Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Pro-Life Quackery

I'd never heard of Dr. John C. Willke until the story broke about Todd Akin's idioctic remarks on "legitimate rape" and women not being able to get pregnant from rapists.

A little investigation uncovered the fact that this guy, who actually has an "MD" after his name, has been advocating rape quackery for quite a long time, and the far right extremists who believe in state-forced pregnancies, like Willard Romney, Paul Ryan, and Todd Akin, have supported Willke and his bizarre ideas  by acknowledging it as though they were real science.

[John C. Willke, MD] is the founder and president of the International Right to Life Federation and president of the Life Issues Institute. He is a former president of National Right to Life.

Willke is a proponent of the concept that rape victims rarely get pregnant, stating in a 1999 article that "There's no greater emotional trauma that can be experienced by a woman than an assault rape. This can radically upset her possibility of ovulation, fertilization, implantation and even nurturing of a pregnancy" and that by his calculations assault rape pregnancy is extremely rare and about four cases per state per year.

 In an interview on August 20, 2012, following the Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy, he said: "This is a traumatic thing — she’s, shall we say, she’s uptight. She is frightened, tight, and so on. And sperm, if deposited in her vagina, are less likely to be able to fertilize. The tubes are spastic."

These assertions were disputed by a number of gynecology professors." --Wikipedia

" 'There are no words for this — it is just nuts,' said Dr. Michael Greene, a professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School.
       
Dr. David Grimes, a clinical professor in obstetrics and gynecology at the University of North Carolina, said, that 'to suggest that there’s some biological reason why women couldn’t get pregnant during a rape is absurd.' ”



Romney: "I am proud to have the support of a man who has meant so much to the pro-life movement in our country."
 

Why are we not surprised that the scientific ignoramuses who support state-forced pregnancies would use a discredited nutjob like Willke to support their totalitarian ideas on girls and women and rape? 

Because rape is one of two exceptions most anti-abortion advocates accept (the other is incest), we're not surprised that the extremists in the anti-abortionist camp would find some charlatan to support an unfounded and unscientific hypothesis to try to destroy the argument for abortion in cases of rape. 

It's no accident or slip-of the-tongue, or "misspeak" on Rep. Todd Akins' part when he made the claims about rape victims not being able to get pregnant because "her body shuts down."  Those ideas come from a discredited extremist, and yet conservatives continue to use that chicanery to deny girls and women a legal medical procedure in all instances, through the spread of lies and misinformation.

From Andrew Sullivan's blog:


"Willke, of course, has defended Akin forcefully since the uproar. Here he is, pioneering this wingnut version of female sexuality back in 1999:
First, let's define the term "rape." When pro-lifers speak of rape pregnancies, we should commonly use the phrase "forcible rape" or "assault rape," for that specifies what we're talking about. Rape can also be statutory. Depending upon your state law, statutory rape can be consensual, but we're not addressing that here.
Yes, you read that right: "statutory rape can be consensual".
[skip]
"Lying behind all of this is some kind of notion that women claim they have been raped to get an abortion. It's this loophole they are trying to fill. It becomes much less obviously cruel or drastic if the odds of pregnancy by rape are close to non-existent. You can see how easily it could become a Christianist talking point, picked up by someone who lives and breathes the evangelical base like Akin. But his statistical method is as surreal as his conclusion. 

It's important to understand that this man is a central figure in the history of the religious right. What he is spouting is the orthodoxy you don't hear outside of Christianist circles - but it's there. And it's why Akin seems baffled, and why Ryan had no compunction in using Willke's specific term "forcible rape" as part of a bill he sponsored."



Infidel753, who visits here at PE, put it succintly in this comment:


"That a party which aspires to such absolute control over citizens' personal reproductive biology has the colossal gall to lay claim to words like "liberty", is an Orwellian outrage against language itself."

Infidel753 has a post up on the subject:

"This is what the Republicans are: the party of reducing women and girls to forced breeding stock for violent criminals. We should never forget it and we should never let the rest of the electorate forget it. A vote for Republicans at any level is a vote for that."

