This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Todd Akin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Todd Akin was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 October 2021. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I removed this section, which lacked context and was just one sentence with a citation to Huffington Post. The source didn't even support the statement being attributed to Akin, the assertion is actually an extrapolation by the author of the piece. Also, titling a section "Controversy" is terribly uninformative and not normally conducive to a neutral point of view. -- Michael Snow ( talk) 19:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
His mother's name should be listed as "Nancy Bigelow (née Perry)." The word "née" refers to the maiden name, not to the married name, so the way it's worded right now is the opposite of that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.30.194.139 ( talk) 18:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone, I highly suspect the gentlman himself or a close friend/family, keeps trying to add the name Mark Lodes to potential opponents against Akin in the 2012 election. This information is supported by nothing other than a not very informative self-created website by Mr. Lodes. No Missouri or national media have mentioned his name at all in the context of being a serious candidate. No election paperwork has been filed. Until such time as his candidacy can be verified by an independent and reliable source I strongly urge his name not be included. What say you? Sector001 ( talk) 20:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Need an actual reliable source rather than simply the "soundbite" type of media. -- Avanu ( talk) 23:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
This content: "Political analyst Nate Silver indicated that the comments had the potential to swing the Missouri Senate race." is inappropriate. Nate Silver's opinion is very interesting, of course, but he isn't the Amazing Kreskin. It's non-encyclopedic fluff, not hard fact. Belchfire- TALK 02:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
The appropriate policy is WP:CBALL, which prevents editors from substituting predictions for reliable sources. It doesn't prevent us from reporting on notable predictions. StillStanding (24/7) ( talk) 05:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone object to rearranging this section to group the reaction comments from Romney/Ryan and McCaskill with the sentence about reaction? It would also isolate the questionable statement regarding the potential impact on the race (which is a separate idea). Could look something like this:
Thoughts? Objections? Rjp422 ( talk) 15:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
'Comment
WP:NOTNEWS. This prognosticating wont be worth a damn in 4 months.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 22:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Should we start to get wording on the responses to the statement? I believe Romney 's campaign and Claire McCaskill have comments concerning this. Casprings ( talk) 03:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Why include the study? It seems to be WP:Coatrack. Plus, adding it without context adds POV. To the average reader, 5% sounds like a small number. However, pregnancy requires sex when the woman is fertile and even then it isn't a 100% thing. TO make this not POV, we need to dive into another area. Casprings ( talk) 04:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok, let's get the ball rolling. What's in dispute? StillStanding (24/7) ( talk) 05:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Should we add this to the controversies section? [3] Qworty ( talk) 07:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Why is this line in the piece? "A campaign spokesman for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan said both disagreed with Akin's position and would not oppose abortion in instances of rape." This is not about Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan. This seems to be here to allow other back door comments about them or from other people to enter. I think it should be removed. 216.81.94.71 ( talk) 11:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Here are a couple examples of a defense of Akin's remarks:
Brangifer ( talk) 18:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
After the protection expires, we ought to add this where Ryan is mentioned: Cwobeel ( talk) 20:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Ryan co-sponsored a bill with Akin in the House of Representatives that would have changed the legal definition of rape to "forcible rape" to narrow access to federal funding for abortions. [1]
I think that the article is a little thin. There should be be a section that detail Rep. Akin's views in greater detail, for example. Casprings ( talk) 12:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Obama has given a response to Akin's 'forcible rape' comment, if anyone wants to add it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19326638
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/08/20/obama-akins-rape-comments-way-out-there/
Euchrid ( talk) 22:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
This Todd Akin comments has enough coverage and enough reactions and fallout to give it its own article. I invite you to edit Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy . I suggest that we create a short summary here (as already exists) and then link the page. Casprings ( talk) 00:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The proper place for this is the article about the election. A sentence, maybe two, should go in the corresponding section of this article, reflecting the magnitude of the fallout. There's no reason for a separate section, let alone an article. Brithon ( talk) 01:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Everyone is free to take this to WP:AfD. I would just argue that this new article meets WP:N and it it involves more then Rep. Akin. Casprings ( talk) 01:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
It's become a big thing, perhaps big enough for an article of its own. Regardless, I think the seven-day full protection of this article is inappropriate, given the circumstances. GreenReaper ( talk) 02:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There's an article on George D. Weber; requesting wikilink to same. 84.203.39.242 ( talk) 01:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Suggestion for sub-section on Akin's position on the science of climate change. Source: [4] -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 02:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest that the following would be a good summery and link to Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy article. I suggest that we work on a summery and then edit it in.
The Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy involves comments by Todd Akin and the controversy that resulted from the comments. Todd Akin is a a representative from Missouri and current candidate for the US Senate (See United States Senate election in Missouri, 2012). In an August 19, 2012 interview aired on St. Louis television station KTVI-TV, Akin was asked his views on whether women who became pregnant due to sexual assault should have the option of abortion. He replied:
Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child. [1]
The comment was widely criticized as being misogynist and inaccurate. [2] [3] [4] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone. [5] A separate 2003 article in the journal Human Nature estimated that rapes are twice as likely to result in pregnancies as consensual sex. [6]
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request you change the name of the section that talks about his comments and provide a link to an expanded article. I request the following edit:
Casprings ( talk) 05:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This article most certainly needs a link to the controversy article as it has become the defining and most public story in this person's biography.-- Oakshade ( talk) 06:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I disagree with the proposed section title; there's no reason to include Akin's full name in a heading on his own article. I would find "Rape and pregnancy controversy" or "Rape and pregnancy comments" to be better headings than the current one ("Comments on abortion in cases of rape"). Theoldsparkle ( talk) 13:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The comment was widely criticized.[34][35][36] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone.[37]
Surely this can be improved? The comment was widely criticized not because people don't agree with an opinion he expressed, but because medical experts say his assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant via rape is flat-out wrong. See this New York Times article, in which four doctors debunk his statement, calling it "nuts," "absurd" and "nonsense." There is also this detailed debunking from Scientific American, and this story headlined Doctors appalled over Rep. Akin's comments that 'legitimate rape' prevents pregnancy from NBC.
Why don't we try something like this:
The comment was widely criticized as false. Medical experts say there is no evidence to support the assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant from rape compared with consensual sex, [1] [2] [3] [4] and a three-year longitudinal survey of 4008 adult American women, published in 1996, found that rape-related pregnancy occurred with "significant frequency." [5]
-- Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
So, as per the conversation above, can I ask an admin to make this edit?
Replace this: The comment was widely criticized. [1] [2] [3] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone [4] (comparative from pregnancy studies: likelihood for any single act of intercourse is around 1% - 10% depending on timing, averaging around 3% [5]).
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help)
With this: The comment was widely criticized as false. Medical experts say there is no evidence to support the assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant from rape compared with consensual sex, [1] [2] [3] [4] and a three-year longitudinal survey of 4008 adult American women, published in 1996, found that rape-related pregnancy occurred with "significant frequency." [5]
FT2, I would be fine with you or someone else merging in some of the other stuff that's in the original paragraph if you want -- I'm not saying it shouldn't be there. Just wanted to stick with the exact text proposed here, for the purposes of asking an admin to make the edit. Thanks Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request that an Admin update the format of the Succession Box, such that for his current office it would say "Incumbent," instead of "Succeeded by Incumbent" almost as if Incumbent were a man's name. The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 05:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request that the Admin add some additional biographical information which I believe is non-controversial To whit:
and
I wish I could add that his father Paul B. Aiken was president of Laclede Steel (which in fact is the case). I could find various reputable one that say there was a Paul Aiken who was president of Laclede Steel but can't off hand find one that states categorically the relationship. Thanks. Americasroof ( talk) 08:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
1. In the phrase "Media columnists considered the comment had not been mis-spoken", change "columnists" to "commentators". More accurate as not all the commentors on this incident are columnists.
2. In the same phrase as above, change "mis-spoken" to "misspoken", for correctness and also consistency with "misspoke" as used in the previous sentence.
