More GOP rape nonsense, this time Rep Trent Franks

[Smash255]

They just can't help themselves......

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/12/rep-franks-tries-to-clear-up-rape-comment/?hpt=po_c2

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Sigh.  I do wish those who are anti-abortion would stick by their guns and have no exceptions for rape or incest.  Granted, it might cause the overall standard adopted to be more permissive, but that doesn't bother me.  I'm not certain of where to draw the line between a non-human and a human in terms of how developed the embryo/fetus is, but I am certain of one thing.  The crimes of the biological father, no matter how horrible they were, do not affect whether what is inside the womb is a human life deserving of protection.

[Mr. Morden]

The statement's kind of ambiguous.  "The incidents of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."  Does that just mean that the pregnancy rate is low in the same way that the pregnancy rate from any single act of unprotected sex is low?  He doesn't seem to be suggesting that there's some magical anti-pregnancy magic going on with rape in the way that Akin suggested, as I'm reading it.

[DC Al Fine]

The statement's kind of ambiguous.  "The incidents of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."  Does that just mean that the pregnancy rate is low in the same way that the pregnancy rate from any single act of unprotected sex is low?  He doesn't seem to be suggesting that there's some magical anti-pregnancy magic going on with rape in the way that Akin suggested, as I'm reading it.

Given the context of the quote, it seems like he was talking about rape being a relatively small share of the causes of pregnancies/abortions. His point was more about calling out/avoiding red herrings

[Indy Texas]

He's making the generous assumption that all rapes are "reported" and that that is done within 48 hours. My guess is the lion's share of House Republicans have no ability whatsoever to relate to victims of sexual assault. The closest most of them have gotten to it was probably making the mistake of using the Senate restroom when Larry Craig was still in office (or maybe getting "tickled" by Eric Massa).

[Link]

The crimes of the biological father, no matter how horrible they were, do not affect whether what is inside the womb woman is a human life deserving of protection.

Corrected that for you.  It is not growing inside a disembodied muscular sack.  It is growing inside a traumatized human being who people are demanding to endure a life time of anguish... or at least until some of them commit suicide... either or.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The crimes of the biological father, no matter how horrible they were, do not affect whether what is inside the womb woman is a human life deserving of protection.

Corrected that for you.  It is not growing inside a disembodied muscular sack.  It is growing inside a traumatized human being who people are demanding to endure a life time of anguish... or at least until some of them commit suicide... either or.

Fine.  Woman then.   Tell me, once what is inside the woman has reached whatever stage society has decided is a human life, why is the woman's life so inherently more valuable to that of the human life inside her, that we end one human life because it will improve hers to some degree? (The improvement is certain, but the degree is unknowable.) That life has committed no crime.  Sometimes there are no good solutions, Link.  This is one of them.

Of course the lack of good solutions here is at its most extreme when coupled with a total ban on abortions, which is not a position I advocate.  While I'm not certain where to place it, conception is not within the range I'd consider placing that dividing line.

[Brittain33]

Given the context of the quote, it seems like he was talking about rape being a relatively small share of the causes of pregnancies/abortions. His point was more about calling out/avoiding red herrings

How does the quote about needing to report within 48 hours fit in with that?

[DC Al Fine]

Given the context of the quote, it seems like he was talking about rape being a relatively small share of the causes of pregnancies/abortions. His point was more about calling out/avoiding red herrings

How does the quote about needing to report within 48 hours fit in with that?

Look at the broader context of the quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's arguing more like "how many rape cases actually make it past 6 months gestation?"

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The GOP just needs to banish the word rape from their vocabulary.  Ugh.

[politicus]

The crimes of the biological father, no matter how horrible they were, do not affect whether what is inside the womb woman is a human life deserving of protection.

Corrected that for you.  It is not growing inside a disembodied muscular sack.  It is growing inside a traumatized human being who people are demanding to endure a life time of anguish... or at least until some of them commit suicide... either or.

Fine.  Woman then.   Tell me, once what is inside the woman has reached whatever stage society has decided is a human life, why is the woman's life so inherently more valuable to that of the human life inside her, that we end one human life because it will improve hers to some degree? (The improvement is certain, but the degree is unknowable.) That life has committed no crime.  Sometimes there are no good solutions, Link.  This is one of them.