Cross-posted from Infidel753's blog:

Todd Akin is a Typical Republican

Vulvarine!

28 comments:

Silverfiddle said...

Didn't Romney come out pretty forcefully against those comments and the Akin' Ass from Missouri who made them?

Infidel's comments are particularly hilarious, coming from a progressive.

Big Government Progressives of all parties have been taking hammers and chisels to individual liberty for over a century now, and you guys cheer it on, and then squeal in shock and horror when the monster turns on you (which it has not. Abortion is legal)

Les Carpenter said...

There are few words to describe this idiocy.

Bottom line, at its core it is an attack on a women's right to chose.

To use this tactic, implying women who claim to have become pregnant from an act of rape really were't raped at all is disgusting at several levels.

Only a true Neandrathal buys "Dr." Willke's very questionable views.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"Abortion is legal."--SF

Each Christianist/Red state is making it more and more difficult for a girl or woman to get a legal medical procedure. In some states, they've closed down abortion clinics completely.

And let's not forget how the conservative governor of Virginia and its legislature tried state-forced vaginal probes on girls and women, that were not medically necessary, as a pre-condition to an abortion.


Romney is the GOP nominee. His and your party just passed its platform that rejects abortion IN ALL INSTANCES, including rape and incest.

IOW, it matches EXACTLY what the severely conservative idiot, Todd Akin, promoted: STATE-FORCED PREGNANCIES in all cases.

That's what will happen if Romney/Ryan get their way if elected.

You continue to be blind to your party's Sharia-like treatment of women.


Conservatives have a LARGE problem with women.

A microcosm of it can be found in the troll, who is one of your tribe, Thersites, who continues to harass me.

Les Carpenter said...

@ Shaw who said... "Conservatives have a LARGE problem with women."

My wife is a pro choice conservative and she has a LARGE problem with the republican party.

Shaw Kenawe said...

I also know a number of pro-choice conservative women, (they're called "thinking women," BTW), and they have shared their disgust over what the GOP has become over the abortion issue.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"That is like Slimy Reids remarks about Obama and his 'you'd never know he was black' comment representing all democrats."

No it isn't.

Harry Reid's comment didn't affect the lives and health of girls and women.

Your comparison is nuts.

Anonymous said...

the gop can't get its act together


"Ryan also tried to distance himself from a bill he co-sponsored with Akin to introduce language around "forcible rape" into prior legislation, in order to limit federal funding on abortions for rape victims. The congressman quickly cut off a question asking him to clarify what those terms meant, responding, "Rape is rape. Rape is rape, period. End of story."

"Rape is rape and there's no splitting hairs over rape," he added, when pressed further on the contradiction between his latest comments on abortion versus his record.

The exchange highlights the struggles Ryan has faced since Akin ignited a firestorm earlier this week by saying if a woman is a victim of "legitimate rape," her body can shut itself down in order to prevent pregnancy.

It was a statement that forced Ryan into an awkward position for having specifically worked with the Missouri congressman on redefining rape as it relates to abortion.

Moreover, it highlighted a key disconnect between Romney and Ryan on a social issue that carries significant weight, particularly with women voters -- a group Romney has struggled with against President Barack Obama. The presumptive GOP presidential nominee currently opposes abortion with an exception for cases of rape, incest and risk to the mother's life. His running mate has stated that abortion should only be legal when a mother's life is at risk.

And even then, Ryan supported a bill that allowed anti-abortion hospitals to refuse emergency abortions."

Infidel753 said...

SF: Infidel's comments are particularly hilarious, coming from a progressive. Big Government Progressives of all parties have been taking hammers and chisels to individual liberty for over a century.

Drivel. In all the ways that matter, liberty has been expanded. Workers have gained the freedom to organize and escaped the most egregious abuses of employers. Women and blacks have escaped from subordinated status and acquired the same freedoms and self-determination previously reserved for white males. All kinds of governmental and corporate restrictions on individual freedom, from contraception bans to abortion bans to film censorship to sodomy laws, have been swept away.

