’t reported, and 2) abortion makes it worse for the victim. (Shocker, women aren’t stupid just because they were raped.)

  • Great post. I agree with your statement that the vast majority of people are morally inconsistent. You’re also correct that people who make policy statements in public don’t have the excuse of not having thought the matter through.
    For this reason, I believe that politicians who claim to be pro-life, yet condone killing babies conceived during rape (like Mourdoch’s opponent) are not sincerely pro-life.
    The logical distance between acknowledging that life begins at conception and its protection no matter how it came to be is so short that the smallest amount of contemplation should be sufficient to make the jump. I think the pro-life movement would be well served by an information campaign to push this.
    Inconsistent politicians have no logical excuse. I believe that politicians who hold “semi” pro-life positions do so for purely political reasons (coughRomneycough).

  • What is to be said to those who have bought into the entire lie that pro-abortion advocates claim is the reason for safe and legal abortion? Those who have been decieved and brain washed are so misguided by those they believe that the words of those who wish to give them the correct information and guidance are regarded as extremist who are waging a war against women. The information that is presented to them shows them the truth but they do not recognize the truth. All they see is what there are told. I have relatives who are very close to me who I have had “discussions” with about abortion who listen and at that moment hear the truth and recognize it and agree with what they are being shown yet afterwards they still vote for the party that continues to lie to them. So once again.
    What is to be said to those who have bought into the entire lie that pro-abortion advocates claim is the reason for safe and legal abortion?

  • Richard,

    If the people you are speaking to “hear the truth and recognize it and agree with what they are being shown”, as you put it, and yet remain obstinate in their pro-abortion beliefs, there is nothing more you can say. Such people believe that ignoring the truth has no consequences and so they wallow in their indifference.

    But I believe God will punish indifference with more severity than outright evil.

  • First Person Account: A devout Catholic young woman was raped by a hired hand on her father’s farm in the 1930’s. Imagine the disgrace. A devout Catholic man met her and realized the severity of the situation and that he also had loved this young woman for some time. He asked her to marry him! He told her he would adopt the child as his own. Imagine the disgrace for him. Stories flew for years and years with the gossips of the small community. Many people thought they “had to get married”. You know you just did not talk about such things in those days. “They” had a baby girl which they named after the woman who “wiped” the face of Jesus. This couple went on to have 12 more children. This couple was married for 60 years. They both died the most beautiful deaths I have ever witnessed. On his deathbed his last words were, “eye has not seen, ear has not heard what God has ready for those who love Him”. “Their” little girl went on to have a wonderful family of 9 children and her husband has been a champion for the Right to Life”. She has passed now, and her husband is dying of cancer. They have 30 grandchildren many of whom are adopted. Most of who are practising Catholic or members of fundamental churches. Her life was inportant just as the woman who “wiped” the face of Jesus. And we have always thought we had our “own” St. Joseph example in our lives. Pity the world.

  • Very moving Jeanne. No rapes in my family history that I am aware of, but my mother was born out of wedlock in 1936. My grandmother rolled up her sleeves, went to work, and my mom was raised by her grandmother while her mom worked during the day. Money was often tight, the big treat each week was on Saturday night when my mom and my grandmother would each have a cookie and a glass of milk, but love was in abundance. Love usually finds a way to triumph over all adversities.

  • People make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are sexual ones (anyone here not make a sexual mistake?), and sometimes those sexual mistakes have consequences, like an unintended pregnancy. The liberal left doesn’t want consequences, either sexual ones or economic ones. The liberal left wants complete license to do what it wants whenever it wants regardless of circumstance or consequence, and someone else is supposed to pay the price, whether that be the tax payer for free health care or an unborn baby who will be sacrificed for mere covenience’s sake. Therefore, I like what Donald wrote: ” No rapes in my family history that I am aware of, but my mother was born out of wedlock in 1936.  My grandmother rolled up her sleeves, went to work, and my mom was raised by her grandmother while her mom worked during the day.  Money was often tight, but love was in abundance.  Love usually finds a way to triumph over all adversities.”

    Love covers a multitude of sins. Isn’t that somewhere in the Bible? 😉

  • Has anyone else noticed the Planned Parenthood ad on this site?

  • Wow, Jeanne. Thanks for posting that.

