Mourdock says pregnancy from rape is "something that God intended to happen"

[Willie]

I'd have thought that, even if their ideas haven't gotten any smarter, these far right candidates might at least have learned which ones to not advertise during a campaign after that "legitimate rape" flap. But here's Indiana GOP Senate candidate Richard Mourdock proving otherwise.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/23/mourdock-god-intended-for-babies-to-result-from-rape/

[JeffPT]

If God exists, his logic is spot on.  Everything that happens is because God wants it to happen, otherwise He'd stop it.  The same is true of cancer, AIDS, alzheimers disease, violent car accidents, floods, tsunami's, people who lose arms and legs, people who are burned alive, people who are stoned to death, starve to death, bleed to death, choke to death, have their heads cut off by people who worship other gods, flesh eating bacteria, the ebola virus, and Here comes Honey Boo Boo. 

BTW, God also wanted Obama to win 4 years ago, and if he wins again, God wanted him to win again.     

[Nam]

Biblegod raped Mary, and the mother of John the Baptist, so, I think Mourdock is right on the money. Good for him. Bad for him for backtracking.

I respect a person more for not whitewashing their beliefs rather than the one who does. I may not agree with it but still...shows honesty and integrity.

-Nam

[JeffPT]

I also like honesty and integrity.  I feel better prepared to vote when I know what a real ass hole someone is on the inside. 

[Nam]

And, there's that.

-Nam

[Nick]

Isn't it strange that you can say any crazy shit thing you want now and it has no bearing on your ability to get elected...unless you don't use the word "terror" correctly.

[Nam]

Tairor

-Nam

[Graybeard]

Republican Senate hopeful Richard Mourdock in rape row:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20054737

A Republican US Senate candidate has come under fire for suggesting that pregnancies caused by rape were "something God intended to happen".

Richard Mourdock, standing in a key race in Indiana, made the remarks in a debate with his Democrat opponent.

His comments come two months after those of Missouri Republican Todd Akin, who said women's bodies had ways of preventing pregnancy after rape.

Mr Mourdock was asked during a debate with Democratic challenger Joe Donnelly whether he believed abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest.

"I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realise that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen," he said.

[Nick]

The way things are in this country today this guy could shit on the stage, toss it at his oppenent, murder the guys dog, ask for forgiveness for who knows what, and praise Jesus and still get the majority of the votes.

[stuffin]

Woke up to that news this morning. There is no tool, device, or words which can accurately portray the stupidity and ignorance of that belief.

[stuffin]

The way things are in this country today this guy could shit on the stage, toss it at his opponent, murder the guys dog, ask for forgiveness for who knows what, and praise Jesus and still get the majority of the votes.

You forgot, do his opponent's wife.

[One Above All]

BM

[ParkingPlaces]

So we need to ask this. If a woman gets pregnant via rape, and then dies because she can't get an abortion because such abortions are outlawed, does the rapist get charged with murder or does he get a frickin' medal for doing gods will?

[Nam]

Nope.

-Nam

[madeline]

Nam, Could you humor me and explain how you feel Mourdock is "right on the money?"

[Jag]

madeline, read the first part of the sentence - biblegod raped Mary and the mother of John the Baptist.

According to a LOT of nasty crap in the bible, this guy is right. Just one of the many, many reasons to think biblegod is kind of a prick. Take a look on YouTube for "Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage" and Nam's comment will make more sense to you.



edited to include link

[madeline]

I appreciate your clarification altho I Don't see the "biblegod rape" as a true rape as we know it today..Mourdock would never view Mary's conception as rape to him it was immaculate conception.

[Nam]

Nam, Could you humor me and explain how you feel Mourdock is "right on the money?"

What I wrote before that is what that conclusion refers to. It's not that hard to understand. Biblegod impregnated john the Baptist's mother, and Mary without their say in the matter, which means, in a way, he raped them.

Not so difficult to comprehend.

-Nam

[madeline]

Nam..Key words being "in a way". My reading comprehension is pretty good.  "Biblegod" impregnated Mary from what I understand (the story) without a struggle, without violence, without begs for mercy, without fear of death if she did not submit. Did I miss this struggle some where in the story?

