Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 19 issues

LESSONS NOT LEARNED

Congressman: Todd Akin Had A Point On Rape And Pregnancy

Anti-abortion lawmaker offers his take on female biology

Next>

by David Mark

Editor-in-Chief t +

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), with his wife, in a ceremonial swearing-in photo with House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Image: AP.

Todd Akin was wrong about "legitimate rape," says a veteran congressman. But he wasn't all wrong on rape and pregnancy.

At a Cobb Chamber of Commerce talk Thursday, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), was asked about then-Rep. Akin's notorious comments about women's bodies being able to prevent pregnancy during rape, reports the Marietta Daily Journal.

"In Missouri, Todd Akin ... was asked by a local news source about rape and he said, 'Look, in a legitimate rape situation' - and what he meant by legitimate rape was just look, someone can say I was raped: a scared-to-death 15-year-old that becomes impregnated by her boyfriend and then has to tell her parents, that's pretty tough and might on some occasion say, 'Hey, I was raped.' That's what he meant when he said legitimate rape versus non-legitimate rape. I don't find anything so horrible about that. But then he went on and said that in a situation of rape, of a legitimate rape, a woman's body has a way of shutting down so the pregnancy would not occur. He's partly right on that."

Gingrey pointed out that he had been an OB-GYN since 1975.

In 2012 Akin got crushed in his Senate bid against Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill, which had been considered an easy pick-up opportunity for Republicans. In Indiana, GOP Senate candidate Richard Mourdock blew a winnable race at least party through his riff about rape-induced pregnancies being "God's will".

Sean Higgins, senior editorial writer at The Washington Examiner, sees a lesson for other GOP candidates. "There are certain subjects that you probably should just not talk about at a public breakfast if you are an elected official, especially if you are a Republican, and especially if your party just took a massive shellacking at the ballot box last November in part because of loose talk by some of the dimmer members of your party on the same subject."

Via The Washington Examiner and Politix analysis.

Like this article? B Vote Up
?

What's your reaction to Gingrey's views on rape and abortion?

View results

146 Comments (view in Forum)

  • jessejaymes
    !
    And my longtime California GOP buddies still call me asking why I dumped the GOP after so many decades and what it will take to get me back. My answer? Let the south Secede. And take the rest of the Bible Belt with them.
  • jessejaymes
    !
    @martydotcom I have mixed feelings about the disaster relief situation. I read homeowner insurance doesn't cover flooding. How is that? What do they cover? And why are insurance companies allowed to exempt anything that they might actually have to pay up for? In California I have to have homeowners insurance, separate flood and mud insurance AND separate Earth quake Insurance. What a scam that is. And of course every time there is a disaster the insurance companies try to not pay.
  • martydotcom
    !
    @jessejaymes Historically home owners insurance excludes coverage in Flood Zones or high risk area such as you describe, as defined by the Army Corp of Engineers. Like all insurance companies they wouldn't take on an obvious high risk Hence the National Flood Insurance program. I've always been in favor of a national disaster insurance to cover those in Tornado Ally, Earthquake Prone West coast locales, and coastal areas. The whole concept that makes insurance a viable business is to spread the risk to as many paying customers as possible... With a national disaster policy the risk is dissipated so as not to have one disaster bankrupt the company
  • jessejaymes
    !
    @martydotcom A national disaster relief policy would be all fine and good except people like me would pay (as I do now) and people like most would not and we'd still be expected to bail them out. There is no easy answer here. I read in an Oklahoma wild fire disaster that FEMA bailed them out, 81% had no insurance. Why would people pay in if they know they will get bailed out? That's just wrong.