It is not Dishonorable to be Honorable

Tuesday, August 21, AD 2012

Chris Johnson, whom Donald has labeled as Defender of the Faith, sums up my feelings on the Todd Akin affair both here and here. Darwin also has an eminently sensible take. Meanwhile, Akin continues to labor under the delusion that he can still defeat Senator McCaskill this November, bolstered by this preposterously over-Republican sampled poll showing that he maintains a one point lead. Evidently his idiocy extends to issues beyond rape.

What’s remarkable is that a hefty proportion of conservatives are calling for Akin to withdraw. When Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Ann Coulter and (kinda sorta) Rush Limbaugh are all urging you to get out of the race, it’s a sign that it’s not just establishment “RINOs” that have turned against you.

Now I do also think that Levin and our own Bonchamps make good points about Democrat hypocrisy on this issue. That said, those few who continue to defend Akin are relying on the most obnoxious tu quoque strategy in order to justify Akin’s continued presence in the Missouri Senate race. Chris and Dana Loesch have been Akin’s most ardent supporters on twitter. They haven’t necessarily defended his statement, but they have insisted that because Democrats say and do much viler things, and because leftists tend to rally around those Democrats who say and defend stupid things, it’s wrong for conservatives and Republicans to insist that Akin get out. They argue that conservatives opposed to Akin are being cowards who are chickening out in the face of Democrat aggression.

First of all, I would argue that the more cowardly and politically weak-minded thing to do is to essentially cede what should be a fairly easy pick-up for Republicans. More importantly,  blind partisan loyalty is not a virtue to be emulated, and the proper response to gutter politics is not to get in the gutter with your opponents.

Let’s take a look at two comments left on Bonchamps’ post.

Yes women get pregnant from rapes. No your body doesn’t shut that down. If a man ejaculates semen into a woman, she can get pregnant whether it’s consensual or it’s rape. I knew a woman who did indeed get pregnant after being gang raped. It happens. Apparently you folks think rape is a joke. Hardy har.

This was downright erudite in comparison to this one:

i hope all of you get raped and then you can feel what it is like, bunch of hypocrites

If you read the comments on Congressman Akin’s facebook page announcing that he is staying in, you’ll see comments from conservatives supporting him, comments from conservatives politely asking him to step down, and comments from unhinged leftists who think that Akin’s comments are a sign that he and all Republicans want women shackled and subservient. Twitter is alive with comments from the likes of Michael Moore:

Don’t let the Repubs paint Akin as a lone nut. HE is THEM. They all believe this: Gov’t MUST have control over what women do w/ their bodies

This is a sentiment that has been echoed in various corridors.

There’s really no charitable way to put it: these people are obviously out of their gourd. These are people not interested in dialogue, nor or they people who can be reasoned with. Yet these are types of people that Akin supporters, in a sense, want to emulate. Instead of being reviled by the viciousness or ruthlessness of the hyper-partisans on the left, some on the right are consumed with the idea of “fighting fire with fire.”

Don’t get me wrong. The Akin supporters (by and large) have not said anything nearly as dumb or vile as these people. Yet instead of recognizing the behavior of the other side as something anti-social and to be avoided, it’s as though certain conservatives see this, dig in their heels, and insist on playing a somewhat milder version of the same game.

A lot of the people on the right behaving like that think that they are simply following in the path of the late Andrew Breitbart. Breitbart, of course, was largely beloved on the right because of his take no prisoners attitude, and because he had an amazing ability to beat the left at their own game. But there’s a difference between sticking to your guns and blind partisan loyalty. I can sympathize with individuals who believe that Republicans are too soft at times and easily back down from political fights. Yet, I don’t think it’s a bad thing that Republicans actually are willing to hold other Republicans’ feet to the fire. In other words, there is nothing dishonorable about being honorable. I don’t think blind partisanship is something we need more of.

Continue reading...

16 Responses to It is not Dishonorable to be Honorable

  • Logical reasoning is not the strong suit of leftists nor Todd Akin apparently. Does he not recognize that his statement essentially says that if a woman is raped and gets pregnant she must not have been stressed out? If she’s not stressed out it’s a short step to saying she must have liked it. This is the same ballpark as that Repub opponent and loser to Ann Richards in Texas who made some buffoonish comments himself about this subject.

    I must say that Dem oppo research is light years beyond Repubs. The Dems knew apparently that Akin was a loose cannon and made a wonderful patsy for the Dems even before the primary vote. Repubs in Missouri were clueless though. Are the Repubs ready this fall for the little surprises that the Dems have ready? I doubt it.

  • Claire McCaskill wants him to run. She considers him a wounded bird now and is ready to squash him.

