On Tuesday night, Republican Senate hopeful Richard Mourdock forgot to moderate some of his extreme views, declaring during a debate that when a woman becomes pregnant during a rape, "that's something God intended," which is why he's comfortable with laws that force women impregnated by rapists to take their pregnancy to term.
Jay Leno helped keep the story alive, asking President Obama about the controversy on NBC's "The Tonight Show."
For those who can't watch clips online, Obama seemed to summarize the thoughts of many when he said, "I don't know how these guys come up with these ideas." It wasn't long before the president connected the controversy to the bigger picture.
"[T]his underscores, though, this is exactly why you don't want a bunch of politicians -- mostly male -- making decisions about women's health care decisions. Women are capable of making these decisions in consultation with their partners, with their doctors. And, you know, for politicians to want to intrude in this stuff, often times without any information, is a huge problem. And this is obviously a part of what's at stake in this election. You've got a Supreme Court that, typically a president is going to have probably another couple of appointments during the course of his term. And, you know, Roe vs. Wade is probably hanging in the balance. You've got issues like Planned Parenthood where, you know, that organization provides millions of women cervical cancer screenings, mammograms, all kinds of basic healthcare.
"And so I think it's really important for us to -- to understand that women are capable of making these decisions and that these are not just women's issues. These are family issues."
As it turns out, Obama wasn't the only national figure talking about Mourdock's mess; the president's 2008 rival was, too.
In fact, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had thrown his support to the Indiana Republican, but is now reconsidering.
"I think it depends on what he does," McCain told CNN's Anderson Cooper, when asked if he still counts himself among Mourdock's supporters. "If he apologizes and says he misspoke and he was wrong and he asks the people to forgive him, then obviously I'd be the first. ... But, you know, in the years that I've been around, I've made a few, Anderson, and I've asked for people's understanding and forgiveness when I won't -- when I own up to it," he continued. "It's when you don't own up to it when people will not believe you."
As of this morning, Mourdock has not backed down. Mitt Romney, who has championed Mourdock's candidacy, also has not made any additional efforts to distance himself from the right-wing Senate candidate.
Leave a Comment:
Tea Party Republicans = American Taliban.
It's about time that we all should be overly curious about what all of these mens wives think of them....the guys from VA, MO, IN, OH, MS FL, NY, etc. who want to control the females .....I wish they would all be asked: "What does your spouse, your daughters think about all you have been trying to change in womens lives...please ask them...their replies would be necessary to hear....because they have all overstepped their bounds ...women have the right to take care of themselves so stop the ridiculous attacks on us and on those you are suppose to love.
MsThel: Your thinking is far too normal, far too sane.
Behind EVERY successful (man) politician from VA, MO, IN, OH, MS, FL, NY, there is a pushy, selfish bitch pulling the strings. She doesn't care about the plight of the poor, families needing help, women in general, just SUCCESS AND MONEY.
So, to ask the politician what his wife thinks wouldn't be productive.
I think we are overlooking the republican plans. They want us all upset about their far right stand on abortion so if they do get a bill on the floor to outlaw it, they hope the Dems will take rape, incest & life of the mother as a compromise. In other words, abortion would be illegal in all states. Keep your eye on the prize.
I would also like to ask these men how they would feel if their wives got raped & had the baby. How would he feel about the child? How would his other children feel about it? Could he treat that child as his own? I doubt it.
Now read this and see what you think.
A gift is something you give to someone because you like or care for them. You want to make them happy and make their life a little more joyful. Also something that the person getting the gift will remember you by hopefully fondly. That is a gift.
How is it a gift if you don't want it, it brings you misery, you have bad feelings about it, and it causes you nothing but heartache.
How is a pregnancy from rape or any unwanted pregnancy A GIFT FROM GOD????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
While he no doubt expressed it awkwardly, what Mourdock meant is that no human being is less important than another simply because of the circumstances of their conception. Every human life is precious in God's eyes. No human being is a "mistake." Every human being has inherent dignity and value. You might want to read about all of these people who were conceived by rape.
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/famous-people-conceieved-in-rape.html
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html
I would also point out that the belief that life begins at conception is based on science, not faith:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110716074456/http://clinicquotes.com/site/story.php?id=28
Rape is a horrible crime and the perpetrators of it should be harshly punished. But we should not be intentionally and directly killing innocent human beings.
