Jump to content

Talk:Todd Akin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linking the article to the expanded article "Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy"

[edit]

I would suggest that the following would be a good summery and link to Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy article. I suggest that we work on a summery and then edit it in.

Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy

[edit]

The Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy involves comments by Todd Akin and the controversy that resulted from the comments. Todd Akin is a a representative from Missouri and current candidate for the US Senate (See United States Senate election in Missouri, 2012). In an August 19, 2012 interview aired on St. Louis television station KTVI-TV, Akin was asked his views on whether women who became pregnant due to sexual assault should have the option of abortion. He replied:

Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.[1]

The comment was widely criticized as being misogynist and inaccurate.[2][3][4] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone.[5] A separate 2003 article in the journal Human Nature estimated that rapes are twice as likely to result in pregnancies as consensual sex.[6]

  1. ^ Jaco, Charles. "The Jaco Report: August 19, 2012". Fox News. Retrieved 20 August 2012.
  2. ^ DiSalvo, David. "Republican Senate Nominee Todd Akin: Victims Of "Legitimate Rape" Don't Get Pregnant". Forbes. Retrieved 20 August 2012.
  3. ^ Abouhalkah, Yael T. "Todd Akin's rape fantasy". Kansas City Star. Retrieved 20 August 2012.
  4. ^ Eligon, John. "Senate Candidate Provokes Ire With 'Legitimate Rape' Comment". Retrieved 20 August 2012.
  5. ^ Blake, Aaron. "Todd Akin, GOP Senate candidate: 'Legitimate rape' rarely causes pregnancy". Washington Post. Retrieved 20 August 2012.
  6. ^ Robillard, Kevin. "Doctors: Todd Akin pregnancy claim bogus". Politico. Retrieved 21 August 2012.

Fiscal Issues

[edit]

The first sentence under fiscal issues, while accurate, seems obviously written by someone who doesn't like Mr. Akin. It says that he brought earmarks to his district, voted for an unfunded Medicare prescription drug benefit, and voted to raise the debt ceiling, clearly implying that Akin is not fiscally responsible (which may, in fact, be true). However, I would say that most members of congress earmark pork for their districts, support raising the debt ceiling, and did or would have voted for the prescription drug benefit. I don't see other politicians getting treated like that on Wikipedia, and I doubt ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' would write it that way. Is there any way to clean up that sentence?24.6.40.199 (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Defense of legitimate rape and New book

[edit]

He is releasing a book where he defends the legitimate rape comment. This should be intergrated into his bio. See link:

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/todd-akin-new-book-108745.html?hp=f2

Casprings (talk) 20:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"claims"

[edit]

Do we really have to have all this BS about "many scientists don't accept his theory"? He's wrong, blatantly wrong, and "from what he understands from doctors" is BS because that's not what doctors are saying. He lied, are we not allowed to point that out anymore?204.11.142.106 (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

anti-evolution

[edit]

I was watching a channel on NEWSROOMMSNBC on youtube. The address is 51mi7dDbitk and this guy's name came up. He says "I take a look at both sides of the thing and it seems to me that evolution takes a tremendous amount of faith. I don't even see it as a matter of science because I don't know if you can prove....". It starts at 0:30. It looks like anti-abortion, anti-women's rights, anti-evolution, young earth creationism, anti - separation of church and state goes hand in hand. Can we have a section about this? Vmelkon (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]