  • Load more replies >

  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    I'm sure glad he was never my ob/gyn. I would like to hear his explanation of what happens within a woman's body during rape, though. This article lacks detail, as usual.
  • Jlope
    !
    @woodtick57 theres nothing magic about it; the human body does all kinds of amazing things, which are affected by mental condition and focus. Placebo effect, focused healing, doubt versus hopel the studies are endless. There is nothing magic about a traumatized brain shutting down the reproductive system in response to a rape.
  • martydotcom
    !
    This very same Rockit Sci (sic) voted against Sandy Flood insurance but has sponsored aid for his state. I can't wait for the midterms
    You can't make this up
  • RobertJHarsh
    !
    @martydotcom The reason why the Sandy victims still have broken houses is because all the pork in the bill and Boehner said he wasn't doing it....mostly loaded by DEMOCRATS. So wrecked city or not...F the lard boy RINO and his mob state. No tears being shed tonight in Ohio.
  • martydotcom
    !
    @RobertJHarsh Robert the bill in case you haven't seen or heard the news contained ZERO PORK the bill they voted against was for" funding flood insurance. "
    37 of those voting against funding flood insurance have both voted for it for their states in the past and have sponsored bills to pay for other states... Genius Hypocrites
    You're as uninformed as the 67 Tea Party types who voted against it
  • RobertJHarsh
    !
    @martydotcom Then they changed it, LAST WEEK Fox had it on their web site showing the bill that the GOP rejected after the fiscal talks. Bridges to nowhere and so forth. Still, let'em dig themselves out. Cleveland got some aftermath of Sandy and lost power and some homes were messed up...I do not see Kasich demanding pork to fix Cleveland.

    But to be honest, Cleveland might have actually been improved by Sandy. I stand by my F New Jersey position.

  • Load more replies >

  • PayThatCEO
    !
    this is why I refuse to see male OB-GYN. I had one once who told me PMS is all in a woman's head. That was last time I ever saw a male GYN. Sorry, guys. No matter how much schooling you have, you will never know what being a woman is like.
  • mtkopf
    !
    @PayThatCEO as a married man, I can't see how these are the idiots that want to dictate women's health issues.
    Its OK for insurance to pay for viagra but not women's birth control? That's ridiculous.
    Personally I don't believe in abortion but who am I to tell another human being what to do with their body?
  • Zazziness
    !
    I wish I had tagged the article a few weeks ago in which a Republican noteworthy was telling his party they have *got* to stop being The Party of Stupid. I have had so many occasions to agree with it since it was published. Maybe if the GOP sent it out on a repeating weekly basis to all Republican elected officials, we'd see less of these superstitious nonsense statements from them.
  • PayThatCEO
    !
    That was Bobby Jindal, who's now all for screwing the hell out of his constituents by raising taxes on everything they buy.

    I don't think the GOP is the party of stupid. I think they are the party of arrogance. To be arrogant you have to think that your way is the only way and what you believe is more important than what someone else believes, which makes these types of people very difficult to compromise and work with.
  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    @PayThatCEO - "... to think that your way is the only way and what you believe is more important than what someone else believes ... " As we have daily proof right here on this web site.
  • Dan_Tien
    !
    " "There are certain subjects that you probably should just not talk about at a public breakfast if you are an elected official..." I disagree. Politicians should talk about anything and everything that they believe. That way we get to know who they really are.
  • OhWiseOne
    !
    To Politix, since you called the congressman anti-abortion will you please start referring to those who support abortion as being pro-abortion? It's only fair. Don't you think?
  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    There actually is a difference, although I can understand your view here. Anti-abortion means against abortion under any circumstances. Pro-abortion would mean you fully approve of abortions. Pro-choice indicates that even if you wouldn't choose abortion yourself, you don't feel you have the right to make that choice for anyone else. Pro-life is the same as anti-abortion, just spun into language that would indicate that if you disagree with someone who claims to be pro-life, you must be anti-life. In my opinion, the only disengenuous term is pro-life.
  • woodtick57
    !
    Our congressional representatives spouting wholly unture things about raped women, and really, science in general, can be blown out of proportion?

    shouldn't these people be actually educated and intelligent?
  • Thunderchicken
    !
    @Mogal

    And he couldn't have picked up his info from some who did go to med school in the `50s or `60s? What I'm saying is he had some outdated information that was once presented as fact. Once I've learned something that is wrong, it's kind of hard to unlearn it. IOW I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.(And I feel betrayed by McCaskill.)
  • Thunderchicken
    !
    @woodtick57

    Even intelligent people can have wrong information. Looking Akin’s career, he’s proven himself to be an educated and intelligent representative many times. That is particularly evident when it comes to fiscal matters. He's a big part of the reason that MO is in the fiscal shape that it enjoys today.