  • I don’t want to get unhinged in denouncing Akin either. That’s something else I’ve been seeing as well from some on the conservative side.

    He made a terrible blunder, yes. He should quit the race, yes.

    But what he was trying to say was not the monstrously evil thing that the hysterical left is making it out to be. It shouldn’t have been said a) because it has NOTHING to do with the morality of abortion and b) the man obviously cannot articulate these finer points of anatomy.

    I’m not going to look at the man as an evil villain.

  • Well to be fair, what the democrats are usually defending is far more egregious than some politically incorrect use of terminology. In other words its usually the result of either criminal or immoral behavior on the part of the dem.

    If we as conservatives want him to step down then it should be to the extent that the severity of the offense requires stepping down as a matter of justice or prudence.

    That being said conservatives can be their own worst enemies because of the tendency to have our own fall on the sword for what is hardly a “legitimate” capital offense.

  • ” Does he not recognize that his statement essentially says that if a woman is raped and gets pregnant she must not have been stressed out? If she’s not stressed out it’s a short step to saying she must have liked it. ”

    No, you see, people who think this is what he said are the ones who lack logical reasoning abilities. People are reading absolutes into what he said, when he used words and phrases to indicate that he believed rape pregnancies were rare, but still possible. COULD he have meant “she must not have been stressed out”? Maybe, but I doubt it. I don’t think he ever insisted that stress = no pregnancy 100% of the time or even implied it. In any case, we simply don’t know what he meant at that moment.

    My hunch: he was trying to say that he didn’t believe that rape pregnancy happened often enough to justify the constant invocation of the “hard cases” (of which rape is one) to support legalized abortion. It is common knowledge that the vast majority of abortions are not performed on rape victims – anywhere between 97-99%, from what I have read.

    He didn’t need to get into this issue to simply say that abortion is never justifiable, no matter what the circumstances.

  • I agree, Bonchamps. I think part of what is driving the angst against him is sheer frustration. He made comments that harm the pro-life cause politically, and he seems unable and/or unwilling to put personal political ambition aside for the good of the country. But his comments were merely stupid, and not indicative that he personally hold odious political views.

  • If the Missouri re-elects McCasKILL babies and America re-elects Soetoro, leader of the choom gang, it will tell us more about Missouri and America than about the two hate-filled liars.

    Abandon hope.

  • It’s one thing to make a stupid comment – and what Akin said was very, very stupid. What does it say about women who were raped and made the courageous decision to have the baby? Are you going to tell them they weren’t “really” raped? It’s that he became stubborn and prideful and mistakes his stubbornness for principle. And Akins doubled down on stupid during his interview with Hannity today. He said he honestly didn’t know that women could get pregnant via rape. What, did he think sperm need a signed consent form? I’m as pro-life as anybody, but what Akins did not only hand our enemies ammo, he gave them an tank division. His comments play into all the worst stereotypes people have of pro-lifers: that they are ignorant bible-thumpers who are “anti-science” and that they are insensitive toward women. And now he apparently believes God gave him a mission to lead the country. No, where this could lead to is the Dems keeping control of the Senate, even if Romney is elected. Obamacare stays and what chances do those future to-be-aborted babies have then?

    I’m not saying he should have abandoned his principles – but you can state them without stepping in it like he did. And saying “But look at what Dem pols get away with” won’t work either. We’ve been pointing out the hypocrisy for years – it doesn’t stop them because the media shields and protects Dems and savagely exploits any GOP gaffes (just ask Sarah Palin). They are working hard to present Akin as “the face of the Republican Party.” While I pray that most voters will see though that, some gulliable idiots may be swayed – and if they are in swing states, that might be enough.

    I still think the wind is at our backs and remind myself that it is still August, not October. This might not be a fatal error, but it was a big unforced one, in a race we should have won in a walk, and I’ve felt as angry at Akin all day as I felt at John Roberts when the SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare came down – 2 men who might end up dragging the country down because of their own egos.

  • This whole episode is interesting to me. Akin makes an incorrect statement in reliance on material published by pro-life forces that proves to be wrong (apparently). Thus he accidentally embarrasses himself, his party and the pro-life movement. Instead, of making the best of it by removing himself from the race he insists on staying in. Understandable but selfish — or at least insufficiently selfless. This I understand. I also understand the Dems grabbing the opportunity to take profoundly unfair (and weird) inferential liberties with his statement to render it callous rather than simply mistaken. But Donna V?

