Typically when a politician taking the kind of heat Akin is says he won't resign, he resigns. But my guess is that he really won't resign. To resign could be a turning point in the anti-abortion fight---that public outrage over extreme views on abortion could bring down a proponent. Where in the calls for Akin to quit the race are deMint, Lee, etc.? The pressure is coming from what's left of "the establishment" in the Republican party who fear not taking control of the Senate as they had planned and who are despised by the tea partiers.  The right wing has a steady long term agenda, and IMO one race here or there doesn't matter. What matters is not giving an inch on the anti-abortion fight. Besides, Akin will probably win the damned race.

This episode is an eye-opener. I must admit that beforehand I really didn't understand why they were trying to parse and change the definition of rape, with the corollary narrative about secret anti pregnancy hormones. If a woman who was raped also gets pregnant, it nullifies the rape. If a woman is raped and doesn't get pregnant she has to prove force---which they are steadfastly trying to redefine in the belief that a good girl doesn't have to worry about rape: the women who are raped generally ask for it, everyone knows that. So show me the bruises, give me proof that you didn't want it. How hard did you fight him off. You know you wanted it. You were in his apartment--why were you there, weren't you expecting to have sex. Were you using seductive perfume, what about those skimpy panties?

I'm contributing to helping Obama win and defeating a right wing view of why women can't be trusted to tell the truth.  If the women in this country can't stand up for themselves, I can't help them.   

The Romney campaigns message that----now----rape is an exception, viewed in the context of redefining rape, is an empty and misleading statement. 

Both Ryan and Romney support Personhood amendments---which would essentially outlaw abortion in any form, plus most likely prevent forms of contraception and IVF. 

 Rep. Todd Akins stance on ‘forcible’ rape is not an anomaly. In 2011 Akins was a co-sponsor and signer of H.R 3 – submitted by the House's new Republican majority. Under H.R. 3, only victims of “forcible rape” would qualify for federally funded abortions. Victims of statutory rape— any minor female impregnated by an adult male—would be on their own, as would all victims of incest if they’re over 18.  “Forcible rape” isn’t defined in the criminal code, but adding the term forcible would ensure any rape where there is no evident violence—i.e. a victim is drugged, doesn’t fight back so as not to be beaten/killed or has any reduced mental capacity - would be even more difficult, if not impossible, to prosecute.

The goal of this bill was to place more restrictions on what defines rape. Among the co-signers of H.R 3, was the GOP’s presumptive candidate for Vice-President in 2012, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI).

H.R. 3 was withdrawn and never voted on – yet.

In the not so distant past, the GOP might not have even realized that they had an Akin problem.  The absurd belief as issue here has been around a long time and has been taken by some, apparently, as gospel.

In 2012, the strategists at the national level are informed enough to know that such comments are harmful not only to a candidate, but to everyone associated with that candidate, even by loose party affiliation.

But, it's interesting that Akin is now using this as an outsider ploy -- he's been abandoned by the party elites and by the Democrat thought police, and now he's waging a fight, hoping for hardcore grassroots money from people who believe that saying this kind of thing is just fine and dandy.

I suspect and hope that he will fail, but I worry that what PT Barnum said about the public in general applies doubly to Republican partisans.

Akin convinces himself that there is true "forcible" rape or the woman is a slut and a liar.The woman has to show her bruises and broken bones in the public square or be condemned.No bruises, no rape. This is utterly ridiculous and Christians are called upon to reject this evil stereotype. If the man is physically stronger or carrying a weapon during the attack, law enforcement tells women to do whatever they have to do to survive the attack. Surviving an assault by not fighting back is not"lying back and enjoying it", it is surviving and having to deal with the psychological effects later.Akin is a fool.

In the case of fornication, it takes two individuals to complete the act.Was Akin a virgin prior to marriage? Is he willing to state that he was virginal prior to marriage publicly ? Has Akin been faithful in his marriage? Judge not.....etc.

In the case of a woman who has had an abortion, is she to be scorned by Christians, or loved.If she is told that she must bear the child to term, does a Christian nation have to provide aid to the woman to ensure, a good life for the child, or do we condemn her for being a poor mother? If  society encourages the birth what other obligations does a Christian society incur? Do we sent the child off to a government orphanage?

I think some will condemn people and feel that they are doing their Christian duty.

Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a slut.Akin may have two daughters, but he believes other people's daughters are sluts, just as some are certain that people they don't know are doing a poor job of raising their daughters. However, we all know that if Akin's daughters were to have an unwanted pregnancy, he would continue to love them.His daughter would not be a slut, but a child who made a mistake.If the daughter had an abortion, would Akin abandon, her? The answer to that question would tell us more about Akin than the daughter.