3. In the sentence "His opponent in the 2012 Senate race, Sen. Claire McCaskill, responded via Twitter, stating 'as a woman...'", change the middle to "responded via Twitter that 'as a woman...'" It's simply smoother and more efficient phrasing. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 12:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The press in Finland has reported this man's bizarre opinions - about both rape and abortion. It seems also to have been reported in the national press in Australia, Britain, South Africa, Canada, France, and Germany (the ones I have checked). This being so, the man now has global renown and these facts about him should at least be mentioned in the lead paragraph and not buried down at the bottom.-- 80.223.105.147 ( talk) 12:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Replace the current introduction, quoted as follows:
William Todd Akin (born July 5, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party.
The district includes the western St. Louis suburbs of Ballwin, Kirkwood, Chesterfield, Wildwood, Town and Country, and Des Peres located along Interstate 270 in western St. Louis County (West County) and the northwestern exurbs of St. Charles and St. Peters in St. Charles County.
He won the 2012 Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat in a crowded field. He will challenge Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill in the general election.
with the following:
William Todd Akin (born July 5, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party. He won the 2012 Republican primary for the U.S. Senate and will challenge Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill in the general election.
Directly underneath the heading "U.S. House of Representatives", place the following (moved from the current intro):
Missouri's 2nd congressional district includes the western St. Louis suburbs of Ballwin, Kirkwood, Chesterfield, Wildwood, Town and Country, and Des Peres located along Interstate 270 in western St. Louis County (West County) and the northwestern exurbs of St. Charles and St. Peters in St. Charles County.
These changes have nothing to do with the current controversy; they're just cleanup. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 15:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
As a new paragraph at the end of the intro (hopefully along with the changes above), add the following:
In August 2012, after winning the primary, Akin drew widespread attention for commenting in an interview that women were unlikely to become pregnant due to what he referred to as "legitimate rape."
I am open to other wording suggestions; one of my goals was to try to be as neutral and objective as possible to encourage reaching consensus on including something relatively quickly. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 15:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think it requires a much more prominent paragraph. This is not just a gaffe and has very substantial political implications. Cwobeel ( talk) 15:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I disagree strongly. Give it time. There is no deadline. This is not a reactionary news service. There is already undue weight given. -- Nouniquenames ( talk) 05:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Would someone substitute in the table below for the tables currently in the article? under the "Electoral History" section. This table includes missing information on elections and updated sourcing with current links. It does not include anything new that has occurred since the full protection on the article. Thanks. KeptSouth ( talk) 14:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
==Electoral history==
Year | Office | District | Democrat | Republican | Libertarian | Ref | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | Tedd House | 42% | Todd Akin | 55% | James Higgins | 1 % | [1] |
2002 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | John Hogan | 31% | Todd Akin | 67% | Darla Maloney | 2 % | [2] |
2004 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | George Weber | 33% | Todd Akin | 65% | Darla Maloney | 1% | [3] |
2006 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | George Weber | 37% | Todd Akin | 61% | Tamara Millay | 2% | [4] |
2008 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | William Haas | 35% | Todd Akin | 62% | Thomas Knapp | 2% | [5] |
2010 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | Arthur Lieber | 29% | Todd Akin | 68% | Steve Mosbacher | 3 % | [6] [7] |
The Devil's Advocate has pointed out on my talk page I added material on the recent matter after protection. He's right, I hadn't noticed protection. So I'm bringing it here for eyeballs and a decision to keep or remove.
DA's post:
In terms of WP:BLP on controversial issues, I don't think the sentence added diverged from sources, though I'm open to disagreement. They accurately and validly state exactly what sources state with no elaboration or synthesis. I gave 3 sources for a statement of how a significant part of the "columnist" or "media" landscape is perceiving and responding to his self-correction, since it's useful to show that the views are in multiple reputable sources, not just one. (There were numerous others)
What they said | What I characterized |
---|---|
|
Media columnists considered the comment had not been mis-spoken but a reflection of personal belief taken back for political expediency... |
|
...with attention drawn to Akin's scientific ignorance... |
|
...and distrust of rape reports and past actions and statements consistent with this belief. |
I also added a brief note from clinical research from a very highly regarded series of studies into pregnancy, which analyzed exactly the question at point - how often would a single incident of intercourse at random be expected to result in pregnancy. It's certain this is information that a reasonable reader would expect in this controversy (to compare to percentage of rape victims), and is very highly sourced. |
Collapsed to avoid publicizing the original article quotes. Eyeballs please, and apologies again (and thanks to DA) for not noticing the protection. FT2 ( Talk | email) 15:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Here is an alternative wording I just worked up:
Commentators critical of Akin suggested the comment had not been misspoken but was instead an accurate reflection of his personal beliefs and that he rescinded the remarks for political expediency. These commentators claimed Akin's past actions and statements were consistent with the comment and constituted evidence of scientific ignorance as well as a general distrust of women.
