Another day, another Republican rape apologist. This time it's Senate candidate Richard Mourdock of Indiana who considers himself so "pro-life" that pregnancies resulting from rape are "something that God intended to happen." Democrats quickly attacked the remarks from the Tea Party-backed candidate, labeling him a "zealot."
Truly, it's astounding that in this day and age, anyone could say that in any way, shape, or form. And hey, if this is what he says in public, just imagine what he says in private. Actually, scratch that. I am not sure I want to know.
What I do know is that Romney is distancing himself from these comments, but the reality is legislating a woman's body is legislating a woman's body. The details of that and how far a man is willing to take it are really just splitting hairs.
Romney had backed Mourdock and hasn't yet withdrawn his support. Mourdock, for his part, has "apologized," claiming he only meant "God creates life" and that the idea that he believes "God preordained rape" is "sick and twisted."
Okay, dude. But YOU said it. You said it was God's plan. So you know, it's not like we are making stuff up.
Regardless of what he meant, Mourdock made it clear that women's bodies serve only as vessels for the man's seed. It doesn't matter how the clump of cells got there. If it's there, then God meant for that woman to be forced into sexual intercourse against her will and she should now be forced to carry the child of the man who did this for at least nine months.
God sounds like kind of a jerk if that is really His "plan," no?
Many politicians claim to support abortion "only" in the case of rape because this scenario is so repugnant to them. But it's all the same. Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will is just as bad no matter how the pregnancy got there. Obviously rape is worse and a woman should have the abortion she needs. But ALL women should have the right to make decisions about their OWN bodies.
A man like Mourdock is dangerously blind and stupid. Women aren't children who need to be guided around by the hand in order to make wise decisions. We are grownups just like him and we should not (and cannot) elect backwards people who want to tell us how to handle our own bodies.
It's infuriating, wrong, and sick. A vote for a Republican this year inadvertently supports this.
Do these comments anger you?
Image via Incandescere's Gallery/Flickr
Ashley Is a Widow Who Stays Strong...
This Hot Dad Wants to Vacuum Your Rug
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
Comments 34
I took his comment to mean what he later clarified it as meaning. God has a purpose for that little life now growing because of a terrible event.
And it is interesting to me that women who are raped are much more likely to keep the baby then a woman who has an unexpected pregnancy! (Just discovered that statistic the other day!) Maybe the women who are raped are more likely to see the baby as a blessing after having experienced something so awful. I don't know.
Men need to STFU about what happens to a woman's body, unless he is her doctor.
Well, Sasha, you said mean instead of meant so which is it? Is it mean or is it meant? ("Regardless of what he mean, Mourdock made it clear that women's bodies serve only as vessels for the man's seed.") I mean YOU said it after all, and according to your principles it's too late to clarify it now. And can I just add? What an absolutely stupid statement for you to make. He clearly said no such thing. You are in fact making this up. Here's the entire statement since Sasha couldn't be bothered to provide it in her article. "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God," Mourdock said. "And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." it's pretty clear from the entire statement that he really did mean what he explained in his later clarification. I DESPISE the way liberal stir bloggers intentionally misinform their readers. It's disgusting.
Absolutely, it angers me. It's disgusting. This kind of thinking seems to be the norm now for these conservative asshats. That's good though. People can see them for what they are.
And bullshit he "didn't mean it that way". I see no twisting of words. He realized he said something that could hurt his chances and now he's backtracking. You can believe whatever you want personally but you don't get to legislate your religious beliefs. If they have no intention of bringing their religious beliefs into law, as billsfan says, then they would say so. The second you bring up religion as a reason for a law (abortion, gay marriage, etc)...your argument is invalid. "God wills it"? Funny...that's the same thing terrorists say to justify their acts.