Rep. Steve King has never heard of such a thing!

Oh. My. God. Rep. Steve King has never ever heard about a pregnancy resulting from statutory rape or non-forcible teen rape. Whatever the fuck non-forcible means, anyways.

REPORTER: You support the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act that would provide federal funding for abortions to a person that has been forcefully raped. But what if someone isn’t forcibly raped and for example, a 12-year-old who gets pregnant? Should she have to bring this baby to term?

KING: Well I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way and I’d be open to hearing discussion about that subject matter. Generally speaking it’s this: that there millions of abortions in this country every year. Millions of them are paid for at least in part by taxpayers. I think it’s immoral for us to compel conscientious objecting taxpayers to fund abortion through the federal government, or any other government for that matter. So that’s my stand. And if there are exceptions there, then bring me those exceptions let’s talk about it. In the meantime it’s wrong for us to compel pro-life people to pay taxes to fund abortion.

Y’all. I cannot make this shit up. Like… what? You’ve never ever ever heard of Glee? Or watched anything on MTV? Or heard of Push/Precious?

Some defending the representative have said that he obviously knew about teen pregnancy through statutory rape, just didn’t know anyone personally who’d been affected by it. TPM writes:

After this post was published, King’s office said he had been taken out of context.

“What he was saying was, he personally does not know a girl who was raped,” Brittany Lesser, a spokesperson for King said. “He never says, ‘I’ve never heard of that.’ There’s a fine line between ‘I’ve never heard of that’ and ‘I don’t know personally anybody who’s been raped. There’s a difference. There is a difference.”

As TPM originally reported, King’s response to a question about whether a young girl who gets pregnant should have to carry a baby to term was, “I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way.” King was not asked  whether he knew anyone personally who had been in such a circumstance.

 Bolded for truth, y’all. No one asked King whether he knew anyone personally, they just asked whether or not a child should be legislatively coerced into bearing a child. Gah.

Comments

  1. sbg says

    Well, obviously, if you don’t know anyone it’s happened to, then it’s not real. It honestly frightens me these people exist, and that I have close blood relatives that would side with them.

    And then there’s this guy, across the pond, on Julian Assange.

    I mean not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion. Some people believe that when you go to bed with somebody, take off your clothes, and have sex with them and then fall asleep, you’re already in the sex game with them.

    It might be really bad manners not to have tapped her on the shoulder and said, “do you mind if I do it again?”. It might be really sordid and bad sexual etiquette, but whatever else it is, it is not rape or you bankrupt the term rape of all meaning.

    I have felt the constant need for a shower since Sunday.

  2. says

    While there IS a difference between “I’ve never heard of it” and “it hasn’t happened to anyone I know”, I have to ask what the fuck the latter has to do with anything. I mean, I’ve never personally known anyone who was murdered, so we should stop letting my tax dollars fund murder trials? This is just absolutely meaningless.

    And I’m damn sick of people talking about tax payers having to pay for abortions. I had to fund that fucking war in Iraq and Afghanistan that killed and maimed so many kids and served the interests of no one I give a damn about. If we’re moving to a system where you can pick and choose what your tax dollars fund, it had better cover more than just whatever shit conservatives are on about.

  3. Jenny says

    Genuine, sincere question here, from someone in the UK: I thought that there was some kind of legislation in the US already, preventing taxpayers’ money being used to pay for abortions. Is it something only preventing federal money not state-specific tax money being used, or something? Or is this Steve King bloke just completely and utterly wrong that taxpayers’ money is being used to fund millions of abortions?

  4. says

    Jenny,

    It’s a pretty confusing issue that’s more hyperbole than anything else. Here’s the most helpful link I can find.

    Basically, the Feds offer money to the states so the states can provide Medicaid, which is limited healthcare for very low income people. The Feds have always allowed it to cover *some* abortions – varying combinations of abortions from rape, incest or when the mother’s life is in danger. The states have generally just followed its guidelines. Some people feel their tax dollars should not be spent on abortions even in those cases. So they distort things and make it sound like poor women are able to get free abortions anytime they forget to spend half their income on the pill.

