24 years ago another Massachusetts governor was running for President of the United States and rape played a prominent role in the attack on the character of the Democratic Gov. Micheal Dukakis. Not because of some outrageous position on how rape wasn't really rape or whether or not there was a definition of rape that was being discussed. The reason Micheal Dukakis was being denigrated was because in a scenario developed in a debate by the moderator, Governor Dukakis wouldn't demand the death penalty for a rapist who had theoretically just raped Governor Dukakis' wife or daughter.
Here it is 24 years later and rape as an issue has been raised again. Only this time the Massachusetts Governor is from the GOP and the issue of rape isn't about executing the rapist but whether or not to give him visitation privileges for the child the GOP demands the victim carry to term.
How did we get here? The GOP of 24 years ago thought any man who raped a woman deserved to be executed. Now the GOP is trying it's best undefine rape, or muddle the definition of rape. Instead of decriminalizing pot, it appears they want to decriminalize rape.
There are members of Congress from the GOP who have obviously never had a lesson in basic human anatomy and physiology. Some of these members of Congress who don't understand anatomy and physiology sit on the Science Committee of the House. They attribute magical powers to a woman's vagina and uterus. However amazing that is, it's not surprising; they've never understood it anyway. Like any ignorant primitive culture, they make up stories and attribute magical powers to anything that is beyond their capacity to comprehend.
Paul Ryan, Todd Akin and Tom Smith aren't aberrations in today's GOP, they are frighteningly mainstream. Today's GOP wants to give a zygote more rights than women. They don't do this out of true humanitarian reasons, they do it because it gives them control over a woman's body. They fear women. They should. But if they can redefine (or undefine) rape and decriminalize rape and give the rapist and the rapist zygote (see personhood amendments et al) more rights than women, then they think they'll be able re-exert control over women. Control women have fought to gain for themselves for generations.
What I fail to understand is why any woman today could vote for anyone who calls themselves a member of today's Republican Party/Tea Party/GOP? How can any man who loves his mother, wife, girlfriend, daughter, sister, female friends et cetera ever vote for a party that wants to treat women as chattel (as they once were treated), a party that wants to take us back to those days?
Last night Ann Romney said she loved women, how can she? How can she when she knows how the GOP wants to treat them? Or is Ann Romney so sheltered or so obtuse to reality she can't see? Is she so detached from reality that she thinks "those rules" won't apply to her and those of her stature in life? With Mitt by her side Ann Romney has ignored the rules others have had to live by for so long, does she no longer realize she may still be subject to them?