Mourdock clarified his comments thusly:
“I'm a much more humble person this morning because so many people mistook, twisted, came to misunderstand the points that I was trying to make. I'm confident God abhors violence and rape, if they came away with any impression other than that, I truly regret it. I apologize if they came away, and I have certainly been humbled by the fact that so many people think that that somehow was an interpretation.” “God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that He does. Rape is a horrible thing…”
And even the Washington Post recognized that the criticism he’s taken is unjust.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/richard-mourdock-and-media-misrepresentation/2012/10/24/0b5b02e2-1e0d-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_blog.html
Reading these posts just makes me sick. What a bunch of rude, angry people. You're talking about "morals"??? Do most of you have any? If that's how Democrats act I'm glad I'm not included in your party. I've always been an Independant. How childish! You all make me ashamed to call myself an American!
I have morals.
I just don't think it's wise to impose them on other people. Morals are the distiction of right and wrong. Do you know what is right and wrong? Maybe you know for you? Do you contend that you know what's right and wrong for other people?
If so, I contend you have some issues!
Us rude, angry, and amoral! Are you serious? If anyone is rude it is these politicians demeaning women and thrusting their religious beliefs on us. I know perfectly well what it right and wrong so don't be condescending Kimja, we've all had a belly full of that kind of treatment!
American means we have freedom. If you don't like freedom go live with the Taliban under Sharia law!
My note to Mr. Mourdock:
I’m personally pro-life (Probably because I’ve never experienced having to make such a decision, so its kinda easy for me to take that stance), and I’ve been a registered republican since I was 18 years old (23 years now), I don’t know when the republican platform changed, but I was always under the impression (maybe I was delusional), that republicans wanted people to make their own choices whereas democrats thought THEY knew what was better for us. Now, it seems the republicans are doing the same thing! You have every right to believe that God may have a hand in why a woman gets impregnated during a rape, and I support your right to believe it. BUT, that should NEVER be seen in legislation. What makes politicians believe THEIR religion and beliefs should be imposed on all? What about atheists, aren’t they Americans too? Should they have to abide by the rules you set based on your religion? I don’t. I don’t know, but if I were a young woman that was raped and impregnated, then my government wouldn’t allow me to make the decision I think is best for me….I bet I would be rethinking the whole, “God” thing. Believe what you want, but if you get the chance, run the government as if you may just be wrong. Thanks.
While he no doubt expressed it awkwardly, what Mourdock meant is that no human being is less important than another simply because of the circumstances of their conception. Every human life is precious in God's eyes. No human being is a "mistake." Every human being has inherent dignity and value. You might want to read about all of these people who were conceived by rape.
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/famous-people-conceieved-in-rape.html
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html
I would also point out that the belief that life begins at conception is based on science, not faith:
http://web(dot)archive(dot)org/web/20110716074456/http://clinicquotes.com/site/story.php?id=28
Rape is a horrible crime and the perpetrators of it should be harshly punished. But we should not be intentionally and directly killing innocent human beings.
Mourdock clarified his comments thusly:
“I'm a much more humble person this morning because so many people mistook, twisted, came to misunderstand the points that I was trying to make. I'm confident God abhors violence and rape, if they came away with any impression other than that, I truly regret it. I apologize if they came away, and I have certainly been humbled by the fact that so many people think that that somehow was an interpretation.” “God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that He does. Rape is a horrible thing…”
And even the Washington Post recognized that the criticism he’s taken is unjust.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/richard-mourdock-and-media-misrepresentation/2012/10/24/0b5b02e2-1e0d-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_blog.html
hey Rachel are you aware of this?
http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/breaking-retired-nsa-analyst-proves-gop-is-stealing-elections/article20598.html
More liberal hackery.
While he no doubt expressed it awkwardly, what Mourdock meant is that no human being is less important than another simply because of the circumstances of their conception. Every human life is precious in God's eyes. No human being is a "mistake." Every human being has inherent dignity and value. You might want to read about all of these people who were conceived by rape.
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/famous-people-conceieved-in-rape.html
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html
I would also point out that the belief that life begins at conception is based on science, not faith:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110716074456/http://clinicquotes.com/site/story.php?id=28
Rape is a horrible crime and the perpetrators of it should be harshly punished. But we should not be intentionally and directly killing innocent human beings.
Mourdock clarified his comments thusly:
“I'm a much more humble person this morning because so many people mistook, twisted, came to misunderstand the points that I was trying to make. I'm confident God abhors violence and rape, if they came away with any impression other than that, I truly regret it. I apologize if they came away, and I have certainly been humbled by the fact that so many people think that that somehow was an interpretation.” “God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that He does. Rape is a horrible thing…”
And even the Washington Post recognized that the criticism he’s taken is unjust.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/richard-mourdock-and-media-misrepresentation/2012/10/24/0b5b02e2-1e0d-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_blog.html