That would reasonably satisfy my concerns.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 18:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
On January 22, 2008, Todd Akin addressed the House of Representatives with a long speech condemning abortion.
In his speech, he drew comparisons between abortion and slavery — even going so far as to suggest that abortion is fundamentally more "un-American" than slavery. "We have one of the most polarizing issues that has confronted our nation since the days of slavery. And yet, just as slavery is fundamentally un-American, so even moreso, anything that violates the most fundamental right -- the right to life -- is contrary to everything that Americans have stood for and fought for." Akin goes on to say that "we have terrorists in our own culture called 'abortionists,'" and that abortionists are "heartless doctors."
http://www.businessinsider.com/todd-akin-abortion-is-more-un-american-than-slavery-video-2012-8 Cwobeel ( talk) 18:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Here are links to all the polls for the 2012 Senate race Akin vs. McCaskill
Senate - Akin vs. McCaskill RealClearPolitics
2012 Missouri Senate: McCaskill vs. Akin Huffpost DLH ( talk) 23:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please capitalize "senate" in this sentence since it is a proper adjective describing the election as one for a seat in the United States Senate, which is a specific entity whose name is always capitalized. Thanks!
Political analysts believe that the comments have the potential to swing the 2012 United States Senate election in Missouri;[39][40] the Washington Post reported a "stampede" of Republicans dissociating from Akin as part of damage limitation, with NRSC chairman John Cornyn saying the GOP would no longer provide him senate election funding and describing Akin as "endangering Republicans’ hopes of retaking the majority in the Senate".
5reided ( talk) 03:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think is is time to un-protect this article. Where can such request be made? Cwobeel ( talk) 15:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As a long-time member of the Missouri Libertarian Party, I'd like to ask for an inclusion of _all_ the candidates in Rep. Akin's congressional races. All data below from [1]
2000 House, Ted DEM 126,441 42.4% Akin, Todd REP 164,926 55.3% Higgins, James LIB 2,524 .8% Gimpelson, Richard J. REF 1,264 .4% Odell, Mike GRE 2,907 1.0%
2002 Hogan, John DEM 77,168 31.1% Akin, Todd REP 166,696 67.1% Maloney, Darla R. LIB 4,547 1.8%
2004 Weber, George D. DEM 115,366 33.0% Akin, Todd REP 228,725 65.4% Maloney, Darla LIB 4,822 1.4% Leefe, David CST 954 .3%
2006 Akin, Todd REP 176,452 61.3% Weber, George D. DEM 105,242 36.6% Millay, Tamara A. LIB 5,923 2.1%
2008 Akin, Todd REP 230,976 62.3% Haas, William C. (Bill) DEM 131,303 35.4% Knapp, Thomas L. LIB 8,576 2.3%
2010 Lieber, Arthur DEM 77,467 29.2% Akin, Todd REP 180,481 67.9% Mosbacher, Steve LIB 7,677 2.9% Cannon, Patrick M. WI 7 .0%
Hsemerson ( talk) 18:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Many immediately decried both the insensitivity of the comments, and the lack of scientific understanding they reflected.
