Tweet
Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin are not alone. At least 15 U.S. Senate candidates think the state should have control over a woman’s private health concerns with her doctor about her body, family planning and the right to determine whether she must bear her rapist’s baby. Amanda Terkel outlines some of the bed buddies of Mourdock and Akin — and sadly, that list includes women.
The political action committee Republican National Coalition for Life submits questionnaires to GOP candidates about their positions on choice issues and then endorses candidates who advocate a strict anti-abortion platform. Selected candidates must be “unconditionally pro-life” and “recognize the inherent right to life of every innocent human being, from conception until natural death, without discrimination.”
So far, the group has endorsed 10 such Republican Senate candidates: Akin and Mourdock, as well as George Allen (Va.), Rep. Rick Berg (N.D.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Sen. Dean Heller (Nev.), Rep. Pete Hoekstra (Mich.), Josh Mandel (R-Ohio) and Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.).
As Slate’s William Saletan notes, there are also five other Senate candidates who hold this position: Michael Baumgartner (Wash.), Wendy Long (N.Y.), John MacGovern(Vt.), John Raese (W.Va.) and Tom Smith (Pa.).
Terkel also notes that some of these candidates tried to distance themselves by the verbal “miscues”/political damage self-inflicted by Akin and Mourdock, but essentially it meant nothing — they hold the same womb-controlling positions.
These GOP pols calling for an apology by Mourdock or Akin, etc. when they “misspeak” about rape and access to abortion or contraception miss the point. Why should these men apologize for saying what they really believe? It informs us about how they would vote on the reproductive freedom of women and their inability to separate church and state. No amount of bleating about being “misunderstood” changes any of that. And they aren’t even listening to their rank and file.
According to a CNN/ORC poll taken in August, the belief that victims of rape and incest should not be allowed to get an abortion is not held by mainstream Republicans.
Seventy-six percent of Republicans believe that abortion should be legal in cases of rape and incest, along with 90 percent of Democrats and 81 percent of independents.
17 Comments
Frank Luntz is focus-group testing replacing “rapists” with “God’s gift givers.”
Heather Wilson, running for the US Senate from NM, is slightly below the radar, but she is a reliable anti-choice vote, maybe not quite at “rape is God’s gift to women.” I was going to point out that she is a woman, after all, despite the number of people who refer to her as “a nasty little man.”
Why is it any skin off Mourdock’s nose if there’s a few less snot-nosed kids running around in the streets.
Anti-abortion right-wingers have an irrational fear that legal abortion is a slippery slope towards coerced euthanasia. That is why the “death panels” meme gained such traction.
“Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin are not alone. At least 15 U.S. Senate candidates think the state should have control over a woman’s private health concerns with her doctor about her body, family planning and the right to determine whether she must bear her rapist’s baby.”
This is because these politicians are after the same thing any rapist is after: sexual control over women.
It isn’t the candidate only “thinking,” it’s the candidate saying what he thinks it takes to get elected in a christian country.
Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
if the rape victim must give birth ,would the rapist have the right to help raise his child?
Wow!! That’s 15 out of 33 GOP senate candidates that oppose allowing abortion for rape victims even though in some circumstances the rapist could win custody of the child and 18-years of support payments from the victim.
Heather Wilson is a nasty little something, man or not. She’s a special piece of work. I’ve seen enough of her back when she was in the House to know that.
This is because these politicians are after the same thing any rapist is after: sexual control over women.
Ding.
I’m praying that God intends for these crackpots to lose and lose big in their elections…
I’ve also noticed that my chosen form of BC used to be readily available over the counter. I cannot find it in drugstores anywhere any more (hint: it’s not a prescription and it’s not for guys). We have to order it on line. Why is that? Hmmmm.
Such a questionnaire is just as intimidating as Norquist’s no-tax pledge. A candidate or office-holder signs or else. A non-response amounts to a condemnation. Should Democrats request a similar public pledge for a pro-choice position? If not, why not? If so, is there a perceived boost among female voters? Are Democrats afraid to make their position public? Is a public statement as strong as a signature eventually made public ? Norquist thinks so, and such a signature does leave a visible, traceable trail. Democrats seem to be good at mildly protesting and then running away. We don’t need more democrats, we need better ones.
these pledges are kind of interesting…don’t they inhibit a discussion and deliberation of the issues after elections? OTOH it’s a way to get a candidate to stick to campaign promises….
Maybe the rape pregnancy adovcates are cleverly moving the dialogue toward a place where support for choice, and access to abortions, is restricted to rape pregancies.
Correct, which is why the “pro-life” agenda is virulent and perverse, aimed at nothing less than domination and subordination–with unfettered sexual access.
Relax. Rombo says that he knows of no legislation now that he supports that would cause a Rombo administration from denying women the right to control their own body. Of course, the crazies in the House can helter-skelter gin up some legislation pronto LATER.