  • Load more replies >

  • Warrior_Judge
    !
    What these assmonkey politicians seem to forget is that a woman has to be OVULATING at the time she is raped in order to become pregnant. If she's not ovulating at the time, she won't get pregnant. The body can't stop ovulating as a defense mechanism. These "men", and I use that term loosely, need to sit down and STFU when it comes to women's issues because they don't have a clue.
  • BelinKS
    !
    I'm glad he changed his stance. If women who were raped would go to the emergency room after, they would be given the morning after pill to prevent a pregnancy. Plus that is the only way for the police to obtain the evidence they need from the rape kit to prosecute the rapist. With out that examination and the evidence collected, it could just turn into a he said/she said situation. Very hard for the prosecution of the rapist without that evidence! Then the rapist is free to do it again to another girl/woman.
    I do know of girls from high school who got pregnant and to not get in trouble with her patents cried rape. That is something girls need to be educated about. I was pregnant in high school. I did not cry rape, though legally it was statutory rape. I convinced my parents not to press charges(I probably shouldn't have because I was fresh out of tenth grade and he was in his twenties). I knew better than to have sex. My patents taught me better. There was another girl at school pregnant. She cried rape. I know for a fact she was not raped. She put that boy through hell because she had consensual sex with him and when she found out she was pregnant and cried rape, her patents had rape charges pressed against him. It is girls like these that make real rape harder to prosecute. Thank God he was found not guilty. He eventually ended up with custody of the child. She knew better just like I did, but did not accept resposibility for her own actions, only her actions causes pain for real rape victems and the boy she accused.
  • BelinKS
    !
    @woodtick57
    Did you read the article? He changed his stance. Did you read even the first sentence of my reply? Much less the whole? Obviously not or you would get it.
  • CommonSense
    !
    If he's right he's right, if he's wrong he's wrong.
    Clearly women can get pregnant if they are raped, but if there's any truth that there is some kind of reduced chance then he didn't misspeak.
    It might not be good for getting elected, might not make his party look better, but saying that therefore he shouldn't say it even if it's true makes a virtue out of lying for the sake of gains in power.
    And our entire political system makes a virtue out of lying. So can you blame either of these men if in fact they are just making things up and there is no research suggesting the female body has mechanisms to reduce the chance of pregnancy during rape? They're just doing what is expected of them as politicians.
  • PayThatCEO
    !
    I absolutely agree. I'm not sure when the lying in our government began. I'm sure it's been many, many decades. But, for sure, it doesn't seem to be coming to an end. At least before now, they tried to cover up their lies. Now they just stand behind them no matter how ridiculous they sound.
  • Denizen_Kate
    !
    "... but if there's any truth that there is some kind of reduced chance then he didn't misspeak." There is no truth in anything either of these men have said. You're either ovulating or you're not. If you are ovulating, you can become pregnant regardless of whether it is through consentual sex or rape. If he learned otherwise in medical school, then he didn't attend medical school in this country within the last 120 years or so.
  • CommonSense
    !
    @Denizen_Kate
    That's what I thought too, but for all I know there's some research out there I haven't bumped into that there's some sort of mechanism to interrupt such as hormone releases that would create a more toxic environment for the sperm. I highly doubt it, but all I'm saying is the article is written in a way that suggests that even if they were right they should've kept their mouths shut, and that devalues truth.
  • Vance1
    !
    yea it certainly would get rid of alot of liberal democrats
    one of the questions could be
    "What is the difference between a Clip and a magazine"
    and another could be
    "Is an AR 15 a fully automatic machine gun"
    and another could be
    "Why did Hitler dis arm the public"
  • PayThatCEO
    !
    @Vance1

    Understanding rape, which is a crime of violence against not just women, but also children,, is far more important than knowing gun terminology.
  • Vance1
    !
    @PayThatCEO
    Yea thats what they think
    HiItler handed out Lugers and Mausers to all the Jews, along with 6,000 rounds of ammo each and instructed them to shoot back at the SS and Gestapo that were rounding them all up.

    Don't you just love the liberal re-write of history?

  • Load more replies >

  • R Load more comments...