Professor Erica Frank, MD, MPH ( talk) 22:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) [1]
References
This article needs a mention of the Akin rape controversy in the intro: something NPOV like "In August 2012, Akin became the subject of media controversy regarding his comments on abortion and rape" would do. Akin has catapulted himself to the centre of the U.S. political agenda by his remarks, to the point where they currently overshadow other campaign narratives about both the Senate and presidential elections. Not to mention this in the intro is ignoring the elephant in the room. -- The Anome ( talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Most political biographies of politician that are in national office have sections on personal life. Has his section gotten lost in all the recent editing? While you all are here focused on the controversy I would request you update the Personal Life section. Thankyou. 97.85.168.22 ( talk) 02:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
"Born in 1947, Todd grew up in Missouri’s second district and attended local schools. He met his future wife while working at IBM and married Lulli in the summer of 1975. Todd and Lulli have six children: Wynn, Perry, Micah, Ezra, Hannah, and Abigail. Eight grandchildren have also joined the Akin family. Todd commutes from St. Louis to Washington every week to be with his family and to meet with constituents, business leaders and other elected officials throughout the greater St. Louis community.
Today, Todd continues to write and lecture on the principles of America's Founding and Heritage. He is active in the Boy Scouts of America, a leader in his local church, a former board member of Missouri Right to Life, and sits on the board of the Mission Gate Prison Ministry."
[1]
Another reference:
Family: Wife: Lulli; 6 Children: Wynn, Perry, Micah, Ezra, Hannah, Abigail
Current Legislative Committees
* Armed Services, Member
* Budget, Member
* Science, Space, and Technology, Member
* Subcommittee on Energy and Environment (Science, Space, and Technology), Member
* Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, Chair
* Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Member
* Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, Member
Education
MDiv, Covenant Seminary, 1985
BS, Management Engineering, Worchester Polytechnic Institute, 1971
Professional Experience
Management Director, Laclede Steel Company, 1977-1980
Officer, United States Army, 1972-1980
Marketer, International Business Machines, 1974-1977
Teacher
Political Experience
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2000-present
Representative, Missouri State House of Representatives, 1989-2000
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees
Member, United States Constitutional Bicentennial Commission, 1987
Member, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Member, Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus
Member, Republican Study Committee
Member, Tea Party Caucus
Organizations
Assistant Troop Leader, Boy Scouts of America
Board Member, Mission Gate Prison Ministry
Member, Executive Board, Missouri River Township Republican Organization
Former Board Member, Missouri Right to Life
Additional Information
* Astrological Sign:
Cancer
* Awards:
-Guardian of Seniors Rights, 60-Plus Association
-Hero of the Taxpayer, Americans for Tax Reform
-Champion of Small Business, Small Business Survival Committee
[2]
97.85.168.22 ( talk) 09:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Ballotpedia Wiki has a section of external links which you can raid for sources: external links section 97.85.168.22 ( talk) 09:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
(I'm starting this section pre-emptively just in case there's danger of an edit war over this.) In the lede, I just changed this:
"The comment led to widespread calls for Akin to drop out of his Senate race. Akin apologized, clarified his comment, and said he would continue his campaign."
to this:
"He later said that he "misspoke." The comment led to widespread calls for Akin to drop out of his Senate race. Akin said that he would continue his campaign."
I did this because the lede should not contain material, especially uncited material, that is not included and cited elsewhere in the text. From what I can see, all the text currently says about Akin's reaction is: "Akin said, 'In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year.'" This does not explicitly include an apology, nor a clarification (simply saying "I misspoke" does not clarify what you were intending to say). If he has apologized and/or clarified, that should be added and cited in the body of the article and then I have absolutely no objection to mentioning such in the lede. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 13:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
A representative of the American Family Association cited a 1999 article by Doctor John C. Willke to argue Akin "was exactly right".[45] Pro-life theologian Pia de Solenni called Akin's remarks "idiotic", but also claimed that there is "no solid data" on the question of whether rape inhibits pregnancy, and opined that it was not a "far stretch [from effects of long-term stress on fertility] to wonder if women who are raped might have a lesser rate of pregnancy resulting from the rape".[46] Robert Fleischmann, director of pro-life group Christian Life Resources, similarly argued that Akin's point was plausible but lacked data ("I have yet to see a study that demonstrates some sort of contraceptive effect from a rape. I do believe, however, it is not an unwarranted conclusion." and "Statistically speaking, it appears something happens in a rape, either with the victim or with the perpetrator, that reduces the incidence of pregnancy.").[47]
I think this section should be removed from the article. These are people being quoted on medical topics who have no medical expertise. It's fine to have them give their views on topics about which they have a particular expertise (politics, religion, etc.) but there's no reason to include their comments on issues they know nothing about. Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Interesting idea, Sue. You should chime in at the deletion discussion; this entire thing is based on the comments made by some moron with no medical expertise. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
There has been some back-and-forth about how to refer, in the introduction, to the controversy caused by Akin's comment. The two versions that have been used are:
"Akin made a controversial comment..."
vs.