  • Mike: I am not saying he is callous (although he is certainly ignorant of biology). What I said that that he will be portrayed by libs as someone who doesn’t care about women, because that is the charge they always made, and his words can very easily be twisted to look that way. Like I said, if you are saying someone who was raped can’t get pregnant, how do you think a woman who has been through the terrible experience of rape and DID get pregnant and DID have the baby feels to be told she must have consented in some way or she would not have conceived? Sure, he may have meant well, but no amount of spin or explaining is going to make that comment acceptable.

    Perhaps in a normal election year, he could have apologized and gotten away with that. But this is NOT a normal election year. The balance of power in the Senate determines the fate of Obamacare. If he had recognized that and stepped down, I would think of him as an honorable man. But instead, pride and ego has driven him to compound his error and possible disaster may result – disaster not only to the people of Missouri, but to the people of the United States.

    Well meaning people can do terrible things, Mike. And politicans who assure themselves that only they and they alone can do the Lord’s work scare me.

  • Honorable to allow that a controversy from error make room for someone the people in Missouri want to speak for them.

    Dishonorable that the President saw this as an opportunity to have something to say to his Press Corps after many weeks away from them.

    Dishonorable that the tolerance the liberal democrats demand does not include those who have different moral standards.

    Dishonorable that mudslinging has become the form of communication for liberal democrats to the detriment of citizens, young and old, here and abroad.

  • Also, if I may add, I believe life begins at conception and that is true whether the baby was conceived during a rape or not. I do not fault Akin’s stance on that. But – Lord, if they announced tomorrow that all abortions EXCEPT those conceived through rape and incest were illegal, I would be doing handsprings, not because I don’t care about the babies conceived via rape and incest, but because the number of abortions in this country would be reduced by 99%.

    The number of pro-life Americans are growing – but they define themselves as “pro-life” in different ways. Most people feel disgust at the thought of late-term abortions, other people would ban abortions past the first trimester and require parental notification of underage children seeking abortions. Yet, we still live in a country where babies can have their brains sucked out a day before the due date and 16 year olds who can’t buy beer legally yet are getting their second abortion. It is the replusion with that that (I believe) the pro-life movement needs to tackle first. Many people who hate the thought of late-term abortions say they’re OK with abortion in the case of rape and incest. They’re wrong, but let’s go after the areas in which there is broader agreement first, before we jump to the rape and incest question. This is a battle of hearts and minds, and it is really stupid to jump into what is, for many, the thorniest, more difficult part of the abortion debate before while the aspects of abortion that are more obviously wrong and evil to the “squishy middle” continue unabated.

    Let me use an analogy to slavery. If you traveled in a time machine back to 1850 and found yourself in a Northern town, you would find quite a few people who would agree with you that slavery is terrible and should be against the law. A smaller group would agree that “black people are humans like us.” An even smaller group would agree that “blacks are as intelligent as whites.” And very few would agree that “blacks should be able to be doctors and lawyers and should be able to marry white people.” Even very liberal whites in the 1850’s would have had a very difficult time with that – not because they were evil, but because they were creatures of their times, just as the “squshy middle, not against abortion in all cases” people are products of our time. So, you start with “Slavery is evil” and go from there. That’s not a denial of the fact that blacks can be equals in all ways, or that even products of rape and incest are humans deserving of life – it’s a recognition of where public opinion was (and is) at this point in time.

    Gee, will somebody let me know if I’m making sense here? 😉 I feel I’ve expressed myself so clumsily.

  • You are doing fine. I got your point and that’s what counts. Now to react,….

    1. Know that you are right. Life begins at conception. That is not debated or debatable. It is a scientific fact. And a moral certainty. On that point the argument is complete and robust. The rest follows in fairly straightforward logical fashion.

    2. How to make progress toward getting rid of abortion? The detailed strategy for getting rid of abortion is more a matter of prudential judgment. The Church will welcome an effective strategy. I prefer open discussion and confrontation (and I want to do it in front of an audience, not just one person). The strategy is to perform an abortion procedure on pro-abort arguments in systematic fashion. Keep pulling them out into the bright light, piece by piece, — that’s gross when you think about it, which is just what I intended.

    It is slow work, but you will not lose — they can never win on the merits. When you reduce the pro-abort to hysteria, you won. And make sure the observers/readers see what you did; do a good recap. Be kind to your opponent, show that you like and respect him personally, and go home a winner. The pro-abort will not admit having lost, but you might have helped a number of observers to the truth. Serve it out generously!

    You are doing fine.

