Anti-abortion hardliners often have a very hard time discussing their refusal to accept exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest in a hypothetical abortion ban. And that’s understandable: If you really (a) think a zygote is morally and metaphysically identical to a full-grown human being and entitled to full constitutional rights and (b) are inclined to disregard the wishes and interest of the women involved, then it’s kind of a no-brainer. But it sure sounds so bad to suggest that women in this situation really should be forced by the government to carry such pregnancies to term. So defenders of this position tend to say stupid things.
Notably in 2012, not one but two red-state Republican Senate candidates went down in defeat after defending their opposition to a rape exception. Missouri’s Todd Akin claimed “legitimate” rape could not produce pregnancy to begin with, which, aside from being a very ignorant assertion, suggested that rape victims were lying about what had happened to them. Indiana’s Richard Mourdock took a different tack, blandly making the borderline-blasphemous argument that pregnancy-producing rapes were “intended” by God as part of his plan for the human race.
Leave it to Iowa congressman Steve King, a pol so regularly offensive that he has somehow managed to become too racist and nativist for Donald Trump’s GOP, to take the let’s-hear-it-for-rape argument to, well, full term, as the Des Moines Register reports:
U.S. Rep. Steve King told the Westside Conservative Club Wednesday that humanity might not exist if not for rape and incest throughout human history.
“What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled out anyone who was a product of rape or incest? Would there be any population of the world left if we did that?” he said in Urbandale, Iowa. “Considering all the wars and all the rapes and pillages that happened throughout all these different nations, I know that I can’t say that I was not a part of a product of that.”
What’s really weird is that King’s line of reasoning — which, if followed, would mandate the abolition of laws against rape and incest as inimical to human survival — didn’t seem to alarm his audience. According to the Register’s account, the members of the Westside Conservative Club were more interested in hearing his explanation for the comments about white nationalism and white supremacy that had gotten him bounced from his House committee assignments after the New York Times published them. And it appears they were satisfied:
Some Westside Conservative Club members, like Rick Herron, a 72-year-old Clive resident, said they liked what King had to say. Herron said he has been a supporter of King’s policies in the past but was glad to get the chance to hear the “white nationalism” controversy story from his perspective.
“I did get a little better understanding of what he went through, in terms of the ‘Never Trumpers’ attack on him and setting him up for condemnation,” Herron said. “You expect the Democrats to attack him but not the Never Trumpers, members of his own party.”
King, you see, says it was all a conspiracy, as evidenced by the fact that he drew a strong 2020 primary opponent the day before the Times article appeared. I guess the years and years of racist King utterances about immigrants and other lesser breeds don’t count because his party tolerated them for so long. Perhaps talking about the sunny side of rape and incest was his way of changing the subject.
