Conservative Christians rally around Akin in face of GOP criticism

[el_em_en_oh]

(CNN) – Even as the official Republican Party continues to try to derail Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin over his remarks about “legitimate rape,” a powerful force within the GOP has begun rallying to the candidate’s side: the party’s socially conservative base.

Powerful Christian activists in the GOP have begun pushing back against party leadership, alleging it has gone too far in trying to thwart Akin and that it is attempting to sideline issues that social conservatives care about, such as abortion.

The criticism is creating major tensions between the mainstream Republican Party and a key part of its base days before the GOP’s convention is set to open in Tampa, Florida.

“Following the pounding of Todd Akin by the GOP kings and lieutenants in the last 36 hours, I've come to the conclusion that the real issue is the soul of America,” wrote David Lane, an evangelical activist who’s influential in the Republican Party, in an e-mail to fellow activists Thursday morning.

“The swift knee-jerk reaction to throw Akin, a strong conservative pro-life, pro-family born again Christian under the bus by some in the Republican Party is shining the light on their actual agenda,” Lane continued.

“We haven't seen anything this vicious since some of the same operatives did this to (Sarah) Palin.”

While many conservative Christian groups have criticized Akin over his “legitimate rape” comment and for claiming that women’s bodies can prevent conception in such cases, the groups have also emphasized that they stand with Akin in opposing abortion, even in instances of rape.

Not all conservative Christian activists are taking Akin's side against the GOP.

"I think it splits the social conservative movement," says Richard Land, who heads public policy for the Southern Baptist Convention. "Some people say, 'Look he is our guy, we are going to stand with him.'

"And some people are saying the odds are this is a fatal blow at least in this election cycle," Land says. "For the good of the movement, for the good of the pro-life cause ... he needs to do what's best for the cause and throw himself on his shield."

Land, who was in Tampa on Thursday attending meetings around the convention, said he thinks Akin should drop out.

Many Republican leaders, from presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney to Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, also have called on Akin to get out of the race.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee and the American Crossroads super PAC that backs GOP candidates both announced that they will stop spending money on the Missouri Senate race. Even tea party groups that have backed Akin in the past said he should step aside for the good of the party and the conservative cause.

The Republican National Committee did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the social conservative criticisms of the party on Thursday.

Akin, who won a tough primary battle this month, has apologized for his comments but also defied pressure to get out of the election.

Republican officials have told CNN on condition of not being identified that the Akin controversy hurts on several fronts. It decreases the chances of capturing Missouri’s Senate seat, which is crucial to GOP hopes of winning control of the chamber, they said.

And the brouhaha shifts the national discussion to divisive social issues that could repel swing voters rather than economic ones that could attract them in a climate of high unemployment and stumbling recovery, the GOP officials said.

Akin has bowed to Republican pressure to skip the Republican convention next week. But the Senate candidate was in Tampa on Wednesday night to meet with a powerful group of religious conservatives, according to a source familiar with the trip.

In a note to supporters Wednesday night, conservative Family Research Council President Tony Perkins heaped criticism on the GOP for abandoning Akin.

"Todd Akin has a long and distinguished record of defending women, children, and families – and unlike the GOP establishment, I refuse to throw him under the bus over one inarticulate comment for which he has apologized,” wrote Perkins, who is in Tampa attending events leading up the convention.

“As for the GOP, it has no rational basis for deserting Akin when it has stood by moderate Republicans who've done worse,” Perkins continued. “Singling out Todd suggests a double standard, designed to drive out social conservatives.”

SOURCE: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/23/conservative-christians-rally-around-akin-in-face-of-gop-criticism/

[adgal]

And I will say that the majority do not do that.  In my experience they have their demonstration, and talk to you about the issue should you approach them.  I don't get into it with them and we all go on our merry way.  I have no issue with that at all.  Also, for Churches to have meetings, etc. on the topic is no issue as far as I am concerned either.  People can attend if they like, your not forced to.  

I don't disagree with you either.  I also dislike abortion and wish wholeheartedly women would make different decisions (you and I have discussed our attempts to adopt and how tough it is).  But, like you, I don't believe that my choice should be every women's choice.  So I guess I too am a pro choice pro lifer.  lol.  Hey, look at us!  Officially on different sides of the issue, but actually feel the same way about it.  Interesting!  Course, our ability to do that is part of why I love ya!