  • Donna V,
    I understand and agree with your fundamental point, which is that something is better than nothing. I also would be thrilled if the law of the land permitted abortions only in cases of rape or to save the live of the mother. Not perfect, but only fools let the perfect be the enemy of the good. My quarrel is only with the notion that Akin said or even implied that rape victims cannot get pregnant. That is simply not true. He said it was rare and explained one reason why. It turns out that his reason may be shaky, though that is not entirely clear, and he can be faulted for not responding more thoughtfully. But he never remotely suggested that a rape victim could not get pregnant or that a pregnancy was proof that the sex was consensual. Only a person who deliberately twists words can make that accusation.

  • “Let me use an analogy to slavery. If you traveled in a time machine back to 1850…”

    … or more precisely, 1854, you might find Abraham Lincoln making the same kind of argument you suggest. He used the actions and words of the Founding Fathers and later statesmen to demonstrate that even though the Declaration and the Constitution allowed slavery, the framers had reached a moral consensus that it was a bad thing that should not be allowed to exist indefinitely. If slavery were not wrong, he argued, why would past Congresses and presidents have placed restrictions upon the slave trade, or attempted to set geographic boundaries beyond which slavery would not be permitted? Lincoln did not, prior to the Civil War, believe that action to free the slaves in existing slave states was warranted (so abolitionists thought him too soft on the issue), but he believed that slavery should be confined only to existing slave states and NOT allowed to expand into new territories via the Kansas Nebraska Act (which made him dangerously radical in the eyes of the pro-slavery crowd). That way, he figured, slavery would eventually die out on its own. (Or to uborrow the words of a much later SCOTUS justice concerning Roe, it was “on a collision course with itself.”) Of course, the Civil War broke out before that approach could be tried. What you are suggesting, Donna, is taking the same approach to abortion today that Lincoln took toward slavery in the 1850s.

  • To a certain extent, I think it is pretty amazing that a 100% pro-life candidate does not have an answer to that question. If we are going to win the debate.. we need to be actually capable of debating.

Life is Life: Akin & Obama on Rape Pregnancy

Monday, August 20, AD 2012


By now, most of you have heard about the monumental blunder made by Todd Akin, a GOP representative and Senate nominee from Missouri, with regards to rape and pregnancy. Here are his comments, in all of their cringe-worthy glory:

“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Mr. Akin said of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

Frankly I have never heard of any doctors who claim that the female body has ways of “shutting that whole thing down”, by which I assume he means implantation or conception, and no doctors appear to have come forward to substantiate this notion. Who knows where Akin got it from. Much is being made of his use of the word “legitimate” as well, which was a clumsy attempt to distinguish forcible from non-forcible rape, a “legitimate” distinction used by law-enforcement in the classification of crimes. What Akin says next is something most pro-life advocates agree with: rapists, not the children of rape, deserve to be punished for the crime .

His comments were certainly poorly worded and bizarre. He may well deserve to lose the political race he is engaged in and perhaps even his office for a gaffe of this magnitude. So this is not a “Save Rep. Akin’s Career” type of post.

But this is one of those moments at which we must firmly reassert our opposition to abortion, regardless of the circumstances. Our opponents are seizing upon this incident to remind everyone of how utterly heartless and anti-woman the GOP supposedly is. Obama is leading the charge on this as well. He had this to say:

“Rape is rape,” Mr. Obama told reporters at the daily White House briefing Monday. “And the idea that we should be parsing and qualifying and slicing what types of rape we’re talking about doesn’t make sense to the American people and certainly doesn’t make sense to me.”

Mr. Obama added that Akin’s remarks underscore “why we shouldn’t have a bunch of politicians, a majority of whom are men, making health care decisions on behalf of women.”

Leaving aside the ridiculous idea that the author of Obamacare, which forces everyone to purchase health insurance, doesn’t want to “make health care decisions” on behalf of women or anyone else, let us look at the statement “rape is rape.” Yes, indeed, rape is rape: it is always wrong, and can never be condoned. Mr. Akin had it in his head, apparently, that certain types of rape make it less likely for conception to occur. If that were actually true, it would make sense to distinguish between types of rape, though it wouldn’t necessarily be a statement on the morality of rape as such, and any honest person knows this. Since it isn’t true, of course it comes of rather badly. Akin’s profuse apologizing will not change this.

