The quote is out of context in anything other than an abortion debate.
The quote is out of context in anything other than an abortion debate.
No its not.Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Its entirely in context on debates about moronic attitudes.
Its entirely in context on debates about misogynistic attitudes.
Its entirely in context on debates about scientific attitudes.
Only if its provided with context, otherwise the point is to deliberately misinterpret and mislead.
Ridiculous. It was presented as a piece of evidence about the educational and intellectual quality of those the Republican party elects (and puts on national science committees to boot). It does not misinterpret or mislead in any fashion at all as such a piece of evidence, whether presented "in context" (context of what, the world wonders) or not. There is no biological defense against conception (or carrying to term) from a sexual assault. It was either a deliberate lie, an invented post-hoc rationalization to defend a position he already wanted to take, or inexcusable ignorance and it is equally damning regardless.
And now you're doing the same thing Akin did, inventing things. He didn't say the above, no. Nor was there any allegation here that he did. The focus here is on his claim (which he most certainly did intend to state) that the human body "shuts down conception from rape" (which it manifestly does not and which he damn well should have known and probably did know and chose to ignore) along with some side-attention to the idea that some or a lot of rape isn't real rape and its attendant implication that women so victimized did in fact "want it" and weren't "legitimately raped" if they got pregnant despite the supposed "defense" against conception from rape.I'm clarifying that there was no intent to state that the human body "shuts down rape"
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote