Mourdock Clarifies Comments: ‘God Does Not Want Rape’

I don't accept this premise. Even if God sometimes works in mysterious ways I do not accept the premise that a pregnancy that arises out of a rape is something God intended.

Don't buy it. And hey sleaze bag Mourdock we are not twisting your words. They are your own words!!!!

So is he a failure or just an evil prick?


You have to pick one or the other

You need to put the sarcasm sign on your post.

If not, I just have to say that if someone thinks that God wills that a child be conceived of a raped mother and her rapist, then does that someone think that God wills that people die as a result of other crimes? Say, terrorism? What about arson? What about run-of-the-mill murder? What about spousal abuse?

Does God will all these things.

One of the problems I have with fundamentalists is that they very often attribute all the good and wonderful things to God and all the bad things to humans.

If a child has open-heart surgery and lives, then God gets the credit. The doctor is just God's tool. If a child dies because the parents cannot afford open-heart surgery, then God does not get the blame.

There is something very inconsistent and therefore very faulty in that thinking.

We humans are responsible for justice, for fairness in our dealings with others. And we should not force a rape victim to bear, raise and sacrifice for the child of her rapist. That would be just sick.

I once met a mother who had a little girl as the result a very brief affair. She never let the child forget that the child's father had run away and foisted the job of child-rearing on her alone. The mother badmouthed the father in front of groups of people, everyone she met. It was horrible. I felt so sorry for that little girl. No one should be forced to give birth to a child she does not want.

But I assume you are joking in your post.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
~Epicurus

If everything that happens isn't his will then you would have to state he's been a failure. He can't even put forth his own plan without it being fucked with and he's a "god".

So if you believe in this thing called god, either he is a mean bastard or he wasn't the brightest kid in class. Big FAIL on the god scoring card right?

The three following books are rather good at allowing additional perspectives re: Free Will vs. Predestination if you have a sincere curiosity rather than a merely argumentative demeanor.

lyman Beecher's, Views in Theology & Skepticism,
CS Lewis, The Problem of Pain
Immanuel Kant, The Cambridge Companion to Kant.

As to any score cards they may keep though, I am unaware; nor do any of them as far as I'm aware, use the trendy phrase "big fail", so they may not be contemporaneous enough for many younger readers.

Obviously not if folks devote entire books to the subject


Is everything that happens gods will, his divine plan, or not? There is no muddy middle...

I once thought "where does the universe end?" a simple question too; but I'm not too clever, and soon thereafter realized there is far more complexity to a most concepts that would allow a "yes" or "no" answer, as disappointing as that may seem to many to many of us.

I imagine a yes or no, black and white, answer is tempting, but I've since found most bumper-sticker answers lacking, regardless of whether I pretend there is always a simplistic yet valid answer.

Sorry that I even questioned. Now I can agree with you.

And yet, we are all, mysteriously one, linked by the barest threads of our continuous and concurrent DNA, the air we breathe, the universe in which we exist (or do we really?).

He was referring to the conception part of the rape as an act of God? Wow! The woman is raped and becomes pregnant while being raped. Therefore, the rape would also have to be an act of God.

Isn't that a little presumptuous? Either anything that happens must be G-d's will, or nothing is. Will it be Her will if Richard Mourdock loses this Senate race? It's anybody's guess!

Man cannot understand the mind of God.

If so why was Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, and numerous heinous murders, rapist, and malicious people born.

God does not interfere in the politics of the state. Why would Jesus have enjoined his followers to
"give unto Caesar what is Caesars and God what is Gods".

God allows man free will. Forcing someone to follow your ideas of scripture does not mean a person will
go to Heaven or be saved.

God requires you to do unto others as you want others do unto you. You are made in the image of God so
respecting others right to following their own conscience is the basis of true love of God.

Only republicans and stupid lemmings do not think this way, to them it is all about "ME".

That seems most likely and makes the most sense.

...Not God personified in I- you duality, but the indivisible Divine without any attributed qualities except to say it's kinda like, as though, Existent-Limitless-Sentience

No logical argument can be used to refute the self-revealed truth of one's "I AM" knowledge because the 'existent sentience' alone makes the illogical argument.
Thus that sentience is, is perhaps the only self revealed truth.
Now, how to know myself as limitless, and what does that mean.

(rambling)

I hope some of the atheist groups will stand up and denounce Mourdock's comments as the fevered ramblings of a religiously-obsessed mind. Since there is no God, there is no way that a pregnancy from rape is "God's will." It's taken quite a few years for us to begin to criminalize rape, and I'm afraid some of these right-wingers are living in a fantasy that rape is relatively OK, since it's been with us for eternity.

25% of women will be raped in their lifetimes. Absurd.

50% of women in the military will be raped by their fellow soldiers. Shameful.

Women should have the total right to control their own reproductive issues, and whether or not they choose to use birth control. It wasn't until 1965 in Griswold v Connecticut that the last Comstock Law was struck down. These religiously fanatical white males do NOT want women to control their own destinies.

