"Tell me how you met my daddy."

In all these discussions about rape, Republicans act as if the only women who are raped are unmarried. Of course this is absurd. Married women are also attacked and raped. So their argument that a women who is raped must give birth to the rapist's child becomes twice as absurd when you consider the husband. It's insane to think that any woman should be forced to give birth to a child that is the result of a violent act against her. Are we also saying her husband should welcome the child into the world, help pay its expenses, brag about its accomplishments and put it through college?  Are we saying he should forget that this is not his child, but that of a violent man who attacked his wife and love it as his own? That is asking a lot of any person. Any child born of rape is going to carry a stigma. Even if the mother comes to love it, will the husband, the family? And how will the child feel when he learns—and he or she probably will—that they are the result of an attack on their mother? That life begins at conception is madness, yet another attempt for Republicans to push their religious beliefs on all of America. That a woman should give birth to a rapist's child is insanity. But then these Republicans don't care what emotional and economical trials such a birth brings to the parent or parents. They can just sanctimoniously feel they have won a victory that they really didn't even care about, other than the winning.

Note: The asshole who said that rape is something god intended, Richard Mourdock, apparently won't be affected by the problem stated above since it seems this 60-year-old is a "bachelor". At least I couldn't find any reference to a wife on the internet. I wonder why his marital status isn't even mentioned on the internet. I guess he just never met the right girl, or doesn't "like" women in ever sense sense of the word.