A question to the moral Right (seeking insight into ways of slicing tough ethical rape questions)

OK, you crazy Social Conservatives.

Why do your Right-Winging moral crusader public officials implode every stinking time you guys look like you might have a chance? Who are you going to blame now? The MSM for directly reporting the stupid shit your proselytizers spew on national television when someone sticks a mike in front of them? Are you going to blame the heathens who control the information channels and control everything? Or worse yet, will you gather scientists who will help you deconstruct the stupid stuff you “spokesperson” said in order to spray some perfume on the pile of shit he left for you to clean up?

I predict, in my Nostradamian fashion, that the conversation which ensues from this soundbite over the next few weeks, or months, regarding the Missouri Republican Senate hopeful’s astounding and articulate scientific allusions to the physiological state of women under the influence of sexual orgasm, will deal exclusively with the science of the situation. Both sides will dig up data to support their argument. Liberals will point out how many births-by-rape occur each year; conservatives will be profuse with medical proof that women’s cervix’s do in fact clam up under stressful sex (and Sunday worship).

This bickering doesn’t matter! People will argue incessantly about scientific shit that has absolutely no bearing on the argument. Who cares what women’s reproductive apparatus undergoes during rape? Does it matter? Even if only one woman each year is impregnated by a rapist, what more is there to argue? People love discussing shit to a tiresome end and they do not care if any conclusions are met. Because they just love hearing themselves speak. But I guarantee where this community argument is going. “Does the female cervix allow impregnation under stress?” Probably not as much, but the fact is that women can become pregnant in any situation and when you consider that in the United States alone, there were about 84,000 reported rapes in 2010, only a fool would postulate that none of those resulted in pregnancy because of this awesome physiological refutation of impregnation women experience under force. We are conflating rape and abortion. Rape sucks, and you know what? Abortion sucks too. No one in their right mind loves abortions. But they are a distasteful necessity. Still, please inform your Christian demagogues to shut up with the science and quit quoting Dr. Seuss.

Rape is a very sensitive subject in the MRA-sphere because it is wielded as an aggressive tool by aggrieved women, however, we should not ever discount that genuine, evil, physical rapes take place. And some pregnancies result. Is this so wrong to recognize?

Once the right-wing moral crusading mouthpieces start veering into science land, they sound like complete, ignorant suntanned dorks. (BTW, what’s up with Akins’ tan!??).

The battle between Left and Right on the national front is ultimately a secular journey, indeed. Like it or not. There are many, many urban Republicans who love one-night-stands and partying. I don’t believe they feel emboldened by the quaint theoretical bullshit of your garden-variety anti-abortion scientifically illiterate fanatics, who incidentally, don’t seem to have the sharpest familiarity with female physiology.