Paul Ryan Co-Sponsored ‘Forcible Rape’ Bill Last Year with Missouri Tea Party Senate Candidate Rep. Todd ‘Legitimate Rape’ Akin

From left: Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), co-sponsors of "foricible rape" bill

Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), left, and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), co-sponsors of "foricible rape" bill

As we noted here yesterday, Missouri tea party Senate candidate Todd Akin made a bizarre assertion about women’s reproductive systems:

AKIN: 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.

This was not a gaffe. It reflects a policy position, and Akin — who is running to unseat Sen. Claire McCaskill — is not alone in advocating misogynistic views on rape. Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan co-sponsored the bill with Akin last year that introduced the term “forcible rape” into the political lexicon:

Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet the law also contains an exception for women who are raped. The bill Akin and Ryan cosponsored would have narrowed this exception, providing that only pregnancies arising from “forcible rape” may be terminated. Because the primary target of Akin and Ryan’s effort are Medicaid recipients — patients who are unlikely to be able to afford an abortion absent Medicaid funding — the likely impact of this bill would have been forcing many rape survivors to carry their rapist’s baby to term. Michelle Goldberg explains who Akin and Ryan would likely target:

Under H.R. 3, only victims of “forcible rape” would qualify for federally funded abortions. Victims of statutory rape—say, a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 30-year-old man—would be on their own. So would victims of incest if they’re over 18. And while “forcible rape” isn’t defined in the criminal code, the addition of the adjective seems certain to exclude acts of rape that don’t involve overt violence—say, cases where a woman is drugged or has a limited mental capacity. “It’s basically putting more restrictions on what was defined historically as rape,” says Keenan.

Although a version of this bill passed the GOP-controlled House, the “forcible rape” language was eventually removed due to widespread public outcry. Paul Ryan, however, believes that the “forcible rape” language does not actually go far enough to force women to carry their rapist’s baby. Ryan believes that abortion should be illegal in all cases except for “cases in which a doctor deems an abortion necessary to save the mother’s life.” So rape survivors are out of luck.

2 Responses »

  1. […] as people then perhaps they wouldn’t be trying to redefine rape, according to Jon Ponder of Pensito Review: Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet […]

  2. bess moore August 22, 2012 @ 3:52 pm

    Stupid stupid asses! R and R = Rape and Rob! God help us!

Leave a Reply

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE