« Clint Eastwood's back in new ad touting Romney | Main | Obama, on radio, compares Romney to Bush and Cheney »

October 24, 2012

Obama: Mourdock's remarks on rape were "outrageous and demeaning"

President Obama thought the comments uttered Tuesday by Indiana Republican Richard Mourdock that pregnancy from rape is "something God intended to happen" were "outrageous and demeaning to women,'' his spokeswoman said this morning.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has endorsed Mourdock, a candidate for U.S. Senate, and starred in a TV ad for him.

"The president felt those comments were outrageous and demeaning to women,'' Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. "This is a reminder that a Republican Congress working with a Republican president Mitt Romney would  (feel) that women should  not be able to make choices 
about their own health care."

Romney had sought to distance himself from the remarks, but did not pull the ad or the endorsement.

"This is an issue where Mitt Romney is starring in an ad for this senator (sic) and it is perplexing that he wouldn't demand to have that ad taken down,'' Psaki said. "I think it is clear that Mitt Romney, that many Republicans who are running for office including him, including Mr Murdock have very extreme positions on issue that women care deeply about in this country. That if they have the opportunity to be partners, in the White House and the Senate, then that is something that women should have, and I think will have, concern about as they are going to the voting booth."

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c64169e2017d3cf3ed37970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama: Mourdock's remarks on rape were "outrageous and demeaning":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Roselle Friedman

The Ninth Amendment is defined as "Rights Retained by the People. The framers of the Constitution believed that there are additional fundemental rights protected from governmental infringement,which exist alongside those fundamental rights specifically mentioned in the first eight constitutional amendments." For instance in Griswold v. Connecticut, a statute prohibiting the use of contraceptives was voided because it infringed on the right of privacy. While the right of privacy may not be specifically included in the first eight amendments, it is deep-rooted in our society, and therefore applies across all aspects of social life for American citizens. That is why personal choice such as having an abortion, or choosing the right to use contraception is a woman's right, and should be upheld under the statutes of the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution.

MEEDF

By extension of Mourdock's philosophy, is it fair to say that the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center was "God's will"? Was the annihilation of Jews by Hitler or any other atrocity imposed on one person by another "God's will"?

This is all too scary.


Carol H

someone should make a deck of cards, like the ones used by our honorable and courageous armed service members, of those who believe woman should have rape baby. We could hand them out to i.d. repubs who want to criminalize all abortion. What if one believed conception begins at erection? We need to go after the source. Rapists need stronger punishment.

PAD

Who are these people with these crazy ideas. A women's body is her body. The fetus cannot survive outside the womb. I consider myself a Christian,a supporter of states' rights and I believe in the right to bear arms. It is a disgrace to make a women have a baby that is not wanted or was produced from incest or rape. It appears many Republicans are ignorant and primarily men. Why does this country want to regress to old ideas? Abortion is a private decision between a woman and her God. Doesn't anyone remember when a woman could go to jail because she had an abortion??? I remember. By the way, all the women I know from the 60's that had abortions are now republican. Women with money and means are going to find a place out of the country to get rid of the pregnancy so overturning Roe vs Wade decision will only affect the poor and lower middle class...one of the 47%.

Jeff Birnberg

Legislation based on a "Belief" is not democratic!!! Life at conception is not a fact!!!

Beverly S. Hill

Remember the “Gotcha Question” asked of Michael Dukakis in the 1988 debate with George H. W. Bush?

Dukakis who opposed capital punishment was asked, “If your wife Kitty were raped and killed would you want the death penalty?”

I ask Romney, Ryan, Akin, Mourdock, Palin, etc., etc., etc. If your daughter, daughter-in-law, grand daughter, WIFE were raped and impregnated, would you want them to have the baby?

The Republican Party Rape Advisory Chart

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/230943_10151111066301872_59869883_n.jpg


LADIES – THIS IS OUT FUTURE UNDER THE REGIME OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!


