U.S. Rep. Steve King told the Westside Conservative Club Wednesday that humanity might not exist if not for rape and incest throughout human history.
"What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled out anyone who was a product of rape or incest? Would there be any population of the world left if we did that?" he said in Urbandale, Iowa. "Considering all the wars and all the rapes and pillages that happened throughout all these different nations, I know that I can't say that I was not a part of a product of that."
The Kiron Republican was discussing his defense of not allowing exceptions for rape and incest in the anti-abortion legislation he tried to pass in Congress. Republican leadership had prevented bills he sponsored on banning abortions from advancing through the House, despite GOP support for the measures, King said.
Just because a conception happened in bad circumstances doesn't mean the result isn't a person, King, who is Catholic, argued.
"It's not the baby's fault for the sin of the father, or of the mother," he said.
16 comments
The stupid part is that I actually get it. If you're going to be totally consistent, and you really think that abortion is the same as infanticide, then making exceptions for rape and incest would be wrong.
Of course, early-term abortion is not the same thing as infanticide, which is why abortion should not be outlawed at all. But still, the point is that “except in cases of rape and incest” is a dumb compromise that nobody could like.
Some incest here and there, perhaps, but not too much; then we get inbreeding problem.
image
In Victorian England, they thought that the woman had to orgasm in order to become pregnant, so anyone who was raped and got pregnant was dismissed; if she got pregnant she must have had an orgasm, and orgasms are always voluntary, right?
Quite a few of the children born from war rape throughout history have probably been done away with, one way or the other (aborted, killed after birth, sent away, adopted away).
Yup, you’re the product of something sinister, all right!
So, you are going to care for all these rape-babies, asshole? You are going to adopt every single one of them?
So this is what Catholicism is now? I get that a Catholic has to be pro-life all the way, but defending incest (Not sure how the Catholic Church thinks about rape. My biggest guess is that they will say that rape is bad and that gay sex is a form of rape.) in the process doesn't seem to me at all what the Pope would approve of. When I hear this I seriously want to know about his position on inmates on death row. I'm pretty sure that when this will be asked to him that he'll start to act like a hypocrite.
“except in cases of rape and incest” is a dumb compromise that nobody could like
Nobody but abortion-opposers who think that "loose women" shouldn't be allowed to use abortion to "escape the consequences of their whoring!"
So they are against access to abortion for unmarried women who became pregnant from consensual sex.
And for married women, 'cause having children is what marriage is for , right?
But if she got pregnant from someone, maybe even a family member, sexually forcing themselves upon her, then it's different.
We get it, Steve King, your father was your grandfather, and maybe your uncle as well. No…well then, you’re just another one who care a lot about fetuses, and nothing at all about the baby post-natally.
The last time a couple of so-called 'men' - with political ambitions - mentioned rape in anything but the strongest possible condemnatory terms, Arsegone of Sadact was eviscerated in the local elections: and Todd Akin lost half of his electorate overnight.
You're going to find that metaphorical rape - as in electorally - is going to be far worse than you being pegged without your consent, Steve-o.
Even by an aunt using a strapon & naga chilli sauce lube.
I think he is right, actually. Incest and rape have created so many of the humans on earth that if every pregnancy from rape or incest had never happened, many, if not most of us would never have come to exist.
Instead, though, other, likely better people would exist instead.
It's not as if the women and men having children through the ages wouldn't still have children. They just wouldn't be rape babies and cousin-fucks or daughter-wives, because people can still fuck some babies into each other in situations that aren't rape or incest.
What the fuck is wrong with the state of Iowa? Perhaps the water in his district should be tested; it probably contains lead levels that dwarf those of Flint. There is something else at work, something besides basic stupidity that would motivate enough life forms to vote for some…thing as stupid, ignorant, hateful & overall useless as King.
Good job, hayseeds! You proved us right, again, by re-electing this disgrace. And they’ll do it again next year.
I mean, part of his argument here is technically true. If you go back far enough, I really doubt that there's anyone alive today who isn't descended from someone born as a result of rape/incest. You're talking about ~300,000 just of anatomically modern humans (it's worth noting that most Catholics, with very rare exceptions even on the far-right, accept the geological record and human evolution; he would probably understand what length of time and what number of distant ancestors he's talking about here).
The conclusion doesn't follow, though. For one, taking out births from rape and incest wouldn't make humanity extinct. It would result in a totally different set of people on Earth than the ones alive today, but there would still be people. It also doesn't follow that abortion shouldn't be legal. That's really a stretch.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