So “rape is rape.” But life is also life. That’s something Obama and the pro-abortion industry cannot and will not admit. The core principle of the pro-life position is this: it is never morally acceptable to kill an innocent human being. There are no circumstances, no matter how horrific or traumatizing, that justify the murder of an innocent human being. And frankly we don’t need the sort of half-baked theories that Akin was peddling to reinforce this point. It is a self-evident truth that we can and ought to proudly defend on its own merits.

We have nothing to run from, nothing to apologize for, and nothing to hide. I hope the Romney campaign is able to deal with this issue in a way that does not compromise in the least degree on the inviolable sanctity of human life, or which does not display fear or doubt regarding the absolute immorality of the left’s position on it.

Update: Given some of the information my co-bloggers and readers have left, I’m inclined to take back my remarks about Akin’s theories being bizarre or untrue. I will say, however, that if one is not prepared to articulate in a clear and sensitive way these finer points of medical fact, one should not speak at all. And in this case, I maintain that it is not necessary to bring up any of this, since it has no bearing at all on the morality of abortion, which is all that really matters.

Continue reading...

29 Responses to Life is Life: Akin & Obama on Rape Pregnancy

  • Statistics aren’t conclusive, but about 1%-.6% of victims of violent rape become pregnant, according to the only place I found that didn’t assume same-as-unprotected sex conception rates. Here’s a second source that also cites Guttmacher, since I don’t feel like digging around their site right now.

    (All the sources I could find that claimed rape has the same conception rate as nonviolent sex sourced this page, which states that it is ASSUMING a 5% conception rate. A few other sites that mentioned “studies” that were over 1% also mention they were counting domestic rapes child abuse where the girls were old enough to become pregnant, so I would guess they also included date-rape while removing rape that cannot cause conception.)

    Yes, the guy said something really dumb, clumsy, etc. I think you’re right that it was differentiating between violent rape and “I don’t remember if I said yes/I said yes but I regret it/we were drunk/I can’t remember” rape, and one should have all of one’s ducks in a row when touching that topic.

    That said, claims like: Since it isn’t true, of course it comes of rather badly really don’t help the situation. As for where he got it from, I can remember it being taught in flippin’ SEX ED when I was in high school. No, I don’t have the citation, because that was over a decade ago– but it was mentioned a couple of times, in the official course materials.
    Maybe someone can find it with that information, but it doesn’t matter– the facts don’t matter, sadly, just folks’ emotional reaction to a safe target.
    (argh, forgot to close HTML)

  • Well, perhaps what I ought to have said is that since it doesn’t appear to be true.

    I mean, I can’t say for certain that he is wrong, but I couldn’t find any information to substantiate his claims. And if you’re going to go around saying things like that, you’d better have a legitimate source lined-up for support.

  • There is violent rape and then there is statutory rape. The violent rapist is a murderer. The statutory rapist is a grossed out ignoramus of unmitigated proportions. Here is the difference Akin was struggling to define. The criminal rapist ought to go to jail for the rest of his unnatural life. The statutory rapist is over eighteen years of age and ought to know better and an underage girl who has not reached the age of informed consent have sexual relations, with or without the child becoming pregnant, the parents of both the male and the girl, or the girl alone, may choose to support and encourage the relationship and ‘adopt” any child as their own, even though it be a grandchild. Statutory rape carried a two year federal prison sentence, no questions asked, in my day, and I felt very protected. With abortion, pornography, indecency at every turn, with the removal of all protection of the young uninformed, innocent virgins, informed sexual consent is counted legally at fourteen years of age in some states and without the voters voting on it. The protections were removed to enhance the abortion rate and increase Planned Parenthood’s profit. Our daughters are being mutilated.
    The woman’s body may shut down during the violence, but conception takes place hours later.
    Life is Life. Government does not give LIFE and government cannot take innocent life, not Liberty, nor the pursuit of Happiness. Government does not give sovereign personhood and government cannot deny sovereign personhood, not even to the one-celled human being, coming into existence at the will of “their Creator”, with his newly begotten immortal soul.
    My definition of just punishment to the rapist is to give the victim’s parents twenty minutes alone with him on the open seas, or a public pillory with several bats and let the public have at him, or jail for the rest of his unnatural life. Once a rapist, always a rapist, the public is not safe anymore, and for all the money taken for taxes. Abort the innocent life, harbor the evil doers and compliment the cowards. Where is Judge Roy Bean when you need him.
    My dad’s family is the result of Tartar rape and the girl’s father adopted the little boy born of the rape. Adoption consisted in taking the child upon his knee. And I would not be here if not for the generosity and common sense of my father’s ancestor. It was my mother’s family who was raped in 1595.
    And as far as Obama not knowing anything, what else is new?