The weird reproductive-biology totalitarianism gripping the right wing today is a product of its subordination to the theocratic Christian Right, which seeks to use state power to enforce the taboos of ancient Middle Eastern tribes on an increasingly secular and individualistic modern population.

Paul said...

"Didn't Romney come out pretty forcefully against those comments and the Akin' Ass from Missouri who made them?"

Didn't the Republiscum platform committee, Monday, add to the party platform - a ban on abortion even in the case of rape and incest?

Yes, they did.

Is Romney going to disavow the party platform?

The Republiscum party wants to make abortion illegal.

That's laughable coming from a party that says it wants big government out of peoples lives.

Kind of like Bush growing the government and his new "homeland Security" department intruding in every aspect of American lives. Listening in on private citizens phone calls and computer conversations. Watching what books they check out. Intrusive body searches by the TSA, and MUCH more.

Not to mention Bush raising the debt 6.5 trillion dollars. A supposed policy sin for Republiscums.

Republiscums = hypocrites

Silverfiddle said...

I also know a number of pro-choice conservative women, (they're called "thinking women," BTW),

How snotty and condescending to those who don't agree with you.

Can you give us details on how people go about shutting down an abortion clinic? How are people making it harder to get access?

And don't whine to me when your big fat nanny state wants to probe you.

You cheer as the progressive state violates and annuls more and more of our liberties, but howl in terror when it comes for you with a vaginal probe in hand. It's just the next step.

You were talking about "thinking women," well think about it.

Shaw Kenawe said...

SF: "How snotty and condescending to those who don't agree with you."

SF, here's a step ladder for you to get off that horse, SF. You of all people accusing someone else of being condescending when your blogposts are soaked in it. Hilarious.

Thinking women can be against abortion without taking the position of denying it for women who do not agree with them. Most thinking people understand that.


When it comes to a totalitarian nightmares, nothing, by anyone's worst imaginings, can be more horrific than the state violating a citizens body or forcing that citizen to do the state's biding with one's body.

That's what the ultra-sound probe and state-enforced pregnancies are about. And it's a totalitarian nightmare.

You don't think it's a big deal, so you try to change the subject by talking about anything that has nothing to do with what the GOP wants to impose on American women.

Closing down abortion clinics?

HERE.

and

HERE.

Slowly chipping away at a legal medical procedure.

Now please link to the liberties that have been annulled.

You can't because there are none.

Your claim is a fraud.

That you dismiss as inconsequential the state shoving probes into girls' and women's vaginas and state enforced pregnancies shows very clearly that it is you who is blind to the erosion of individual liberties.

Stanley Kowalski said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Stanley Kowalski said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shaw Kenawe said...

Dear commenters,

Thersites and Stanley Kowalski--TWO CONSERVATIVE BLOGGERS, insist on coming to my blog and making fools of themselves.

Comment moderation is on until these two [they're probably the same pathetic asshats] get tired and go annoy someone else, or their mother kicks their withered little asses out of the basement and makes them get a job.

I would also like to emphasize that the two boys trolling my blog are CONSERVATIVES.

Let that sink in.

Leslie Parsley said...

I think Skuddbutt belongs in the same category. Anyway . . .

"The Republican Party has moved so far to the right that the extreme is now the mainstream. The mean-spirited and intolerant platform represents the face of Republican politics in 2012. And unless he makes changes, it is the current face of the shape-shifting Mitt Romney.

The draft document is more aggressive in its opposition to women’s reproductive rights and to gay rights than any in memory. It accuses President Obama and the federal judiciary of “an assault on the foundations of our society,” and calls for constitutional amendments banning both same-sex marriage and abortion.
- - - -
In passages on abortion, the draft platform puts the party on the most extreme fringes of American opinion. It calls for a “human life amendment” and for legislation “to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.” That would erase any right women have to make decisions about their health and their bodies. There are no exceptions for victims of rape or incest, and such laws could threaten even birth control.

