Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Todd Akin Was Arrested Multiple Times For Physically Blocking Women’s Access To Abortion Clinics

Posted by toomanybrats 
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) — who came under fire after asserting that “legitimate rapes” don’t often result in pregnancy — was arrested multiple times in the 1980s for protesting outside of abortion clinics in St. Louis.

Between 1985 and 1987, Akin worked with other anti-choice activists to physically block women’s access to reproductive health clinics in the city, during what RH Reality Check describes as a “hotbed of anti-choice violence and harassment” in St. Louis.

At that time, Akin went by his given first name, William, rather than the middle name he currently uses.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/10/25/1091791/todd-akin-arrested-abortion-clinics/?mobile=nc
Who's surprised by ANY politician breaking the law all over the place anymore?

Seriously, where the hell are all the media 'gatekeepers'? Why do we have to rely on third-rate news sources like Internet blogs to find out what these clowns are really up to?
yup. nut surprised. lol!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So.. We know that food and water are running out, with overpopulation and all... Yet people keep on poppin' out those babies! I guess they want to have their baby and eat it too...

My top reason is that parenting gives you a free license to be selfish based purely on the fact that you're being selfish for an emanation of your own self. The illusion that what you do to benefit your children benefits them solely is a fallacy. Every parent benefits from the benefits that their children receive. Henceforth, it gives one a license to perpetuate a dog-eat-dog mentality that I perceive to be amoral. Parents say that their children are their greatest loves, what they forget to add is that they are their ONLY loves and only because their children are a reflection of themselves. I prefer to be able to love multiple people and have lasting relationships of many types and possess the essential core value of empathy for all than to restrict myself to an echo chamber of ego-masturbation and self-serving chicanery.

In short: Not parenting makes you a better person.
Love a knee shoved real hard and tight in the "Daddies" and teach him what its like when your raped, then give birth to a watermelon.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Quote
Snark Shark
a REPUBLICAN?? BREAKING THE LAW?? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE IT!

bouncing and laughingbouncing and laughingbouncing and laughing

What's pathetic is that the Rethuglicans don't care about this anywhere near as much as they would care if he were gay (closet gayness [always from anti-gay ones for some reason] and bullying women being the main 2 types of scandals these fuckers have).

Harassing women? Eh, whatevs.

Liking dick? OMG, BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!

smile rolling left righteyes2

It is even possible for someone to be more bigoted towards a larger percentage of the population than these asshats are? They hate women, they hate gays, they hate minorities, they have everyone who wasn't born in America, they hate young people, they hate atheists, they hate Muslims, they hate scientists, they hate unions and everyone in them, they hate liberals, they hate the poor, they hate the childfree, they hate the educated... I mean, jesus christ, who the fuck DON'T they hate?

As far as I can tell, it's just fetuses and old white men. And I'm not even sure about that anymore, seeing as how they insist on making sure as many of these fetuses are born to unprepared women as possible, and they also insist on making the old white men who aren't rich simply starve and die of treatable, simple shit.

Ok, old, white, rich, Christian men. That's all I can think of. That's, like, what? 1% of the population?
Quote
lilin_unite
Quote
Snark Shark
a REPUBLICAN?? BREAKING THE LAW?? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE IT!

bouncing and laughingbouncing and laughingbouncing and laughing

What's pathetic is that the Rethuglicans don't care about this anywhere near as much as they would care if he were gay (closet gayness [always from anti-gay ones for some reason] and bullying women being the main 2 types of scandals these fuckers have).

Harassing women? Eh, whatevs.

Liking dick? OMG, BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!

smile rolling left righteyes2

It is even possible for someone to be more bigoted towards a larger percentage of the population than these asshats are? They hate women, they hate gays, they hate minorities, they have everyone who wasn't born in America, they hate young people, they hate atheists, they hate Muslims, they hate scientists, they hate unions and everyone in them, they hate liberals, they hate the poor, they hate the childfree, they hate the educated... I mean, jesus christ, who the fuck DON'T they hate?