  • In the Old Testament, the Bible, if a woman was being raped in the city and she did not call out, she was to be stoned along with the rapist to keep evil out of their midst. If the woman was raped in the field where her cries would not be heard she was not to be put to death. In not calling out, the victim in the city, became an accomplice to her own rape.

  • It has been known and acknowledged for some time that stress-whether physical or psychological-can cause delayed ovulation, and therefore a delayed period. This was a fairly common complaint in my college days actually–the girls (the ones who weren’t on the Pill) would complain about their period not coming on the day expectetd and guess what? They had had a bad month working on a paper or some history project or something. Or they got sick, or went on some new ridiculous diet and exercise program. No they weren’t pregnant, and yes, the period came a few days late.

    I don’t see why a rape, if it occurred in an early part of the cycle, say Day 5 or 6, wouldn’t cause a delayed ovulation. Now if a woman were on Day 14, which is mid-cycle for the average women (not on the pill) and about the time they ovulate (I think Day 16 is the text book date), that I don’t know. And if she had ovulated within 24 hours before the rape occured, I don’t know of any reason why the egg might not get fertilized (and then implant some days later.) If the rape occurred several days after the woman has ovulated, fertilization is most unlikely. An unfertilized egg only lives roughly 24 hours.

    This is my understanding from what I’ve picked up along the way. I would verify with an Creighon Modle NFP practioner.

  • Here below is a link to Physicians For Life who contend that pregnancies from “assault rape” are rare:


  • Another article on stress and infertility:

    It’s not that it’s all in your mind,’’ Dr. Domar said. “If you’re really stressed out and depressed, the body seems to sense that’s not a good time to get pregnant. There’s something about practicing relaxation techniques or being with other women who understand what you’re going through, probably a combination of everything, that makes a difference. It isn’t just about relaxing.”


  • “But as unwelcome as the advice may be, it may be right. New evidence suggests that stress does affect fertility. A recent study found that women with high levels of alpha-amylase, an enzyme that correlates with stress, have a harder time getting pregnant. Saliva samples taken from 274 women over six menstrual cycles (or until they got pregnant) revealed that those with the highest enzyme concentrations during the first cycle were 12 percent less likely to conceive than were women with the lowest levels.

    What’s more, women involved in the study, published earlier this month in the journal Fertility and Sterility, had no prior record of infertility. Participants were either planning to get pregnant or had been trying for less than three months.

    Researchers do not yet understand the role stress plays, since women can and often do get pregnant even under the intense stress, for example, that follows the death of a spouse. “I suspect that some women are more reproductively sensitive to stress than other women,” says Alice Domar, who directs the Domar Center for Mind/Body Health in Boston. And the effect can feed on itself. “If you are stressed and you don’t get pregnant quickly, then you get more stressed,” says Domar, citing evidence from a study in Taiwan in which 40 percent of participants seeking infertility treatment were diagnosed with depression or anxiety. The treatment itself can be stressful, she adds, adding even more uncertainty.”


  • This all seems legit to me.

    But if one isn’t prepared to clearly articulate with the necessary sensitivity these medical points, one should simply not speak at all. And it isn’t really necessary to make these points either.

  • True. When it comes to rape and pregnancy the proper response was given in the movie Rob Roy:

    Mary MacGregor: Robert, there is more. I am carrying a child and I do not know who is the father.”
    Robert Roy MacGregor: Ach, Mary…
    Mary MacGregor: I could not kill it, husband.
    Robert Roy MacGregor: It’s not the child that needs killing.

  • Akin getting out:


    He is an object lesson for Christians in politics: innocent as doves is necessary, but so is wily as serpents. The man has been in Congress for 10 years. He should have been able to field the question effortlessly (example of how to do it) “Rape is a terrible crime and I wish we had the death penalty for convicted rapists. However, when a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape another innocent victim is then present. We should treat both the mother and child with infinite compassion and care. The rapist deserves death and not the innocent child brought into the world by his crime.” You show through this answer both abhorrence of the crime and compassion for the two innocent victims.

  • i hope all of you get raped and then you can feel what it is like, bunch of hypocrites

  • I’ll leave comments such as “what”s as an example of the sort of insanity we are dealing with from the left.

  • Thank you for showing the true colors of the psycho lefty, Jeff S out in San Francisco.

    As for the matter ahead, ditto what Chris Johnson said.