The draft demands that the government “not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage,” which could bar abortion coverage on federally subsidized health-insurance exchanges, for example.

The platform praises states with “informed consent” laws that require women to undergo medically unnecessary tests before having abortions, and “mandatory waiting periods.” Those are among the most patronizing forms of anti-abortion legislation. They presume that a woman is not capable of making a considered decision about abortion before she goes to a doctor. The draft platform also espouses the most extreme Republican views on taxation, national security, military spending and other issues.

Over all, it is farther out on the party’s fringe than Mr. Romney ventured in the primaries, when he repudiated a career’s worth of centrist views on issues like abortion and gay marriage. But the planks hew closely to the views of his running mate, Paul Ryan, and the powerful right-wing. Mr. Romney has a chance to move back in the direction of the center by amending this extremist platform. It will be interesting to see if he seizes it."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/opinion/what-the-gop-platform-represents.html?smid=FB-nytimes&WT.mc_id=OP-E-FB-SM-LIN-WGP-082212-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click

Leslie Parsley said...

"I’m so incredibly fed up with the vicious and craven stupidity driving the anti-abortion battle that I could spit. I’ve yet to meet a single anti-abortionist who had the least bit of understanding about the moral and societal importance of preserving human dignity and medical autonomy.

There is absolutely nothing pro-life about being opposed to abortion. It is, in fact, oxymoronic to claim to be pro-life when, in fact, that position denies another living human being the right to make intimate decisions about her own body and may, in fact, even lead to her death.

If you want an example of how far this anti-abortion insanity can actually go, there are two recent examples in the United States and the Dominican Republic.

Let’s start in the U.S. By now, anyone who hasn’t been in a coma should have heard about Missouri Rep. Todd Akin’s recent display of unmitigated ignorance – an ignorance so profound it even shocked senior pro-life Republicans, none of whom are known for their pro-feminist and human rights sensitivity or lack of ignorance about women. These Republican leaders have urged Akin to end his race for the U.S. Senate against the incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill.

As of this writing, on Tuesday, Aug. 21, Akin hasn’t shown the intelligence and strength of character to bow out. It will be interesting to see if that has changed by the time this column is published.

In an interview aired on the Fox affiliate in St. Louis, Akin said abortion shouldn’t be allowed in rape cases (a position, by that way, that is shared by Paul Ryan, Romney’s pick for vice president). Akin went on to say that he had it on good medical authority that pregnancy was unlikely to result in a case of rape.

“From what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Akin said, adding, “If it’s legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

The female body “has ways to shut that whole thing down”? Like a woman is a cement mixer or something. And what the hell does “legitimate rape” mean?

Who elects these morons? It’s all the more astonishing that Akin sits on the Congressional Science and Technology Committee. God help us.

I am aghast.

Now let’s look at the heartbreaking case, recently reported by CNN, of a pregnant 16-year-old in the Dominican Republic who died from leukemia. The young woman was forced to wait nearly three weeks to begin chemotherapy because the hospital initially refused to treat her, fearing that the chemo would terminate her pregnancy.

The Dominican Republic’s constitution declares that “life begins at conception” and abortion is banned. I don’t know if the young woman would have lived had she received immediate, aggressive treatment for her leukemia, but I do know the delay in treating her was barbaric and immoral. The 16-year-old died, as did her fetus.

Dominican women’s health advocates reported the girl’s physicians made her undergo ultrasounds that they then used to demonstrate to her that her fetus was alive.

“Your fetus is alive, sweetheart, but you are dying…”

What manner of people would do such a thing?

Let me tell you: They are all around us. They are here in the U.S., and they would create a world where women are chattel, mere vessels for breeding, who have no intrinsic worth as autonomous human beings.

Do not be deceived by these people; they are not godly and they are not moral, they are the devil’s own spawn.