  5. SunlessNick says

    Huckabee has been using the opposite defence of listing various celebrated people who are the result of rape. I’m not sure whether he realises or cares that he’s defending rape as well as forced pregnancy with that – but it seems that Akin’s supporters have their stories less straight than he does.

  6. facebook_patrick.mcgraw.7 says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    I’ve decided that any time someone pulls the “I don’t want my tax dollars being used to kill Teh Baybeez” card, I will ask them what actions they have taken to prevent their tax dollars from continuing to be used for drone strikes that kill innocent children.

  7. says

    SunlessNick,

    That’s… such a bad idea. Ted Bundy was a product of incestuous rape, too, and he’s hardly unique. Rape isn’t always an aberration in an otherwise healthy life. Sometimes it’s the norm, and heaven help any child born into that atmosphere. THAT is why I’m pro-choice. I mean, imagine being a young girl who’s impregnated by a male relative who runs the household she lives in. That child will be HIS to harm as he sees fit. The mother will be powerless to stop it.

    Why do people want this for children? Are they just so fucking ignorant they don’t realize it ain’t all that rare at all?

  8. Dani says

    sbg:
    Well, obviously, if you don’t know anyone it’s happened to, then it’s not real. It honestly frightens me these people exist, and that I have close blood relatives that would side with them.

    And then there’s this guy, across the pond, on Julian Assange.

    I have felt the constant need for a shower since Sunday.

    I just read that today, and it made me ill.

    When Todd Akin’s remarks first came to light, I wasn’t sure whether the misogyny or the stupidity was more infuriating. But since then, I’ve been made acutely aware of the fact that, not only are people DEFENDING him, but this belief is apparently fairly common among hyper-conservative Republican politicians (and has been for some time). The astounding way these people so flippantly and ignorantly talk about rape and rape victims is frightening…especially because they hold public office.

  9. Red says

    facebook_patrick.mcgraw.7,

    I think (personally) a more relevant question would be, what actions have you taken to significantly REDUCE the number of abortions each year.

    Do you demand that contraceptives be made free and available to those who can’t afford it or otherwise don’t have the resources?

    Do you demand both schools AND parents use comprehensive, complete and EFFECTIVE sex education tools to educate their children on the realities of sex, it’s risks and what can happen if you aren’t careful with your body.

    Should they have young teens, have they personally spoken to their children about sex (not just ‘Don’t do it! It’s a sin!’, etc) ? Have they worked to dispel the myths and assumptions they have?

    Something like that may give them pause and make them actually THINK.

  10. Cloudtigress says

    Recent article over at CNN about Atkins and Galloway and (some) men losing touch with reality about rape:

    http://us.cnn.com/2012/08/23/opinion/akin-galloway-opinion/index.html?c=&page=0

    Trigger Warning: brief discussion about a recent rape in the Congo, and an older one from the Bosnian civil war.

    Plus the usual posts from misogynists calling the author a “prostitute” (I guess because a ‘real woman’ wouldn’t deign to think/write about such things, or something), and those saying Assange is clearly innocent of rape because the victim “waited weeks” to file a report, and did even that only because she “had ties” to the CIA and was following orders from them to get Assange into their clutches. (No, I didn’t read far enough into the comments to learn whether these “CIA ties” meant she was a former employee, briefly dated someone who worked there, or just regularly delivered pizza there when someone called in an order.)

  11. says

    Cloudtigress,

    Part of male privilege is the ability never to get in touch with the reality of rape and rape culture if you don’t feel like it. That said, clearly Akin and Ryan put a lot of thought into it when they wrote a bill clarifying that the rape exclusion for Medicaid abortions was only for FORCIBLE rape. Drugged women and women intimidated through threats of killing the kids or pets or whatnot are obviously just amoral whores, apparently. Ryan and Akin seem to feel the burden should be on the woman to resist in a way that’s not unlikely to get her killed. That makes sense if you basically just have no use for any woman who isn’t benefiting you in some way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>