The X, Y, Z On The Akin Controversy

August 22nd, 2012 4 Comments

What Akin Ought To Have Said

It’s false to say what Akin said, that rape will not result in pregnancy, or that it does so only rarely, due to some protective mechanism in the female body.  The reality is that there are many pregnancies from rape.  And perhaps his rashly made comments were generated, at least in part, by frustrations of the question he was asked, frustrations pro-lifers know only too well – the phony insistence that if abortion is bad at all, at least it ought to be allowed in cases of pregnancy from rape or incest, shouldn’t it? —Something completely irrational, because it completely ignores the real reasons to be against abortion in the first place.


Nonetheless, Akin could have, and should have, made a very different point.  Only the guy who condemns all violence is a credible witness against rape.  Isn’t this obvious and intuitive?  Otherwise we have selective condemnation — only some types of violence are really wrong or at least worthy of being condemned — in which case, even the condemnation of rape is on shaky ground.  This is because the reason rape is wrong is the very same reason all violence against the innocent is wrong.  In a false, selective kind of condemnation perhaps some folks might be heard to say, “I’m against all rape except in the case of uncontrollable predators who might otherwise kill.  But in all other cases it’s wrong,” something so wrongheaded it scarcely needs to be said.


So, the true defender of life and dignity might say that only he who 100 percent opposes abortion knows why rape is truly wrong, as an act of violence against an innocent; all others are not fully trustworthy.  It is pro-lifers who are fully consistent when they condemn rape; all others are somewhat contradictory in that only some innocents they consider worthy of protection and dignity, or only under certain conditions, in which case they show themselves neither trustworthy nor credible in defending any victims, even their “pet peeve” victims.

Imagine if we had truly educated and well-formed statesman, who knew that ALL RAPE IS WRONG. ALL RAPE IS VICIOUS. But for the very same reason that ALL ABORTION IS WRONG AND VICIOUS, and not just because rape is our own politically correct pet peeve!


Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, NFPMC, ABVM, ACPh
President, The Edith Stein Foundation


August 22, 2012



  1. Mike Minnis says:

    Should he be asked to resign for this one awkward sentence? If so, why?

    • Admin says:

      Thanks for your question! As a non-profit organization, the Edith Stein Foundation may make comments on ethical and social mores. However, we must steer clear of answering direct political questions regarding the status of a candidate for office. In this case, we wished to point out the main point behind the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” question that was asked of Akin, and so often of other pro-life public figures, and consequently, to address the correct answer that should have been made to support the pro-life cause. We appreciate your interest in our post!

  2. Son Skye says:

    One of my problems with Aikin-like responses is that no one ever seems to ask or answer some very simple follow-up questions.
    1. I assume our pro-life position is that the woman who carries a child of rape or incest must cary that baby until birth; yes?
    2. If she aborts the child, what prison sentence do you recommend?
    3. Since it’s murder, would you accept the death penalty as a punishment?
    4. Shouldn’t there be a federal law that makes crossing a state line for the purpose of getting an abortion a crime?
    5. Shouldn’t there be a federal law that makes crossing an international boundary from the U.S. for the purpose of getting an abortion a crime?
    6. Should we consider intercourse with women of other religions so that we’d have more Catholic babies?

    One last question. Could the foundation make and sell bumper stickers that say “Rape: a Liberal’s Politically Correct Pet Peeve! ?

    Many thanks.

    • Admin says:

      Your point that capital punishment is excessive is well taken, but then one has to ask how we tolerate this “death penalty of the 100 percent unborn innocent right? Isn’t this capital punishment without trial? Without any crime? What offense has the child committed?

      Sure we should “carry” the unborn until she can live on her own, I mean what else? Because if you’re saying rape justifies killing in reaction to the rape, then rape wouldn’t necessarily be always wrong either right? But we can’t say that can we?

      Crossing state lines to kill? Makes it federal and not merely state offense right?

      Should abortion be any less punishable than rape, which we both agree is a horrible, horrible, cruel atrocity?

      About the bumper sticker: no, Christians don’t like to embarrass others publicly for one mistake, and prefer to help.


Leave a Reply