If the Democrats can't make that argument, we're going to end up with Republicans.

end jumbled rant

It was also accepted by the populace who believed they had the power and right to do so.. Yet people still can't see the connection between ancient myths and modern beliefs.

The details are a little fuzzy, though.

Hell it's not even a clarification - he merely re-stated it and did an ad hominem.

But he'll use it if He/She has to, in order to force a woman to have a kid?

Did I get that right?

...seems that is the bottom line with this idiot.

There is no reasoning with religious extremists. The talibornagains are just as unfit to govern as their other monotheistic counterparts.

This guy is a nutcase.

First he says he has god thoughts,

then he says god has intentions on everything,

then he becomes god by telling the world not parse his words

how it's made? Who cares if the woman doesn't want to be raped and impregnated? What matters is that God is making a baby, THROUGH the rapist--he is merely an instrument of God. Who are we to argue with this process, or stop it? It's God's will.

If he didn't have enough awareness to realize what he was saying (something he claimed he 'struggled with' and then 'came to realize', so not an off the cuff remark) would cause a shit storm, then that ALONE should disqualify him from serving.

Mourdock: TOO STUPID TO BE TRUSTED WITH OUR GOVERNMENT.

doesn't want a pregnancy as a result of the unwanted rape if the victim doesn't consent to the pregnancy.

I do.

To him, women are simply a vial for reproduction.

And to me, his thoughts are simply vile.

Isn't that basically the same thing?

"Sorry that horrible thing happened to you, honey. Here, let me, god, make it up to you by giving you a baby (with half the rapists genes) to carry around for the next nine months. Isn't that a nice gift? Make sure you thank me for it in your prayers."

And every other life form that invades your body.

God is a man, rapists are men, God throws down with the men over the women, everytime. If men rape it's fine with this guy. The woman is nothing more than an empty vessel. God is the divine rapist, He raped Mary. Her baby was famous. That turned out well. She could have been stoned to death.

All that story needed was an adoption agency to rip the newborn out of the mother's arms. That's always pleasant for everyone.

With "friends" like you, Mourdock, Christianity doesn't need much in the way of enemies.....

What is absurd and sick is that you would say such a thing in the first place.

You cannot have it both fucking ways.

Am I getting this right?

Does God make these decisions randomly, use a magic 8 ball, play rock, paper scissors with an archangel? Or is there some set of criteria that God uses to decide which rape victims deserve to be "blessed" with the miracle of life?

Murdock is filth. Utter filth.

Let me get this straight.

You stated "God creates life, and that was my point"
You also stated "God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that he does."
You also said "when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen"

So God makes life. God doesn't want rape. So life created by rape, which he doesn't want to happen, is something that God intended to happen? So if God doesn't want rape to happen, why does he intend for it to happen?

Mr. Mourdock, after breaking it down into simple steps for me to comprehend, I still don't get it.

I could figure it out mathematically - e.g. :

x = "God intends rape",
-x ="God does not intend rape",
y = "God creates life",
-y = "God doesn't create life",

(-x) + y = x + y ?

By that mathematical equation the only way it can be solved is if x = 0 - i.e. no God.

The argument is illogical, and is further proof of my Christian belief that in the book of Genesis, God gave humankind free will. The rape is human free will, nothing to do with God. God may create life but in the way that the farmer sows their seeds in the ground, what's to stop a bird from eating it? Is that bird to be punished because it ate a germinated seed?

Its official, he's an ass.

To join other intellectual titans like Rand Paul & David Vitter in blocking the 21st century.

THE SENATE NEEDS TO BE REFORMED OR ABOLISHED.

However, I don't think God would want a woman to carry around a living reminder of her rape for 9 months--nor raise it as her own.

I thought, according to his rethug partner in crime, Akin, that a woman's body had a way of "shutting down" in a case of "legitimate rape" so no pregnancy occurred ? Now this dude seems to be suggesting the opposite.

I think we may be seeing a rift in their movement, opposing views. I think they should have "Mourdock vs. Akin", in a Steel Cage Match to settle this.

Gotcha.

Freak.

the girl or woman just wouldn't cooperate.

Mourdock and Mormon leader, Warren Jeffs seem to have the same opinion...."it's God's work" it's God's intention... Sick pieces of shit cut from the same mold.

It's all the idiots that will vote for him.

(How many millions of US citizens do you suppose agree with him?)

Seemed pretty clear to me he was saying life was a gift from God, regardless of circumstances. IMO, he was not saying rape was a gift from God.

His anti-choice, anti-women stance is disgusting and degrading. His use of religion to justify his position is offensive. But twisting his words to imply another meaning is a Faux News/Freep tactic. I won't join them on Bullshit Mountain - it stinks up there!

If we want to highlight ignorant, extremist candidates we have plenty Neanderthals to choose from (Walsh, Akin anyone?)

Or is God only in charge of creating life and not ending it?

OK, if only creating, then every life form that arises out of genetic manipulation is God's will. I bet they won't agree with that one.

Being a rapist? Better look into that man's criminal record.

Assclown Republicans speaking on her behalf, nor does she want to be part of the US Government.