When life gives you lemons, make rape-incest babies

by d

I don't have to live with the consequences of your actions!

I have been eager for the chance to talk about conservative Senate candidate Sharron Angle (Republican, Nevada, challenging Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid). For the purpose of this blog, I wanted to have a really good reason to lay into her. So I bided my time, and now it has come.

It’s not secret that Sharron Angle is anti-abortion. Way anti-abortion. She has stated before that she believes abortion interferes with God’s plan (with audio):

MANDERS: Is there any reason at all for an abortion?

ANGLE: Not in my book.

MANDERS: So, in other words, rape and incest would not be something?

ANGLE: You know, I’m a Christian, and I believe that God has a plan and a purpose for each one of our lives and that he can intercede in all kinds of situations and we need to have a little faith in many things.

Now news is breaking of another interview, where Angle told teens raped by their fathers to ‘make lemonade.’

The interview took place on June 30th, on the KXNT840’s Alan Stock New Show. The station also runs Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Angle has appeared on Stock’s show several times. On the 30th, he was hailing her as “the next Senator from Nevada!” Our readers may be interested to note that she would also be “the first female senator ever from the great state of Nevada!” He also took it upon himself to give her opportunity to respond to “this rag, The Sun” which is constantly misrepresenting and misquoting her, oh and that one TV interview she gave with that guy.

The interview was brought to the Huffington Post‘s attention and they posted a partial transcript and audio on July 8th. You can listen to the full interview on the radio station’s site.

Stock: Let me bring up one other topic that I rarely talk about here, because it’s one of those topics that’s a lose-lose, but we’ve got to talk about it because it was brought up in your TV interview and that has to do with the issue of abortion, and whether or not abortion should be available in the case of rape or incest. The question to you at the time by the interviewer was that do you want the government to go and tell a 13 year-old child who has been raped by her father that she has to have that baby. And of course you responded ‘I didn’t say that I always say that I value life.’ Where do you stand on the issue of abortion, a consensual abortion, from a person who is raped or is pregnant as a result of incest?Angle: Well right now our law permits that. My own personal feelings and that is always what I express, my personal feeling is that we need to err on the side of life. There is a plan and a purpose, a value to every life no matter what it’s location, age, gender or disability. So whenever we talk about government and government’s role, government’s role is to protect life and that’s what our Founding Father said, that we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Stock: What do you say then to a young girl, I am going to place it as he said it, when a young girl is raped by her father, let’s say, and she is pregnant. How do you explain this to her in terms of wanting her to go through the process of having the baby?

Angle: I think that two wrongs don’t make a right. And I have been in the situation of counseling young girls, not 13 but 15, who have had very at risk, difficult pregnancies. And my counsel was to look for some alternatives, which they did. And they found that they had made what was really a lemon situation into lemonade. Well one girl in particular moved in with the adoptive parents of her child, and they both were adopted. Both of them grew up, one graduated from high school, the other had parents that loved her and she also graduated from high school. And I’ll tell you the little girl who was born from that very poor situation came to me when she was 13 and she said ‘I know what you did thank you for saving my life.’ So it is meaningful to me to err on the side of life.

Because having the baby of your incestuous rape is just sour grapes.

I have some incredulity for that story of hers. This has to be the one-in-a-million situation. Can anyone confirm that a couple adopted a fifteen year old girl pregnant with her own baby? Cuz, wow. Those people are saints.

As for the saving a life thing, I think we all need to turn that scary, scary lens on our lives. Umpteen things could have prevented your birth. Your parents might never have met, or they might have had a fight that broke them up before you were conceived. If a different condom had broken, your mother could have gotten pregnant earlier, and thus been unable to conceive you. The slightly jostling of gametes would not have created you. Something natural could have terminated the pregnancy. Perhaps something just like you was forming, but the body determined something wasn’t right, so it flushed you. Maybe mom got ill, or had an accident, and the body gave up the fetus to save itself. (Our bodies are very pragmatic that way.) In fact, mom herself could have died in a car accident, or perhaps she was on her way to an abortion clinic that was bombed by mad pro-lifers and she wasn’t even going for an abortion. Or, maybe dad had garlic for dinner and she just didn’t feel like kissing him, let alone letting him do her.