As far as I can tell, it's just fetuses and old white men. And I'm not even sure about that anymore, seeing as how they insist on making sure as many of these fetuses are born to unprepared women as possible, and they also insist on making the old white men who aren't rich simply starve and die of treatable, simple shit.

Ok, old, white, rich, Christian men. That's all I can think of. That's, like, what? 1% of the population?

bowing
Lilin_unite.... Mr. T: I pitty tha foolhankyou

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So.. We know that food and water are running out, with overpopulation and all... Yet people keep on poppin' out those babies! I guess they want to have their baby and eat it too...

My top reason is that parenting gives you a free license to be selfish based purely on the fact that you're being selfish for an emanation of your own self. The illusion that what you do to benefit your children benefits them solely is a fallacy. Every parent benefits from the benefits that their children receive. Henceforth, it gives one a license to perpetuate a dog-eat-dog mentality that I perceive to be amoral. Parents say that their children are their greatest loves, what they forget to add is that they are their ONLY loves and only because their children are a reflection of themselves. I prefer to be able to love multiple people and have lasting relationships of many types and possess the essential core value of empathy for all than to restrict myself to an echo chamber of ego-masturbation and self-serving chicanery.

In short: Not parenting makes you a better person.
if anyone -man, woman, or child - tried to block my access to a healthcare facility i would move them out of the way with a machete.

:sam
I second the machete use. Assholes.
I wonder why they never block access to ~

Liquor stores
"Adult" shops
Strip clubs

Why aren't they blocking men's access to strip clubs?

What about gay bars? They're anti gay too - why not protest and block access there?

Probably because they know those guys would kick their asses.
Old rich white men? I'm thinking they make up about .0001% of the population.

Must be verrrry tiring hating the other 99.999% Whew! Poor widdle rich white guys. They're such victims.
He should have STAYED jailed.
"The abortion politics of Campaign 2012: Is that something that God intended to happen?"

http://news.yahoo.com/the-abortion-politics-of-campaign-2012-03044584.html

First three paragraphs:

By Virginia Heffernan

Happy birthday, abortion! You’ve bedeviled philosophers, politicians and doctors for 25 centuries! That’s right: Since around the 5th-century B.C., when the Hippocratic Oath for physicians first contained a clause about abortion, we’ve driven ourselves insane over the implications of a simple, common, ancient medical procedure.

As the explosion of abortion punditry in Campaign 2012 made clear, the issue exerts a radioactive fascination. Millions of temples and keyboards began pounding in August after Todd Akin, the Republican candidate for Senate in Missouri, engaged in some pseudoscientific theorizing on the impossibility of pregnancy after a “legitimate rape.” And the number must have reached Carl Sagan proportions after Richard Mourdock, the Republican candidate for Senate in Indiana, uttered this line: “Even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”

Yikes. Did Mourdock say rape is divinely inspired? Not exactly. Journalists sensitive to religious cosmologies like Amy Sullivan of the New Republic explained that Mourdock had seen God’s intention only in the life conceived during rape, not the rape itself..........

(snip)

I have to say, I don't understand that word "simple" in the first paragraph, since, as she admits later, it WASN'T at all simple or safe if you weren't qualified to do it - and, like any other surgery, NO ONE was really qualified before the days of anesthesia, antiseptics, not to mention the protection of the law - as in Roe vs. Wade.
Quote
lenona
I have to say, I don't understand that word "simple" in the first paragraph, since, as she admits later, it WASN'T at all simple or safe if you weren't qualified to do it - and, like any other surgery, NO ONE was really qualified before the days of anesthesia, antiseptics, not to mention the protection of the law - as in Roe vs. Wade.

I think what she's saying (without reading the article) is that it is simple compared to the things we can accomplish with medicine now - something that was practiced for thousands of years, unlike more modern medical advances like the heart bypass. It is simple in that we have known for a long time what causes the condition (which is far more knowledge than we even had about disease, until recently), what needs to be done, and how to do it, even if we haven't had the means to make it safe for that entire period of time.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login