[Graybeard]

Nam..Key words being "in a way". My reading comprehension is pretty good.  "Biblegod" impregnated Mary from what I understand (the story) without a struggle, without violence, without begs for mercy, without fear of death if she did not submit. Did I miss this struggle some where in the story?

You seem to think that rape must involve violence - it need not.

[Nam]

madeline,

A girl/woman can be raped without a struggle, by force,  without any hint of violence. If you don't know that by just being a woman, well...hell, many rapes today are without those things. A father raping his daughter can be without those things. A college guy raping a college girl can be without those things (usually with drugs).

One can be raped without the physical aspect, at all. But with Mary, and John the Baptist's mother, there is a physical representation there. Something entering in their womb that they gave no permission for it to happen, is rape.

The 3rd definition of Rape in my American Heritage dictionary is: Abusive or improper treatment; a violation.

According to the Bible Biblegod (by definition) raped Mary and John the Baptists's mother. Period.

There was no consent on the part of Mary or John the Baptist's mother.

-Nam

[madeline]

Indeed Nam..but you and I both know that the story of Mary and John the Baptist's mother is made up story..unless you are saying it is true?! Please don't assume you know what rape means..unless you have been on the receiving end you know not of what you speak.

[madeline]

As to your 3rd definition of rape in your dictionary "abusive or improper treatment; a violation, me thinks its time to get a new dictionary.

[madeline]

Greybeard, I do understand that rape does not always include violence..as Nam stated from personal experience it could be a father or someone whom has access to drugs rendering a woman (child) helpless. It seems ironic to me that y'all (how am I doing on my southern accent?) will set the bar with a story you know is bull shit as to what rape is.

[Nam]

Indeed Nam..but you and I both know that the story of Mary and John the Baptist's mother is made up story..unless you are saying it is true?! Please don't assume you know what rape means..unless you have been on the receiving end you know not of what you speak.

Backpeddle much? You're like Mourdock, in such regard. It doesn't matter what I think. It matters, according to you, what the Christian thinks. Reply #16 [paraphrased] "...that's not what Mourdock would think, he's a Christian.".

And your dictionary remark: are you one of those idiots who think words only have one definition? Or, could be used in only one way or mean only one thing? 'Cause that's what you're sounding like. It would be nice if it were true but it isn't.

Look it up in other dictionaries, they'll have similar (or the same) definition.

You can't be this stupid. Look at Graybeard's comment;he says the same thing I do.

-Nam

[madeline]

You know what Nam..Fuck you..I didn't back peddle at all..What I said was Mourdock didn't view Mary's impregnation as rape. You do however, even tho you know its a bullshit story. Irony at its finest. Call me what you want but you are the one who calls rape on a story you don't even believe. <shrug>

[Nam]

You know what Nam..Fuck you..

What profanity.

I didn't back peddle at all..

You did.

What I said was Mourdock didn't view Mary's impregnation as rape.

Because he's a Christian, and Biblegod wanted it to happen. Which this entire conversation is the point-of-view of. Whether I believe in the story, or not, is irrelevant. They do. Therefore Mourdock would justify Mary and John the Baptist's mother being raped by Biblegod because Biblegod wanted it to happen.

Get it yet?

You do however, even tho you know its a bullshit story.

Yes, I do. In context of the story. How you're not getting this is beyond me. And, even if it wasn't in context of the story, you seem to agree too by way of your comment to Graybeard.

Irony at its finest.

Irony? Do I need to look up another word for you?

Call me what you want but you are the one who calls rape on a story you don't even believe. <shrug>

Again: irrelevant.

-Nam

[madeline]

You know what Nam, I didn't back peddle..you said I did but you are full of shit..you keep your blinders on..it seems to serve you well..nothing you just posted eradicated what I said..in fact it made you look like the uneducated asshole you are.

[madeline]

I digress..my apologizes...I think Nam your are educated, I think, however, you have no real interpersonal skills..maybe try getting laid..might help with your aggression.