"His comment caused media and political controversy"
My preferred version is the former, which seems clear and succinct. To me, the latter seems awkward and fairly meaningless; what is "media and political controversy"? Controversy that is reported by the media and involves politics? Both those attributes seem like they could be pretty well assumed by the reader.
Other opinions? Theoldsparkle ( talk) 14:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I have removed it because the article on Akin does not meet the criteria: "The current event template may be used optionally to warn the editor or reader about the great flux of edits and the fast-changing state of the article", see, WP:Current event templates
There is not a great flux of events going on, nor are there a huge amount of edits. He is either going to get the court order and resign from the race or he is not, which is not exactly a great flux of events. Besides, the situation now is in limbo, with Akin still campaigning as the party nominee. Please discuss here if you disagree and wish to re-add the template. KeptSouth ( talk) 15:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I couldn't find a source for this after looking diligently, so I removed it
Hopefully, someone will see this note, provide a source and re-add the material to the article. KeptSouth ( talk) 12:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In External links, CongLinks template, please fill out the nyt parameter with a/todd_akin 184.78.81.245 ( talk) 14:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
at the start of the second paragraph, it is written that Akin expressed a controversial opinion. I was surprised to hear it described that way because it entails an element of subjectivity where none exists. It isn't an opinion like his opinion on which genre of music is best, and he wouldn't be "entitled to his own opinion" in this matter, so the saying goes. I'm not saying he doesn't genuinely believe it, but I mean it's recognized to be not a matter of opinion, but one of scientific inquiry and that his idea of how biology works is genuinely incorrect.
Can I propose that that word be changed to something like comment or statement, so there isn't any ambiguity about whether it's fallacious or not?
THanks 71.234.13.90 ( talk) 18:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
You may believe that 2+2=4, but in addition to that attitude you're able to have knowledge of that fact by external confirmation, whereas with an opinion or belief, you are capable of having the attitude, but not progressing any further into certainty.
So, he definitely believes that, but it's not his opinion because it's not open to interpretation. 71.234.13.90 ( talk) 18:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Done Fewer words tend to be clearer. – MrX 18:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps we should delve into the relationship between Akin and Tim Dreste, an man who in the early 1990s made several threats against abortion clinics and doctors working there and who Todd Akin donated $200 toward his election campaign in 1992. What is a guy who wants to run for senate doing giving money to a domestic terrorist? -- Bushido Hacks ( talk) 07:00, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Akin went into the military in 1971, in the middle of the Vietnam War. His bio says he was in the U.S. Army, which has to be true for a small part of his career, at least - when he was on active duty to go the Engineer officer basic course. But two different sources say that he was in the National Guard, something not in the Wikipedia article:
Being in the National Guard rather than the U.S. Army is a big difference (see, for example, George W. Bush military service controversy, Dan Quayle). If Akin was in the National Guard for a while and then transferred to the Army Reserve, the article should be revised to say that.
Also, the second source says "rank of lieutenant (1971-1980)"; it would be nice to add his rank to the article, but more detail is needed (and a better source): there is no rank of "lieutenant" for Army officers; it's either 2LT or 1LT.