Phoebe2012

The point being made by Mourdock from my point of view is that pregnancy in any form is a life that should be respected, and we should consider this from a spiritual standpoint, and look past rape. He does not view pregnancy from rape necessarily resulting in a child being born that would not benefit the world. To give a woman who has suffered a violation as violent as rape, of the type only she would understand, the choice to end a related pregnancy, which removes a child from being a part of society just because the next six months to term will be emotionally the largest challenge she would have, I believe women are strong, inherently strong, and it is not something Murdock believes would be bad enough for hm to say was so difficult to come to terms with that it requires the option of killing an unborn child. The logic is not there - to punish the mother or the unborn. Why choose? Why not get counseling for the rape, provide assistance to the woman to help her deal with the rape, and to come to terms with the pregnancy, and afford her a supported pregnancy, and options such as giving the child up for adoption, providing financial assistance in instances of rape and sealing any related information that the child was the product of rape if given up for adoption. We are a mature society, and women should be empowered to be fully informed of the life they are impacting when they choose abortion, and not be allowed to termation after 20 weeks, much less in my opinion after 8 weeks, as there is life here, which should be recognized and protected, regardless of how it came to be. We should be educating our women on their valued role in society to produce life, and protect life in all forms - not use abortion as a tool of convenience. Rather than giving them all an easy out, make sure they know what they are doing. We should be building our women up to think of the child. It used to be men threw money at women to get an abortion, and now we have men standing up for life - why do we not embrace that evolvement? Why not make laws to protect the unborn, and ensure we are developing men viewpoints as Mourdock has considered, to understand the benefit of valuing life, instead of falling into the trap further that unwanted pregnancies are easily dismissed? I find the world to be upside down in this regard, and women have been brainwashed into worrying more about everyone around them, over the life within them, and this argument over pro-life, or pro-choice just indicates the influence of an agenda to push a dividing line between men and women, women and motherhood, and the political parties, to manipulate women's choice to only be "democrat" on the false promise of self-protection of upholding Roe v Wade law, and protecting it so women can "choose" to kill their child. It is not just a personal decision if it takes life from our society - it can be easily correlated to murder; and if you ask women who have had the decision of abortion that it lives within most women their entire life as more than a "decision" but the taking of a life that will not be known. Mourdock spoke from a spiritual place, and I am sure most people who are spiritual know that inherently life should be protected from conception; no matter if they are religious or not - so why don't Democrats respect life, and evolve? It's a shame to not do so, and a moral issue. I'd like to hope that this country will eventually believe all life should be protected, and put our laws and Services in place to ensure women would not have to make this decision. In the meantime, I'd like to see folks like you speak up for the unborn, especially because you are well educated; help take this off the table, as not about winning on points to get someone elected, surpass the need for this argument by showing the logic of protecting life -- and show moral judgment. Thanks for your consideration of this viewpoint. I know I am just one voice but after an abortion, you can't take it back.

from a website I found weak information of statistics for rape related pregnancies. Complicating the issue is that some of the estimates of pregnancies due to rape are based on different years, and the estimates for total number of rapes can fluctuate widely because of small sample sizes and changes in methodology. A Department of Justice victimization survey detected an increase of nearly 50% in rapes and sexual assault in 2010 from the prior year, but the accompanying report cautioned that this was based on just 57 reports of rape in 2010, up from 36 the year before.
So what are we talking about this as a pivotal aspect of an election? It is irrational.

“The measurement of rape or sexual assault represents one of the most serious challenges in the field of victimization research,” according to the report.

The Justice victimization survey “doesn’t capture information on whether a pregnancy resulted from rape,” said Shannan Catalano, a statistician with the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the branch of Justice that produces the victimization survey. “The survey does contain a question that asks female victims whether or not they were pregnant at the time of the victimization, but there is a good bit of missing data on this variable due to respondent refusal to answer. There’s also a timing issue because a respondent may not know whether they are pregnant at the time of an interview or for many months afterward.”

So as vague as it is, and statistically insignificant in terms of the violent act % of society, and the number of pregnancies unmeasureable, why make this a focal point of the election? We know Roe V Wade is here to stay; the changes in the State by State laws re: Pro Choice concerns is to protect the unborn after 20 weeks of pregnancy to eliminate late term abortions, except in the case of protecting the mother's health. This type of protection of unborn concerns is to ensure we are humane. When are we going to promote humane decisions for humans? I just think we are way too analytical, and this should all be from the heart. Thanks.

Enni

Replying to your comments about Mourdock's statement. I watch Rachel's show and every other msnbc show EVERYDAY! I have the upmost respect for her views, opinions and comments. I am a moderate democrat because I am a Christian and believe the word of God. However, I am a democrat. I even have 3 bumper stickers, one being, "I am not a republican". I completely disagree with your interpretation of Mourdock's comments. Yes you are twisting them. There is a verse that says, "For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom". Rachel you are really intelligent but you can not even attempt to understand what God wants. HE DID NOT MEAN THAT THE RAPE WAS GOD'S PLAN. MY SON'S LIFE WAS THE RESULT OF A RAPE AND I BELIEVE THAT MY SON IS A GIFT FROM GOD. My sons life is not a mistake. Yes, he was conceived out of a horrible act but his life is not a horrible mistake. YES, HIS LIFE WAS INTENDED TO BE LIVED! Now Mourdock may have said some other weird things but this I understand. An unborn child life, UNWANTED OR NOT, IS INTENDED TO BE LIVED. Simply because the conception was made. A woman may not want that life to be lived. My beliefs are not to be forced on the nation. Man has to choose whom they will serve. It has to be a choice. Stop attacking someone who voices their belief in God's word. Learn the word.

mlsj2012

I always wondered whatever happened to Rosemary's Baby. Now I know. It is Murdock all grown up!

ibsteve2u

lolll...another blog entry, only? OK, which one of you guys went in hock in one of Adelson's casinos?

The comments to this entry are closed.

ABOUT THIS BLOG

"Planet Washington" covers politics and government. It is written by journalists in McClatchy's Washington Bureau.

Send a story suggestion or news tip.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

THIS MONTH

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2 3 4
    5 6 7 8 9 10 11
    12 13 14 15 16 17 18
    19 20 21 22 23 24 25
    26 27 28 29 30 31  

BLOGROLL