This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Where Christianity intersects with politics, culture, and entertainment.


akin

Akin's angst

The New Testament book of James compares the tongue to a small rudder that guides a huge ship. Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo.—an evangelical Christian—might be thinking about that passage today.

In less than 48 hours, two words that Akin uttered during a television interview on Sunday have steered the course of his promising Senate ambitions to a potential shipwreck.

The two words: “legitimate rape.” The context: a discussion of abortion.

Republican leaders now worry that Akin could lose his Senate race in Missouri against incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill, and that the GOP could lose a chance to regain the Senate in November. Pressure is mounting on Akin to drop out of the race by 5 p.m. CDT today, even as he releases a campaign ad apologizing for his remarks.

Continue reading at www.worldmag.com
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • Evermyrtle

    What was Akin talking when he used such a term. The term "illegitimate rape" alone, should not raise such ire. After all, we hear an equal to the word, homosexuality every day. It should depend on the entire sentence or the entire subject. If he had said "the way the country is treating Christianity and ousting it in every phase of public activities amounts to "legitimate rape" considering our present laws, he would have spoken the truth. We want to brand him as a monster without knowing what he was talking about. What would have happened if Pelosi or Holder, on Jackson had used the term?? We would have never even known about it.>

    • Bighoss

      Akin is no monster; he is just an extremist ideologue (one of many contaminating Republican ranks) who, by his intemperate and inaccurate remarks, has inadvertently revealed the depth of his extremism and made himself a toxic liability to the GOP.

  • Bighoss

    Akin is being pressured by high-ranking conservative Republicans to make himself scarce. The reason they want him gone is that his stand on abortion is very much in line with the GOP's position on that issue in its party platform, which makes no exceptions for rape, incest, or even the life of the mother.
    http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/08/21/republican-convention-platform-committee-approves-strict-anti-abortion-plank/r8PAXGUUpNE5IsyGY8WAAI/story.html

    That platform position is similar to those adopted by the GOP in prior national elections, but unlike those, this year's position will be intensely scrutinized, owing to the current dust-up over Akin's foot-in-mouth nutterance on the subject. Thus, the less visible Akin becomes, the less intense that scrutiny should be, or at least the GOP hopes that will be the case. They are probably wrong, though, since Akin's known position on abortion (no exceptions for rape or incest) is identical with VP nominee Paul Ryan's and the two co-authored a "sanctity of life"bill [that went nowhere] that notably provided for no exceptions for abortions.

    Now GOP spokesmen, including the extra-terrestrially-named party chairperson, Rence Priebus, are "explaining" this inconvenient situation by saying that the party platform and the nominee's position are two different things. That kind of statement became necessary when Mitt (Etch-A-Sketch) Romney allowed as how he would be okay with abortions where rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother are involved.

    Thus, In the fractured GOP, the tension between the ultra-rightest, inflexible Tea Party and evangelical factions and the standard model Republicans continues, with each being suspicious of the other and both continuing to provide fodder for their opponents.

  • JDH

    Akins has been sacrificed to the gods of political correctness.his comments were not acceptabe to the main stream media and may have been politically incorrect, but not totally scientifically incorrect. To me they are equivalent to calling someone wth an IQ of 60 a moron instead of calling him metanlly challenged(I'll reserve that name for barry the pretender)

    • Jeff Dixon

      Of course it is scientifically incorrect. A womans body does not have a way to prevent pregancy in case of rape. On average, there are around 32,000 pregnancies that occur from rape each year.
      http://news.discovery.com/human/akin-pregnancy-rape-120820.html

    • don

      if he was a democrat nothing would come from it. it bafles me let one our own miscue one word an we want to run him off but let our president stomp on our constition an make up laws going around congress even threation the supreme court an you hear nothing. our beloved country is coming to an end as we have known it.our own people in congress have forsaked us. only god can save the home of the brave an once free.

  • John Adams

    Those who are opposing Akin are no friends of the U.S.

  • mallen11

    I am a Republican but there
    is one point I would like to make regarding control over We the People: the
    Republicans ALSO want to run our lives when they advocate control over our
    physical bodies including abortion. Our physical problems should never be made
    a POLITICAL issue — the GOP needs to drop that issue and let each individual
    person decide for themselves. It is called FREEDOM of choice. The home and
    churches should teach the issue of abortion or any other physical or mental problem
    people may have. It should NOT be part of a political issue. Our energy and
    emphasis should include following our Constitution and promoting freedom, bring
    our military home and securing our borders, stop sending money to countries whose
    governments hate us, let other countries deal with their own problems (Has our
    money or interference changed anything?), and get rid of the liberals and RINOs
    in WDC.

    Acts 17:24-25
    "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of
    heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor
    is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself
    gives to all people life and breath and all things;

    Acts 17:24-25
    "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of
    heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor
    is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself
    gives to all people life and breath and all things;

  • aceituna

    Abortion is a moral concern. We follow Biblical morality. Politicians are walking a tightrope on this issue because there are too many people who do not have a firm moral stand on this issue. On some issues it becomes better to have half a loaf rather then none, that is in this case abortion only permitted in cases of maternal death and maybe rape or incest. Problem is defining the terms. Would that everyone would have a respect for life that would trust God and not have abortions, but that is a dreamworld. Such a law would outlaw most abortions, and hopefully education would get rid of the rest. That has been an issue from before history began and will continue to be an issue until our Lord Jesus returns. Even so come Lord Jesus.

  • David S.

    Akin needs to step down. Period.

  • EstebanCafe

    Well, it was definitely more than "potateo" (c.f. Dan Quayle), but certainly less than Mssr Obama voting for partial birth abortion.
    Either way: what did the child do that s/he should be killed? The discussion always steers away from the "other innocent" in rape cases. What is that old English saying? "Two wrongs do not make a right."

  • Wordman

    He was speaking of "legitmate rape" as opposed cases where women falsely report that they were raped in order for them to have their babies killed in places that will not let them kiill their babies except in cases of rape. I don't see why he's drawing so much fire for making such a distinction.

  • e.rebus

    It was not the phrase that showed this man to be a narrow-minded fool but his explanation about the woman's body shutting down. He is an in-bred zealot that claims to believe the Bible literally. someone ought to ask him his thoughts on the "sons of Lot"? These self-proclaimed evangelicals are the word-faith counterpart tot he Islamic radicals such as the Taliban. By saying what he did he has brought into the light the foolish and dangerous ideas of the Darbyites.

  • Marilyn K. Smith

    The term "legitimate rape" does not have anything to do with the precious child in a mother's womb. The child is a legitimate gift from God in any circumstances. It is a living soul with value and worth and made in the image of God no matter who his or her father is. God is the Heavenly Father. There is no argument that we (all of us) say things in a way we don't mean and they are taken in a way we never meant. Look at this man's record, past decisions and life. Pray and then vote the Bible. Simple…even an 18 yr. old can do it.