We owe our lives to billions of random factors lining in the way they do. Other people interfering is far less miraculous than the universe giving its tacit blessing.

I listened to the interview in full, and discovered lots of other interesting things. Angle asserts that her mention of “second-amendment solutions” was “Just a broad statement concerning our second amendment rights,” not a call for gun rights activists to storm the battlements, though that’s certainly what it sounded like at the time. She says “No,” to Elena Kagan. Oh, and this is how she wrapped up the abortion portion:

Stock: All right, a lot of people respect that and have a lot of gratitude to you for that. Let me ask you this, very another important question on this. And I have got to put this on the table. What happens when it comes to a question between the life of the mother? If the mother’s life is at risk, would you allow for an abortion, would you understand that an abortion if the mother’s life that would be taken if the baby’s born?

Angle: Certainly, even before Roe v. Wade therapeutic abortion was allowed in this country and it is of course a personal choice, once again, between a woman and her doctor. And that’s really all we’ve ever said, but when the Supreme Court got involved and decided to dictate their morality in 1973, that’s what put this whole issue on the governmental table. It should never have been there in the first place and most people agree with you, Alan, ‘Why are we even discussing this?’ These are the kinds of issues that are truly very personal issues and should never have been part of the government discussion in the first place, and so it gets us widely away from what’s really at stake here and that is that Harry Reid and Barack Obama have taken over our country and given us high unemployment, high foreclosure rates, and high bankruptcies. And that’s really the issues, and that’s really why I’m running, is to discuss those kinds of things. Now, Harry Reid says that he is pro-life as well, but his actions speak louder than his words. He is willing to appoint and confirm judges such as those judges that made this an issue in the first place, that would like to continue this discussion rather than put an end to it. And then he also does things like the health care bill, Obamacare bill, that makes government, and makes those who absolutely are against abortions in the first place have to pay for them through their tax payer dollars, and I think then there are those of us who are just economically savvy, and say, you know, government shouldn’t be in this business at all, it shouldn’t be paying for those no matter which side of this issue you fall down on. So that’s, yanno, that’s really the larger issues, is the economy and how we’re spending our money.

Oh, mah gawd. I need to parse this.

“Even before Roe v. Wade therapeutic abortion was allowed in this country.”

This is true, good job, Sharron! Specifically, it was legal from time immemorial and no one got around to outlawing it in the US until the 1800s. Some interesting factoids from the National Abortion Federation:

Abortion Was Legal

Abortion has been performed for thousands of years, and in every society that has been studied. It was legal in the United States from the time the earliest settlers arrived. At the time the Constitution was adopted, abortions before “quickening” were openly advertised and commonly performed.

Making Abortion Illegal
In the mid-to-late 1800s states began passing laws that made abortion illegal. The motivations for anti-abortion laws varied from state to state. One of the reasons included fears that the population would be dominated by the children of newly arriving immigrants, whose birth rates were higher than those of “native” Anglo-Saxon women.

YAY, racism! Hating other white people and saving babies, that’s the American way!

“It is of course a personal choice, once again, between a woman and her doctor.”

Wh–bauh–th–That’s our line! Yes! The whole basis for Roe v. Wade is privacy, the right for a woman to make a private decision without the interference of government.

“But when the Supreme Court got involved and decided to dictate their morality in 1973, that’s what put this whole issue on the governmental table.”

What? No, you’re confusing guaranteeing legal abortion as an option, for this very private decision, with mandating it. The SCOTUS has never said that you must have an abortion. No one has! The phrase is pro-choice. Make whatever choice you want, you have all the options open to you. There are plenty of people who believe you should have this right to choose but who would never do it themselves. You know, like Voltaire’s I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Oh, but he was French, so he doesn’t count.

Angle is also pulling States Rights into this, which is a shitty way of saying, “At least let me make it illegal in my own back yard!” Conservatives always seem to think that, secretly, 90% of the country agrees with them, and if we would just take these issues away from the liberal federal-level folks, the state-level can sort it all out. Because the federal government is the enemy.

“These are the kinds of issues that are truly very personal issues and should never have been part of the government discussion in the first place.”

Yeah, and keeping abortion legal is the only way to keep the government out of it. If it’s outlawed, it’s interference. Just like it’s interference for Texas to insist you can’t buy or use sex toys. (They’re ‘education aids’ down there. That happen to buzz. Loudly.)

So, then Angle shows she has two brain cells to rub together and returns to her playbook: making Harry Reid (and Obama and the Democrats at large) look like monsters.

“What’s really at stake here and that is that Harry Reid and Barack Obama have taken over our country and given us high unemployment, high foreclosure rates, and high bankruptcies. And that’s really the issues, and that’s really why I’m running, is to discuss those kinds of things.”

A set of legitimate elections with 61% (Reid, 2004) and an approximately 7% lead (Obama, 2008) does not qualify as a hostile takeover.

I’m sorry, who gave us a shitty economy? Let me see, who repealed the legislation and oversight that prevented banks from selling bullshit and inflating their stated earnings, which lead to bankruptcies and foreclosures, tanking the world economy and consequently tossing millions of jobs in the crapper? Gosh, Obama must have been really busy between Feb ’08 and August ’08! You’d think that would take years to do, like, decades. Republican decades. Oh well!

“Now, Harry Reid says that he is pro-life as well, but his actions speak louder than his words. He is willing to appoint and confirm judges such as those judges that made this an issue in the first place, that would like to continue this discussion rather than put an end to it.”

No, we went over this, SCOTUS voted to keep government from interfering in your life, because it’s your life. I thought you people liked anarc–I mean autonomy.

What happened to all that ‘litmus test’ garbage everyone used to go on about?

“And then he also does things like the health care bill, Obamacare bill, that makes government, and makes those who absolutely are against abortions in the first place have to pay for them through their tax payer dollars.”

NO. NO, goddammit, this has been proven to be false. Specific legislation was introduced and approved solely to shut you people up. Do you not know who Bart Stupak is? The amendment was named for him. The Stupak Amendment. It wasn’t in the bill to pay for abortion in the first place, but Stupak’s pro-life and he pushed to get even tighter wording put in there. It did shut some pro-lifers up enough to vote for it. I can’t even find you a current link for this, because it was settled back in MARCH.

GOD, have you been living under a rock?

I’m done. I could go on about how she’s sanitized her message for the general election, or other batshit crazy things she’s said (get rid of the Dept. of Education, the government is being mean to BP, quote me and I’ll sue, lets leave the UN), but I am done. For tonight. I’m certain she’ll pop up here again before November.

And if we’re very, very unlucky, after November as well.

3 Responses to “When life gives you lemons, make rape-incest babies”

  1. This woman is a total airhead. She needs to actually think before she speaks, but then again that might require her to have a brain in the first place. Whoever her PR person is needs to be fired for allowing her to say such ridiculous things. But, at least she’s being honest enough so that the people of Nevada know not to vote for her as a majority (I hope). Not to mention that if she absolutely cannot keep her religion out of her damn governmental job then she needs to NOT run for office. That’s all this really is, a way to sneak indoctrination in through the back door. I completely abhor such blatant nonsense from people who are downright batcrackers.

  2. That woman…
    Wow. Just, wow.
    Anti-choicers can call arsenic lemonaid for all I care, but that doesn’t change that it’s arsenic. And there’s no contradiction with her stance on gun rights, eh?

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: