Paul Ryan: Rape Is Just Another 'Method Of Conception'

[Greenbeard]

How do Akin and Ryan have the same position when Akin said Rape rarely causes conception and Ryan is saying that it does?

Neither of the "forcible rape" duo would allow a woman impregnated by rape to end her pregnancy.

Believe it or not, Akin actually comes out ahead on this score. He apparently holds this position because he views this scenario as a biological impossibility (how could God's will be otherwise?), making his position merely idiotic and not consciously monstrous. Ryan's reasoning, on the other hand, is "tough shit."

So you admit your side is lying in this?

Good to know.

Lying about what? The various pieces of Ryan-Akin legislation are publicly available. There's no daylight between their legislative/policy prescriptions, they just have different ways of justifying their idiocy.

 

[Charles_Main]

Paul Ryan: Rape Is Just Another 'Method Of Conception' - YouTube

I think he should be forced to have a sex change operation and see what he thinks then!

"The method of conception doesn't change the definition of life." Huh?!!....what about it changing the life of the woman? What if the woman doesn't want a child conceived in rape or she medically shouldn't have children?


And he passes the buck saying "Remember the president makes policy, however."

But what's to say that YOU, Paul Ryan won't affect Romney's policy? After all, he is wishy washy and often goes where his advisers or his political party leads him. He did that in MA. Couldn't get anything done so he caved to the dems.

So are you claiming then it isn't?

lol

 

[Dot Com]

how is Akin dropping out a plus "for the sake of the conservative movement" when his views match Ryan's I know a BS'er when I hear one

How do Akin and Ryan have the same position when Akin said Rape rarely causes conception and Ryan is saying that it does?

Or did you manage to miss that giant viewpoint difference in this thread?

ever heard of the "personhood amendment" co-sponsored by those two?
Akin, Ryan, rape and Republican hypocrisy » peoplesworld

Ryan co-sponsored with Akin a national version of that personhood amendment in the U.S. Congress.
The Romney-Ryan ticket is distancing itself from Rep. Akin, not because they disagree with his ignorant views about rape victims not having the right to abortions, but because they fear Akin will expose what they and their party are all about.

 

[Avatar4321]

Lying about what? The various pieces of Ryan-Akin legislation are publicly available. There's no daylight between their legislative/policy prescriptions, they just have different ways of justifying their idiocy.

That Akin and Ryan have the same position when it comes to rape and conception. Please try to keep up with the conversation instead of ignoring it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Paul Ryan: Rape Is Just Another 'Method Of Conception' - YouTube

I think he should be forced to have a sex change operation and see what he thinks then!

"The method of conception doesn't change the definition of life." Huh?!!....what about it changing the life of the woman? What if the woman doesn't want a child conceived in rape or she medically shouldn't have children?


And he passes the buck saying "Remember the president makes policy, however."

But what's to say that YOU, Paul Ryan won't affect Romney's policy? After all, he is wishy washy and often goes where his advisers or his political party leads him. He did that in MA. Couldn't get anything done so he caved to the dems.

So are you claiming then it isn't?

lol

Isnt that exactly what they got upset with Akin over?

 

[Greenbeard]

Lying about what? The various pieces of Ryan-Akin legislation are publicly available. There's no daylight between their legislative/policy prescriptions, they just have different ways of justifying their idiocy.

That Akin and Ryan have the same position when it comes to rape and conception. Please try to keep up with the conversation instead of ignoring it.

Their policy positions on abortion in the case of rape are identical (as are their contrived "forcible rape" definitions).

The fact that Ryan arrives at the same position as Akin (whose reasoning has become embarrassingly clear) should horrify you. But I suppose you're in the 15% of the population that also arrives at that position.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The title of this thread is misleading. It intentionally gives the impression that Ryan is validating rape and he is not.

 

[Avatar4321]

Lying about what? The various pieces of Ryan-Akin legislation are publicly available. There's no daylight between their legislative/policy prescriptions, they just have different ways of justifying their idiocy.

That Akin and Ryan have the same position when it comes to rape and conception. Please try to keep up with the conversation instead of ignoring it.

Their policy positions on abortion in the case of rape are identical (as are their contrived "forcible rape" definitions).

The fact that Ryan arrives at the same position as Akin (whose reasoning has become embarrassingly clear) should horrify you. But I suppose you're in the 15% of the population that also arrives at that position.

Why on earth should it horrify me that Ryan wants to protect innocent children? What horrifies me is that there are people like you who think killing their children is a good thing.

 

[Misty]

A Reagan classic; ""I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born."

 

[Conservative]

The title of this thread is misleading. It intentionally gives the impression that Ryan is validating rape and he is not.

don't bring reality into their fantasy. They might get snippy with you.

 

[SuperDave]

How do Akin and Ryan have the same position when Akin said Rape rarely causes conception and Ryan is saying that it does?

Neither of the "forcible rape" duo would allow a woman impregnated by rape to end her pregnancy.

Believe it or not, Akin actually comes out ahead on this score. He apparently holds this position because he views this scenario as a biological impossibility (how could God's will be otherwise?), making his position merely idiotic and not consciously monstrous. Ryan's reasoning, on the other hand, is "tough shit."

It kills me how seemingly intelligent people won't even try to have a rational discussion. How you feel about the position you say Ryan holds, I've never seen him say he's against abortion in the case of rape but I'll take your word for it, is how Pro-life people feel about partial-birth abortions. Ask yourself a simple question and be truly honest when you do it. If you believed that, what you would refer to as a non-viable tissue mass, were an unborn child. Not a fetus but a baby that just happened not to be born yet. If you believed that would you still believe that it should be put to death because it was conceived under terrible circumstances.

 

[Greenbeard]

Why on earth should it horrify me that Ryan wants to protect innocent children?

Because he purposefully denies the legitimacy of a rape victim's decision to terminate or continue her own pregnancy. He would strip her of the autonomy to make her own choices.

Akin had the courtesy of deluding himself into believing such a scenario can never happen to justify his position. Ryan has no such excuse. I find that rather more sinister.

 

[tinydancer]

The title of this thread is misleading. It intentionally gives the impression that Ryan is validating rape and he is not.

I know. Why aren't the mods stopping this.

I'm really getting tired of lying thread titles by the libs.

I can do Clinton raped Broderick.

I can do Axelrod got sucked off by Jarrett.

I can do a lot of thread titles. But I won't. What's going on here?

 

[Greenbeard]

Ask yourself a simple question and be truly honest when you do it. If you believed that, what you would refer to as a non-viable tissue mass, were an unborn child. Not a fetus but a baby that just happened not to be born yet. If you believed that would you still believe that it should be put to death because it was conceived under terrible circumstances.

Where did I say I believe any fetus "should be put to death"? I don't feel the need to make any such decision on behalf of a woman who's been raped.

 

[tinydancer]

Why on earth should it horrify me that Ryan wants to protect innocent children?

Because he purposefully denies the legitimacy of a rape victim's decision to terminate or continue her own pregnancy. He would strip her of the autonomy to make her own choices.

Akin had the courtesy of deluding himself into believing such a scenario can never happen to justify his position. Ryan has no such excuse. I find that rather more sinister.

Oh fuck off. This is an old belief in the medical community.

Shut up asshole. It's stupid, it's medieval but it's out there you little prick. You really think you are your avatar asswipe. Grow up.

 

[Noomi]

Paul Ryan: Rape Is Just Another 'Method Of Conception' - YouTube

I think he should be forced to have a sex change operation and see what he thinks then!

"The method of conception doesn't change the definition of life." Huh?!!....what about it changing the life of the woman? What if the woman doesn't want a child conceived in rape or she medically shouldn't have children?


And he passes the buck saying "Remember the president makes policy, however."

But what's to say that YOU, Paul Ryan won't affect Romney's policy? After all, he is wishy washy and often goes where his advisers or his political party leads him. He did that in MA. Couldn't get anything done so he caved to the dems.

Even the conservatives should be afraid of him. This guy is a nutcase.

 

[Greenbeard]

Oh fuck off. This is an old belief in the medical community.

Shut up asshole. It's stupid, it's medieval but it's out there you little prick. You really think you are your avatar asswipe. Grow up.

The Akinists rise!

I knew you folks were out there. Tell us more about how dear old Todd's biological theories aren't really that out there.

Just kidding. Please don't.

 

[tinydancer]

Ask yourself a simple question and be truly honest when you do it. If you believed that, what you would refer to as a non-viable tissue mass, were an unborn child. Not a fetus but a baby that just happened not to be born yet. If you believed that would you still believe that it should be put to death because it was conceived under terrible circumstances.

Where did I say I believe any fetus "should be put to death"? I don't feel the need to make any such decision on behalf of a woman who's been raped.

Hey as compared to the Tiller who had no problem with aborting full term babies?
Let's go for it.

Rape victim? Fuck you one in a million as compared to the busloads of women that Tiller brought to his mill.

I think he genuinely got off on it. Did you know there was a motel he'd keep them at?

 

[Greenbeard]

Hey as compared to the Tiller who had no problem with aborting full term babies?

How did his death make you feel?

 

[tinydancer]

Oh fuck off. This is an old belief in the medical community.

Shut up asshole. It's stupid, it's medieval but it's out there you little prick. You really think you are your avatar asswipe. Grow up.

The Akinists rise!

I knew you folks were out there. Tell us more about how dear old Todd's biological theories aren't really that out there.

Just kidding. Please don't.

What part of it's stupid, it's medieval didn't you get you little prick? How did you miss this?

This is what the man has been taught. It's idiotic. But this is what he was taught. He regurgitated it like a fool. But oh there are so many fools out there.