Akin's Folly

By now, you have probably heard more than enough about Missouri Rep. Todd Akin, who is running against the vulnerable incumbent Senator, Claire McCaskill.  Akin, a 6-term congressman, did not drop out of the race before the 5pm deadline yesterday, which means that if he drops out now, it will have to be accompanied by a court order.

In instances like these, I am always inclined to support the Republican nominee (e.g., the inconsistent treatment of Republicans and Democrats by the media for one), but upon learning that Democrats in Missouri directed over a million dollars against Akin's Republican primary opponents and knowing the strong possibility that Republicans could take over the Senate, I am with the strong majority who would like to see Akin step aside.  Not only does his comment do damage to the Pro-Life movement, but on top of that, Democrats can now demagogue on the issue and act as though all Republicans and conservatives believe Akin's statements until they prove otherwise (which also shifts the focus off the Obama record and the economy).

Here is Paul Mirengoff taking apart Akin's statements and trying to make sense out of them:

Here is Akin’s statement: 

It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that [a pregnancy resulting from rape] is 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 of the rapist, and not attacking the child.

First, contrary to the outrageous claims of feminists/Democratic partisans like Kirsten Powers, Akin never claimed that there is such a thing as a legitimate rape (in the sense of an acceptable or ok rape). Clearly, when he said “legitimate rape” he meant actual rape, as opposed to consensual sex that later is alleged to be rape. 

We know this from the context, including the fact that he calls for punishment of the rapist. If Akin thought that actual rape can be “legitimate,” he would not have advocated punishing the rapist. Akin plainly was saying that in cases of real rape the female body shuts down the reproductive process, whereas in cases of falsely alleged rape, it does not.
Some feminists would take issue with Akin’s implicit claim that not all reported rapes are actual rapes. But that view represents the triumph of ideology over facts. In reality, not all claims of rape are legitimate claims 

The most damning interpretation of Akin’s remarks would be that if a pregnancy results, the claim of rape could not have been legitimate. But Akin stopped short of making that claim. Indeed, he assumes that this is not the case. And he talks of the body “trying” to shut the process down, not invariably being able to do so. 

The problem with Akin’s statement – and it is a very big problem – lies in his view that the female body has ways to shut down its reproductive process in response to rape, such that pregnancies resulting from rape are “really rare.” The evidence strongly contradicts this assertion. Akin’s embrace of junk science not supported by data represents the same kind of triumph of ideology over facts that, as noted above, some feminists are guilty of.

I can tell what Akin was attempting to say, and it doesn't even make any sense.  Plus, resorting to language like that really makes it difficult to mount any kind of defense even if what he said was close to some level of rationality.  Akin needs to step down and let someone else (Jim Talent) take on a very beatable opponent.