Yes, I am that furious and my words are harsh, but they are well chosen and well aimed and I stand by them. It’s high time we put these people in their place and tell them to keep their hands, legislation and flawed religious scruples out of our lives.

They are not pro-life, they are pro-death. They would kill a woman’s spirit as well as her body and do so in the name of God – and it’s time we called them out on it."

http://www.journaltribune.com/articles/2012/08/22/columnist/doc5034e8bbf2cd1990831807.txt

Les Carpenter said...

Shaw, you have made the appropriate decision. One which you were forced to make to avoid a complete disruption of your sight.

It was the same decision that forced me to go to comment moderation. Only in my site's case it was because of a PROGRESSIVE troll who had nothing but HATE and LIES to post.

In a truly grown up world this s**t wouldn't be necessary now would it?

Shaw Kenawe said...

Here's a conservative in my own backyard who says he's "willing to use 'deadly force' to stop an abortion."

Topics: deadly force ♦ Frank Szabo ♦ Hillsborough County Sheriff




A candidate for sheriff in New Hampshire said Wednesday that he would be willing to use deadly force to prevent a woman from terminating her pregnancy.

“I would respond specifically by saying that if someone is under threat, a full-grown human being, if they’re under threat, what should the sheriff do? Everything in their power to prevent them from being harmed,” Frank Szabo, the Republican candidate for Hillsborough County Sheriff, told WMUR.



BTW, I see that Silverfiddle hasn't come back here to enumerate his rights that he claims have been annulled.

Shaw Kenawe said...


"The man Mitt Romney wants to be a heartbeat away from the presidency claimed that abortion should be illegal except for “cases in which a doctor deems an abortion necessary to save the mother’s life” as far back as his first House campaign in 1998. Throughout his career Ryan’s view has been consistent and unambiguous — rape survivors are out of luck.

Some of the legislation Ryan has supported is even more severe:


Although Ryan's anti-abortion credentials have gotten plenty of coverage since he was announced as Romney's veep choice, the full extent of the measures he's endorsed is breathtaking, and includes cosponsoring a measure that would allow hospitals to deny women access to an abortions even if their life is in immediate danger." The Daily Beast

Shaw Kenawe said...

Leslie, thanks for the comments. I can't add much more to them except to state what the GOP's position on abortion really is:

State enforced pregnancy. The state forces a woman to bear a pregnancy against her will, or against what she and her doctor determine are medical reasons.

That is true totalitarianism. And people like Silverfiddle come here warning us that the liberals are taking away his freedoms while he ignores what his party has adopted as part of its platform: NO ABORTIONS FOR ANY REASONS WHATSOEVER.

Again, that is state-forced pregnancy. And SF ignores it.

skudrunner's comments that women use abortion as birth control for an inconvenient pregnancy are merely an opinion by a man who also wishes to impose his will on women, so he trivializes a woman's reasons for abortion, as though he alone knows why a girl or a woman seeks one.

It sounds like he'd rather go back to the days when women were branded with a scarlet "A" for being sexually active--you know, the days where women bore the brunt of shame and the men none.

Infidel753 said...

I see Skudrunner is back to the usual change-the-subject trolling.

To those who think only economics is worth talking about and the Republicans' totalitarianism on social issues is just a distraction:

In fact it's obvious that the Republicans would be worse for the economy than the Democrats, but set that aside for a moment.

In the past we've seen totalitarians rise to power in foreign countries by claiming they could handle an economic crisis better. People voted for them because they thought the economic problems were the only ones that mattered.

Those who would vote Republican based purely on economic preference, ignoring their totalitarianism on social issues, are just following the same path.

Leslie Parsley said...

"It sounds like he'd rather go back to the days when women were branded with a scarlet "A" for being sexually active--you know, the days where women bore the brunt of shame and the men none."

Or where the men "get none", which may explain what's behind their anger at women.

Silverfiddle said...

Shaw: The "closing down clinics," as you choose to categorize it, is just the state putting more regulations in place to make the practice safer. I thought liberals liked that?

