Huck may have a point but Akin is clearly the wrong battle to try and make it over. There are certain things you just can't say while running for elected office and Akin said one of them. Basically that's it.
Agreed
I don't understand why saying something is what seems to bother you two so much, but not the actual policy in question that the stupid splitting-hairs-about-rape thing comes from. Absolutely granted that Akin has terrible opinions on literally everything, but sometimes I feel like Republicans get more upset about bad press than anything else, as if you're afraid to look in the policy-mirror and see Akin, or you've compartmentalized campaigning and policymaking from each other to such a degree that you can't understand how there is such a small leap from holding that policy position to making that statement.
Uhhh... because he just suggested you can't get pregnant by being raped. That's not called "social conservatism" that called stupid. And it's hugely detrimental to the pro-life cause because it helps to foster the attitude the being pro-life has nothing to do with life and is all about wanting to control women. He completely shifted the debate in the wrong direction. From a policy standpoint they might be the same, but campaigns do matter. Words do matter. How you conduct yourself matters. Real life isn't Atlasia; people expect competent governance. And really Marokai, the policy end is completely moot anyway at the moment because
Roe is in place and the Human Life Amendment is politically feasible. The entire rape distinction is politically irrelevant because there aren't the votes to outlaw it anyway. And this entire argument is beside the point when it comes to abortion anyway because
only 1% of US abortions occur because of rape anyway. Before worrying about that 1%, I want to see the other 99% outlawed first.
