Kirsten Powers Bio Blog Index RSS 03.08.2006 South Dakota Republican Sicko on What Constitutes Rape (13 comments ) READ MORE: Corporation for Public Broadcasting, 2006, New York Times As Huffington Post readers know, South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds on Monday signed legislation banning almost all abortions in South Dakota. So what does "almost all abortions" mean? The ban allows an exception for the life of the mother (how generous!) and Sen. Bill Napoli (R-Rapid City) has explained that rape and incest could be exceptions under the "life" clause. Prepare to be disgusted by what follows. Napoli explained what kind of rape would justify an abortion. From the transcript of an interview on NewsHour with Jim Lehrer: "A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life." So, what about a non-religious woman who was raped? Or a non-virgin? And more importantly, who is this sicko? And really, what does it matter if you believe that abortion is murder â as anti-choice people do -- whether the woman was raped or molested? Is Napoli saying that it's ok to "murder" a "baby" if the father is a rapist? What did that "baby" do to deserve to be "murdered"? Democrats and the media too often accept Republicans who try to seem reasonable (I'm not including Napoli here) by saying that they don't like abortion but would make an exception in the case of rape or incest. By saying that, they are de facto admitting that abortion is not murder OR they are saying that they condone murder in certain cases where women become pregnant. There is no other way to interpret it. The only consistent position is the one that most Democrats hold: abortion is not murder; a cluster of cells is not a baby. From there you can set limits that are consistent as the embryo develops into a fetus and then a baby. So, abortion may be palatable to you in the first two months, but not the third or later. You may oppose abortion all together, but support the morning after pill that merely prevents the egg from implanting. Or you may think that until the fetus is viable it is not a life and therefore any abortion is not murder. But to say as conservatives do that abortion is indisputably murder from the moment of conception, and then make an exception for certain cases is blatant hypocrisy and we should call them on it every time. They should not be allowed to take this "nuanced" position to attempt to seem reasonable to voters. They either believe its murder or they don't. I'd like to know where each of them stands. www.kpblog.com
Napoli is out of it. All rape and incest cases should be legal. It's not the girls fault at all. As far as abortion as a tool for "birth control", it truly is murder in my opinion. Still can't grasp the thinking of keeping convicted murderers alive but killing the innocent unborn. However, I would personally keep it legal. Crime rates are reduced when there's a lot less unwanted people running around.
Well, in a society that has tossed out all standards, yes, the distinction does seem bizarre. And that's why I applaud this senator Napoli. Not so much for apparently unprincipled exception he makes - I'd need to look into it more, but for the moment it appears unprincipled - but for having the guts to speak up for virtue. I remember hearing as a kid, this must have been some 20 years ago, of some Australian politician that had remarked raping a nun was a worse offense than raping a prostitute. Naturally the media jumped down his throat and I think he ended up withdrawing his remarks. It seemed obvious to me then that he was right and I couldn't really understand the reaction. Of course, I didn't have a context to place it all in. It's all very clear now, though.
No, no, no. Not at all. Abortion has led to a massive increase in illegitimacy among the underclass. Theoretically, that has the effect of increasing crime - and that is precisely what the statistics bear out.
Im not grasping this comment. Could you elaborate? How can less unwanted humans running around decrease crime? Most abortions are ridding the world of the future criminals, no?
Because the availability of abortion absolves the couple of the responsibility of not getting pregnant. (Much the way contraception absolved the male of the responsibility of not knocking up his girlfriend.) People think, oh well, if I get pregnant, I'll just get an abortion, no problem. That's fine in theory. But we're talking about the underclass here. These aren't exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer, if you know what I mean. When they do get pregnant, the emotions take over, and the girl decides "I'm keeping it!" (And why not? Since she knows the state's going to take care of her.)
Another fucking moron. Does anyone know what the fuck this moron is trying to say? If you are suggesting the poor under class are the ones having sex and propagating their genes. Would not abortion be a good thing? There would be less of these genetic regressives who grow up to be criminals. Do you even know what the fuck you are trying to say? Quote from spect8or: Because the availability of abortion absolves the couple of the responsibility of not getting pregnant. (Much the way contraception absolved the male of the responsibility of not knocking up his girlfriend.) People think, oh well, if I get pregnant, I'll just get an abortion, no problem. That's fine in theory. But we're talking about the underclass here. These aren't exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer, if you know what I mean. When they do get pregnant, the emotions take over, and the girl decides "I'm keeping it!" (And why not? Since she knows the state's going to take care of her.)
So lets do this one more time. Abortion is murder. This is the definition of the religious regressives. But Then they make an exception for some types of murder? Are you religious nuts saying some form of murder is allowable and other types are not? Do you want to know why everything is so fucked up? It is because Jethro Regressive from Alabama is applying this twisted logic to all facets of government.