I Told You Regarding Akin (Updated)

Yesterday I wrote about this deal with Todd Akin and the notion of women "faking" rape claims.

It is, however, accurate to say that the McCorvey part of Roe v. Wade used a false allegation of rape to challenge the Texas law. Not only was Norma McCorvey not raped, but she never had an abortion to begin with. It was immaterial anyway because the Texas law was being challenged on constitutional grounds and I believe there was a class-action claim. Right now I am too tired and lazy to look it up.

What the anti-abortion people are trying to argue is that if you put a bunch of exceptions to anti-abortion legislation, some women will find a way to "game" it. I was around during pre-Roe, and it is true that women, especially those with money, could always make a false claim in order to get an abortion. False "mental health" claims were especially common. The key was getting a doctor to perform the deed.

Poor women, of course, couldn't easily get abortions at all. They and many other young women without abortion access and not marrying the fathers were forced into giving their babies up for adoption. Dan Rather Reports tonight had a good segment on the so-called "baby scoop" of the post-war, pre-Roe era where young women were conned into giving the children up and regretted it. Some 80 percent of young, unmarried white women gave their babies up for adoption as recently as 1970; declining birth rates and less social stigma attached to unwed motherhood reduced the percentage to only around 1 percent decades later. If it were up to Akin, Ryan, and company, these scam adoption practices would make a comeback regardless of the damage it did to women and the children they gave away.

I personally don't like the "exceptions" to banning abortion because they assume that unless a woman is somehow "virtuous" (as in having her life at stake, being a victim of rape or incest, in danger of giving birth to a severely deformed baby), she shouldn't have the right to an abortion. She is a slut if she doesn't fit some narrow definition of who should get abortions. The implied double standard is offensive. The men involved are held to no such standard.

Those who believe all abortions should be criminalized at least are consistent. You either believe a fetus is a baby with a "right to life" or you don't. The circumstances surrounding the conception and pregnancy should be irrelevant to this. The woman's behavior should not be relevant, either.

Those who think Roe should stand believe the ruling was reasonable. Women have a right to abortion without restrictions until fetal "viability." The circumstances surrounding the conception and pregnancy are irrelevant to this. The woman's behavior should not be relevant, either.

Anyway, Akin is trying to dig himself out of a hole and probably is giving Senator Claire McCaskill more ammunition.

He apparently meant "legitimate rape CLAIM" but left off the last word.


Meanwhile, this woman could teach Akin a thing or two about rape and pregnancy.