And you completely misunderstand me when you say this:

"That's what the ultra-sound probe and state-enforced pregnancies are about. And it's a totalitarian nightmare.

You don't think it's a big deal, so you try to change the subject by talking about anything that has nothing to do with what the GOP wants to impose on American women."


You don't know me at all. The idea of the state forcibly inserting a vaginal probe into a woman is abhorrent.

It is also a logical next step of the statist Progressive Long March.

Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?

Shaw Kenawe said...

Skudrunner: "...enlighten us why a women who did not get pregnant by rape, incest and her health is not in danger would seek an abortion other than it is inconvenient."


skudrunner, you're a perfect example of an officious panty-sniffer who thinks it's his business to know why a woman does anything to her body.

It's none of your business and it certainly isn't the government's business either. You've given us all a perfect insight into your opinions about women's sexuality, and it belongs in the 15th century.

I repeat: It is none of your g-d business nor the government's business as to why a woman chooses to have a legal medical procedure.

skudrunner: "Your comment about the scarlet letter is really beneath you. Although you do not believe in personal responsibility..."

And tell us all how you know this? Are you privy to what goes on in my personal life?


Because I support a woman's right to make decisions about her own body, you take that to mean I don't believe in "personal responsibility?"

You fit right in with my definition of a GOP crackpot.



"...there are ways to keep from getting pregnant and it worked fine in the sexually enlightened sixties."--skudrunner

skudrunner, you are not paying attention. Your party, in addition to supporting government forced pregnancies, also wants to shut down access to birth control. Paul Ryan sponsored "Personhood" legislation that gives a fertilized ovum all the rights of a living, breathing, walking, talking human being. Therefore, any medication or device that prevents the implantation of a fertilized ovum is necessarily a killing medication or device, and therefore, a possible murder weapon to the "personhood" of a fertilized egg. If the egg cannot be implanted in the womb, it dies.

Crazy isn't a strong enough word to describe that Medieval, anti-female thinking. It's no different from Sharia law that seeks to keep women as nothing more than brood mares and objects for men to dominate.

There's a reason women overwhelmingly support President Obama and not the crackpots of the GOP.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Silverfiddle: "Shaw: The "closing down clinics," as you choose to categorize it, is just the state putting more regulations in place to make the practice safer. I thought liberals liked that?"


Bullshit! Having an abortion is safer than giving birth. What those states are doing is making it more difficult for poor and middle class girls and women to get their lawful medical procedure.

Rich girls and women will always find a way to get an abortion.

Those "regulations" are instigated by the various states' objective of closing down altogether the clinics.

If you don't believe that, you're naive.

It's interesting, though, isn't it, that these regualation need attention in states with GOP governors and legislatures.

Shaw Kenawe said...

SF: "You don't know me at all. The idea of the state forcibly inserting a vaginal probe into a woman is abhorrent.

It is also a logical next step of the statist Progressive Long March."

The GOP platform does NOT condemn vaginal probes, but see them as a necessary tool in thwarting a woman's right to choose.

SF uses a proposal wholly devised by the crazies in the GOP to warn me about what liberals will do.!

SF: "Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?"

It's true. What do we do if the GOP wins the WH and Congress and implements its goal of state-forced pregnancies?

That's what is in the GOP platform that your candidates support.

You profess to be a libertarian?

You should be howling to the moon and back over that hellish government intrusion into an individual's life.

But it appears you're selective in your outrages.

Paul said...

"is just the state putting more regulations in place to make the practice safer. I thought liberals liked that?"

You have no clue what's going on, or you lie to cover up the Republiscum despicable intrusion into woman's personal health care.

Shaw Kenawe said...

skudrunner calls my comment "hate-filled" and then posts this:


"I believe it was the democrats that condoned cigars as vaginal probes. They also condoned driving your girlfriend off a bridge and taking no personal responsibility for it."


And you say the conservatives are against women's rights. That is a laugh."

There's an old saying that goes like this:

"Too bad it doesn't hurt to be stupid."