  • According to his facebook page, he’s staying in. He just updated about 8 minutes ago (8 pm Central Time).

  • I get what the candidate said, but wish too, that he had taken a deep breath before answering. McCaskill wants him to stay in the race, she thinks he is a wounded bird now and that is the only way she could win. Typical O/alinsky tactic to eliminate your opponent. Too bad. Hope there is someone to fill his shoes who is a little more willey.

    LOVE Rob Roy. It’s the Scottish in me.

  • Yes women get pregnant from rapes. No your body doesn’t shut that down. If a man ejaculates semen into a woman, she can get pregnant whether it’s consensual or it’s rape. I knew a woman who did indeed get pregnant after being gang raped. It happens. Apparently you folks think rape is a joke. Hardy har.

  • Apparently you think accurately representing what other people say is a joke.

    No one claimed that a woman cannot get pregnant from rapes. Some people are arguing that serious stress and emotional trauma can decrease the chances of conception. That doesn’t sound unreasonable to me.

    But it is really irrelevant. I don’t care if it happens 1 in a million rapes, or 1 in 100. The principle remains: it is never morally acceptable to take an innocent human life.

    Neither rape nor child murder is a joke. But your ridiculous post is. Har har.

  • As bad as the remarks are, it doesn’t seem completely irrational to think some physiological factors can affect the likelihood of pregnancy – stress, fear, etc. release different hormones and compounds into the body, so it could be possible it would affect conception.

    Still, pretty cringeworthy. But not as bad as that Texas Gubernatorial candidate (Clayton Williams?) that made a huge rape gaffe that cost him the election to Anne Richards.

  • The law may have been changed, but last I remember, if a child was brought into a family, through rape, adultery, or whatever, the child was legally the father’s/husband’s child and a legal member of the family. The law did not exact death to the unbon child.

  • “I’ll leave comments such as “what”s as an example of the sort of insanity we are dealing with from the left.”
    “what” does not know that she is a “WHO”

  • So what you are basically saying is that you are fine if a woman is raped since you really know there isn’t a chance of pregnancy. Consequently, any woman that claims rape and is pregnant wasn’t raped at all.

    Somehow, I think women from the Virgin Mary to Sister Theresa would have a problem with your theory. I suggest heading to the confessional and I pray God takes pity on your soul.

  • “So what you are basically saying is that you are fine if a woman is raped since you really know there isn’t a chance of pregnancy.”

    Reading comprehension really isn’t your strong point is it Mr. Lambert?

  • Mr. McClarey,

    I read and comprehend quite well. I do well at reading between lines. If you favor HB 3 which I assume you do…..then this would be your exact view. Would it not?

  • Once again, reading comprehension is clearly not your strong point. I trust you are receiving a fair amount of money from the Obama campaign to troll a Catholic website since you are doing a very poor job of it. We expect inventiveness and wit from our trolls and you are merely boring, so into moderation you go.

  • I do well at reading between lines.

    Ah. You mean you assume we’re saying something monumentally stupid, and when you can’t find any evidence of it, you lie and claim we did.

    You are disgusting.

    When faced with mention of scientifically supported evidence that women who are violently raped take such physical damage that their fertility is about 1/5 of that in the case of normal intercourse, you try to claim that it means NO chance, and then extrapolate to something so evil and moronic that it boggles the mind….

    Some of us have friends that were born of rape.
    Some of us respect the truth enough mention it, even when facts aren’t up your alley.
    Some of us can deal with those we dislike without lying about them– and frankly, I must disagree with Mr. McClarey. There is simply no way a rational being could read what has been written here and, by innocent lack of reading comprehension, conclude what you have claimed.

    Slanderous lies are even more disgusting that plain old supports-a-view lies.

  • Another problem with irresponsible government overspending is no accountability for grievous, intentional, and wasteful error. The piece of cake mentality going in, and the garbage produced coming out.

  • I just looked up ten indictments for rape in this year’s Books of Sederunt, more or less at random. Six of them contained averments to the following, or similar effect, “while she was under the influence of alcohol and drugs or of one or other of them and bereft of the power of resistance” or “while she was asleep under the influence of alcohol and incapable of giving or withholding consent” Another averred the woman was a defective, within the meaning of the Mental Health Acts and incapable &c

    In no sense is this a scientific survey, but it suggests that rape may well be as often clandestine as forcible. After all, the essence of the offence, the factum probandum, is absence of consent; force or violence are merely evidence that the panel knew the woman was not consenting, or was reckless as to whether she was consenting or not.