[specialmom]

That is true, people should respect other people's beliefs and boundaries.  The reason they want to make laws around it is that murder is against the law and if you believe with all sincerity (your whole heart, honest to goodness belief) that abortion is murdering an innocent baby, you will want to include that in the laws against murder.  You will want to fight for the unborn babies that have no say.

This is not my big topic, as weve discussed my friend.  I am middle of the road on many social issues and I'm a pro life pro choicer as I call it.  Meaning that I do believe after conceiving and having a child that it is a baby at the time of conception and it makes me sick if someone aborts their child but will not take that right away from other woman.  However, I do understand how many feel as they do about abortion.  They are passionate about it and it becomes their hot political topic that they are most interested in.  Our church has a section in every single weekend pamphlet you take after your church service you attend.  They hold meetings and conferences on the subject.  I am just not going to say that these people are wrong for promoting laws to protect what they believe in their hearts are innocent babies.  

But it is a turn off for anyone to shove a pamphlet in your face.  That doesn't help their cause by any means.  

[adgal]

You know, I would respect that.  People being pro life is fine, and we all need to respect each others beliefs.  We all have to live our lives according to what we feel is right.  It's when we take our belief as the only way it should be and try to create laws around it that I have an issue.  

Last week I was walking near a pro life demonstration, but intentionally steered myself away from it.  Just no interest in getting into an argument or confrontation.  A women attempted to thrust a pamphlet into my hands and I politely said no thank you.  She just wouldn't let it go...she showed a complete lack of respect for me and my boundaries.  Not saying she is representative of the pro life movement, my issue is with her specifically.  Let's just all respect each other - what a novel concept!

[specialmom]

I wish they would say what is probably true----  due to how they were taught either by their church or their parents, they belive that abortion is murder of an innocent child no matter what the circumstances.  They don't need to explain away their belief that is actually shared by many with 'excuse' type of things which seems like grasping at straws.  It's what they believe, pure and simple.  And it is okay for them to believe as they do.  

[Barb135]

Scary to think these guys are trying to set policy on anything, isn't it?

[teko]

And how many years have these ignoramouses been having sex anyway? I mean to be so illiterate. And they are someones parents? Wow, that speaks volumes.

[teko]

So now we have conservative christiand and democratic christians to boot. OMG, so now our faith is divided by politics? LOL Only in America

[Vance2335]

Depends on what theroy of evolution you want to talk about. Man from ape...no, as there is still no scientfic proof of this it's still just a theroy. Man evolving...yes.

And lets not get into global warming because I have spoken about that topic and gave some good links to some professionals in the field that do not agree with man-made global warming.

[mikesimon]

It's not that surprising really - these types of people reject science routinely.
Evolution, global warming and now pregnancy.

[adgal]

Wow - they really still believe this stuff?  I think they need to spend some time on MH's pregnancy forums.  This is right up there with "you can't get pregnant the first time" or "you can't get pregnant if you have sex standing on your head" theories.  Thanks for the article Mike.  At least it explains why he said it, even if it is a complete falsehood.

[mikesimon]

You might find this interesting.

Rape Trauma as Barrier to Pregnancy' Myth Dates Back Centuries
By Sharon Begley and Susan Heavey

(Reuters) - The long-discredited notion that rape victims cannot become pregnant - a claim that pushed Republicans to repudiate one of their own U.S. Senate candidates on Monday - dates back centuries to when human reproduction was hardly understood.

But the medieval theory has surfaced in 21st century political discourse as a result of the U.S. abortion wars.

Writers from the Middle Ages and modern politicians alike have based their arguments on the idea that a trauma of the magnitude of rape can shut down the body's reproductive system.

The combination of misunderstanding and cherry-picked science even led some to conclude that a woman who says she was raped yet becomes pregnant must have been lying about the attack. Modern proponents of the claim repeat it despite empirical research showing that rape victims are at least as likely to become pregnant as women who have consensual sex, and possibly more likely.

Representative Todd Akin, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Missouri, spurred new outrage on the subject when he told a St. Louis television station he does not support abortion for rape victims because "if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

Akin, a member of the House science committee, apologized on Monday for his statement, calling it "ill conceived" and "wrong." Senior Republicans scrambled to distance themselves from the comments a week before the party holds its presidential nominating convention in Florida.

The furor has prompted a response from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The claim that rape is unlikely to lead to a pregnancy has "no biological plausibility," said Dr. Barbara Levy, vice president for health policy at the organization. The claim is "not grounded in any physiology or scientifically valid data."