Of course the lack of good solutions here is at its most extreme when coupled with a total ban on abortions, which is not a position I advocate.  While I'm not certain where to place it, conception is not within the range I'd consider placing that dividing line.

Forcing a woman to carry a child conceived by rape is a cruel and unjust punishment of an innocent person (and her family) unworthy of any civilized society.

Its perfectly rational to say that the individual that's already fully developed (incl. mentally) and has contributed to society (incl. established emotional relations to others) is more valuable than the unborn child and that doesn't mean you have to be in favour of abortion in other situations, which doesn't regard the life and health (incl. mental health) of the mother.

The life of the unborn child is extremely valuable, but the life and sanity of the mother is more valuable, is a position thats perfectly logical.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The crimes of the biological father, no matter how horrible they were, do not affect whether what is inside the womb woman is a human life deserving of protection.

Corrected that for you.  It is not growing inside a disembodied muscular sack.  It is growing inside a traumatized human being who people are demanding to endure a life time of anguish... or at least until some of them commit suicide... either or.

Fine.  Woman then.   Tell me, once what is inside the woman has reached whatever stage society has decided is a human life, why is the woman's life so inherently more valuable to that of the human life inside her, that we end one human life because it will improve hers to some degree? (The improvement is certain, but the degree is unknowable.) That life has committed no crime.  Sometimes there are no good solutions, Link.  This is one of them.

Of course the lack of good solutions here is at its most extreme when coupled with a total ban on abortions, which is not a position I advocate.  While I'm not certain where to place it, conception is not within the range I'd consider placing that dividing line.

Forcing a woman to carry a child conceived by rape is a cruel and unjust punishment of an innocent person (and her family) unworthy of any civilized society.

Its perfectly rational to say that the individual that's already fully developed (incl. mentally) and has contributed to society (incl. established emotional relations to others) is more valuable than the unborn child and that doesn't mean you have to be in favour of abortion in other situations, which doesn't regard the life and health (incl. mental health) of the mother.

The life of the unborn child is extremely valuable, but the life and sanity of the mother is more valuable, is a position thats perfectly logical.

Well said.

[Keystone Phil]

Given the context of the quote, it seems like he was talking about rape being a relatively small share of the causes of pregnancies/abortions. His point was more about calling out/avoiding red herrings

How does the quote about needing to report within 48 hours fit in with that?

Look at the broader context of the quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's arguing more like "how many rape cases actually make it past 6 months gestation?"

Yeah but that's you being fair and reasonable, DC. Quite frankly, once Franks opened his mouth, the other side was going to pounce because it fits the "War on Women" narrative. They've taken disingenuousness to new heights. Notice how is comment about laws needing to be tougher on rapists is almost completely ignored.

This sums up everything that is wrong with political discourse these days. Akin's comment has been used as justification to demand that any Pro Life male shut up about rape and abortion or else have their quotes twisted beyond belief. And this is coming from someone who opposes abortion but favors exceptions, by the way.

[Brittain33]

Phil, at some point you're going to have to recognize that talking about part of an argument and not a different one is not necessarily "ignoring" it.

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, at some point you're going to have to recognize that talking about part of an argument and not a different one is not necessarily "ignoring" it.

Ah, right. So when Congressman Franks is called "anti woman" and "insensitive towards rape victims," I assume his point about wanting tougher punishments for rapists will receive more attention.

[TNF]

What do you expect from the party of old, rich white guys?

[Brittain33]

Phil, at some point you're going to have to recognize that talking about part of an argument and not a different one is not necessarily "ignoring" it.

Ah, right. So when Congressman Franks is called "anti woman" and "insensitive towards rape victims," I assume his point about wanting tougher punishments for rapists will receive more attention.

On the substance - it's perfectly possible to be in favor of tougher sentences on rapists and still be insensitive to rape victims. It's not hard to envision that. Just because he has a hammer, it doesn't mean what he's hitting is a nail. If a rape victim feels she has a right to an abortion (let's not get into the substance - grant the point) then knowing her rapist might get 10 years in jail instead of 8 if he's caught and convicted is simply not addressing her specific need. Also, recognizing a political issue and engaging with it politically (because most Republicans have figured out by now, rape is a complex and fraught issue) doesn't mean you actually care, and it shows if your policy response is cynical and non-responsive.

Second, if you think someone is genuinely missing a contradiction instead of not engaging with something they think is irrelevant or not connected to what they're saying, why make the assumption they haven't seen it or are ignoring it? Maybe (in fact usually) there's an interpretation there you're missing which is why they aren't talking about it. But you don't know until you ask directly.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Forcing a woman to carry a child conceived by rape is a cruel and unjust punishment of an innocent person (and her family) unworthy of any civilized society.

Yes it is unjust, but not as unjust as killing an innocent child.  Also, except in the case of a society that prohibits abortion altogether, it isn't something that is being forced except in the rare situations such as a woman abducted by her rapist and then rescued after the point where abortion would not be normally an option but before giving birth.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

By that logic, we should simply send orphans without "established emotional relations to others" into the organ banks where they could save the lives of others who have already "contributed to society".  I simply do not see the logic in valuing one human life over another.  Particularly when on one side of the scale you have certain death and on the other is only possible suicide and some additional mental anguish. I see the perfectly logical position as preventing the certain death.

At most, I could see allowing abortion in the case of rape in a society where abortion was otherwise completely prohibited, and even then only if performed as soon as it determined there was something to be aborted.  I wouldn't like it, but since I also wouldn't like an absolute prohibition on abortion either, it wouldn't offend my personal sensibilities. That said, in any society that permits abortion at any point during a pregnancy, then there absolutely should be no exception for rape.

[Ogre Mage]

Once again it looks like House Republicans did not get the memo.

Rep. Franks bill which bans abortions after 20 weeks and his insensitive comments are a kind of companion to the recent House vote to defund the President's DREAM Act-like executive order (a measure sponsored by the racist Steve King).  The GOP tries to pretend it is friendly to women, minorities and immigrants, but the party's actual track record reveals this front for what it is.

Unfortunately, House Republicans probably won't face serious consequences.  But their Senate and Presidential candidate counterparts (who must appeal to a broader electorate) have not been so lucky in the past.  I don't think they'll be lucky in the future either.

[Beet]

The Democrats are quick to pounce on these Republican comments (in this case, I can't really understand Franks' comment, or what he's trying to say with the 48 hours remark) to support their accusation of a Republican war on women, but Carl Levin has tabled a bill to deal with the 26,000 annual sexual assaults in the military, which, ironically, has several Republican cosponsors. That's a real war on women and I don't see many Democrats on the Armed Services committee supporting their fellow Democratic woman Kirsten Gillibrand on the issue, or caring about it generally. I called my Senator Tim Kaine who sits on the Armed Services committee and I could tell the staffer who answered the call agreed with me, but Kaine wants to defer to the military bureaucracy. If you care about stopping rape, I think policy counts more than insensitive comments from individuals because this needs to be dealt with on a systemic level. The fact is there is bipartisan agreement on Gillibrand's bill but also bipartisan opposition. Democrats are verging on hypocrisy here. Womens' rights is about more than just abortion, and I dislike how abortion dominates the discussion.

[7,052,770]

demand that any Pro Life male shut up about rape and abortion

Yes. 100%.  No politician should ever even consider disallowing abortion in the case of rape. Ever.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

demand that any Pro Life male shut up about rape and abortion

Yes. 100%.  No politician should ever even consider disallowing abortion in the case of rape. Ever.

Because killing people for the crimes of their fathers is A-okay!

As I've stated before, I support allowing abortions, but being a product of rape instead of love does not change whether what is to be killed is human. So once the point is reached where it is generally no longer acceptable to abort because that would mean killing a human life, the circumstances of conception, no matter how horrible or tragic, do not justify killing the human inside the woman.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This kind of stuff is who Republicans are. 3 Republican Senate nominees last year is no fluke.

[DC Al Fine]

This kind of stuff is who Republicans are. 3 Republican Senate nominees last year is no fluke.

Hack

[Brittain33]

As surely as night follows day, Trent Franks is now cashing in on his comment.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/gop-congressman-fundraising-after-rape-comment