Akin is not alone in his view about rape and pregnancy, however. It dates at least to medieval times, when a 13th century English legal tome called Fleta asserted that pregnancy was prima facie evidence against a charge of rape, "for without a woman's consent she could not conceive."

A 19th century book, "Elements of Medical Jurisprudence" by Samuel Farr, said that conception is unlikely "without an excitation of lust, or the enjoyment of pleasure in the venereal act." That reflected the common notion that pregnancy requires a woman, like a man, to reach orgasm during intercourse.

Both early references were noted by The Guardian newspaper in a blog post on Monday.

In fact, "human ... female orgasm is not necessary for conception," explained a 1995 paper in the journal Animal Behaviour, one of many studies reaching the same conclusion.

THE STRESS FACTOR

In more modern times, the rape-pregnancy claim seems to have been linked to the fact that stress can decrease fertility.

"Mental stress can temporarily alter the functioning of your hypothalamus - an area of your brain that controls the hormones that regulate your menstrual cycle," explains the Mayo Clinic in a publication about infertility. "Ovulation and menstruation may stop as a result."

But the stress that reduces fertility is the chronic kind that occurs over months or years, not the acute trauma of a rape.

"A woman who is raped at a vulnerable time in her menstrual cycle is as likely to conceive and retain a pregnancy as a woman who was voluntarily attempting pregnancy," said ACOG's Levy. "There's absolutely no validity to any sort of theory that the trauma related to rape - or to anything else for that matter - would shut down ovulation that has already begun."

Physicians and researchers had long thought that conception occurs when sperm encounter an already-waiting egg. Recent research has shown that in fact sperm do the waiting, remaining in the woman's uterus or fallopian tubes until an egg is released from the ovaries.

Although the trauma of rape might impair a woman's fertility months or years later, said Levy, "you're not going to interrupt something (like the release of an egg) that's already started."

Numerous studies support that. In a 1996 study in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, researchers surveyed 4,008 American women for three years. Among women in their prime reproductive years, 12 to 45, five percent of rapes resulted in pregnancy, mostly among adolescents. One-third "did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester," the researchers found, concluding that "rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency."

It may occur with greater frequency than after consensual sex. Indeed, evolutionary psychologists - who seek to explain human behavior by imagining what actions might have helped our ancient ancestors survive and reproduce - say the reason rape has been so endemic throughout history is precisely because it often leads to pregnancy: men who commit that crime, goes the argument, were more likely to have progeny, passing along their "rape genes" to the next generation.

While the explanation for rape has been discredited, the fact that rape often leads to pregnancy has not been. In a 2003 study in the journal Human Nature, researchers found that 6.4 percent of rapes in the hundreds of women they surveyed caused pregnancy; that compares to a rate roughly half that with consensual intercourse. In Mexico, rape crisis centers have reported that some 15 percent of rapes cause pregnancy.

The rate may be high because rape victims are less likely to be using contraception at the time of the crime than are women in a relationship, who can also choose to forego sex during fertile periods in their reproductive cycle if they do not want to conceive.

Reuters Health Information © 2012

Re-printed: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/769468?src=nldne

Mike

[el_em_en_oh]

Politically, he'd be more effective and do a better job than McCaskill any day of the week and twice on Sunday's, as she's a MO RON.

But that said, personally (re: his ideology as a human being), I simply CAN'T get behind the guy, no matter how good a job he'd do, opposed to McCaskill.

Idiot

[adgal]

I cannot understand anyone defending his comments.  They aren't even accurate...I still want to know how a women's body knows a pregnancy is a product of rape and "takes care of it".  He does not seem entirely sane to me.

[orphanedhawk]

I agree El, its not the government's business in our bedroom and certainly not inside our bodies.

The freedom granted to all religious beliefs means no one should ever be forced to have an abortion or use birth control just as no one should ever be denied access.
These topics should not even be politicized.
It stops us from talking about important things like, where DID all that money go that Chase lost ?

[el_em_en_oh]

You know, this is simply indefensible.

He didn't misspeak, he said exactly what he meant.

Sad thing is, he'll probably be elected to the senate to continue to spread his  ignorance.

Smaller government.... Except in my bedroom, on my marriage certificate or my reproductive organs!!!

Republicans and Democrats alike, need to stay away from religion & sex. Gov't has no place in my church nor my bedroom.

That said, I'm an atheist, but who's counting!