So, to repeat: it would be helpful if the article stated how many years he served on active duty; a typical commitment for an officer (via ROTC) would have been 2 years active duty and then 6 years in the Reserve. But if he was in the National Guard, he would have been on active duty only long enough to do go through officer basic school, and then he would have had a monthly drill obligation in the National Guard. (The article wording now gives no clue as to the date of "his discharge from active duty".) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
The first sentence under fiscal issues, while accurate, seems obviously written by someone who doesn't like Mr. Akin. It says that he brought earmarks to his district, voted for an unfunded Medicare prescription drug benefit, and voted to raise the debt ceiling, clearly implying that Akin is not fiscally responsible (which may, in fact, be true). However, I would say that most members of congress earmark pork for their districts, support raising the debt ceiling, and did or would have voted for the prescription drug benefit. I don't see other politicians getting treated like that on Wikipedia, and I doubt ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' would write it that way. Is there any way to clean up that sentence? 24.6.40.199 ( talk) 08:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
He is releasing a book where he defends the legitimate rape comment. This should be intergrated into his bio. See link:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/todd-akin-new-book-108745.html?hp=f2
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Todd Akin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Do we really have to have all this BS about "many scientists don't accept his theory"? He's wrong, blatantly wrong, and "from what he understands from doctors" is BS because that's not what doctors are saying. He lied, are we not allowed to point that out anymore? 204.11.142.106 ( talk) 16:37, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I was watching a channel on NEWSROOMMSNBC on youtube. The address is 51mi7dDbitk and this guy's name came up. He says "I take a look at both sides of the thing and it seems to me that evolution takes a tremendous amount of faith. I don't even see it as a matter of science because I don't know if you can prove....". It starts at 0:30. It looks like anti-abortion, anti-women's rights, anti-evolution, young earth creationism, anti - separation of church and state goes hand in hand. Can we have a section about this? Vmelkon ( talk) 01:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Todd Akin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Todd Akin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Todd Akin was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 October 2021. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I removed this section, which lacked context and was just one sentence with a citation to Huffington Post. The source didn't even support the statement being attributed to Akin, the assertion is actually an extrapolation by the author of the piece. Also, titling a section "Controversy" is terribly uninformative and not normally conducive to a neutral point of view. -- Michael Snow ( talk) 19:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
His mother's name should be listed as "Nancy Bigelow (née Perry)." The word "née" refers to the maiden name, not to the married name, so the way it's worded right now is the opposite of that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.30.194.139 ( talk) 18:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone, I highly suspect the gentlman himself or a close friend/family, keeps trying to add the name Mark Lodes to potential opponents against Akin in the 2012 election. This information is supported by nothing other than a not very informative self-created website by Mr. Lodes. No Missouri or national media have mentioned his name at all in the context of being a serious candidate. No election paperwork has been filed. Until such time as his candidacy can be verified by an independent and reliable source I strongly urge his name not be included. What say you? Sector001 ( talk) 20:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Need an actual reliable source rather than simply the "soundbite" type of media. -- Avanu ( talk) 23:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
This content: "Political analyst Nate Silver indicated that the comments had the potential to swing the Missouri Senate race." is inappropriate. Nate Silver's opinion is very interesting, of course, but he isn't the Amazing Kreskin. It's non-encyclopedic fluff, not hard fact. Belchfire- TALK 02:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
The appropriate policy is WP:CBALL, which prevents editors from substituting predictions for reliable sources. It doesn't prevent us from reporting on notable predictions. StillStanding (24/7) ( talk) 05:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone object to rearranging this section to group the reaction comments from Romney/Ryan and McCaskill with the sentence about reaction? It would also isolate the questionable statement regarding the potential impact on the race (which is a separate idea). Could look something like this:
Thoughts? Objections? Rjp422 ( talk) 15:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
'Comment
WP:NOTNEWS. This prognosticating wont be worth a damn in 4 months.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 22:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Should we start to get wording on the responses to the statement? I believe Romney 's campaign and Claire McCaskill have comments concerning this. Casprings ( talk) 03:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Why include the study? It seems to be WP:Coatrack. Plus, adding it without context adds POV. To the average reader, 5% sounds like a small number. However, pregnancy requires sex when the woman is fertile and even then it isn't a 100% thing. TO make this not POV, we need to dive into another area. Casprings ( talk) 04:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok, let's get the ball rolling. What's in dispute? StillStanding (24/7) ( talk) 05:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Should we add this to the controversies section? [3] Qworty ( talk) 07:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Why is this line in the piece? "A campaign spokesman for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan said both disagreed with Akin's position and would not oppose abortion in instances of rape." This is not about Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan. This seems to be here to allow other back door comments about them or from other people to enter. I think it should be removed. 216.81.94.71 ( talk) 11:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Here are a couple examples of a defense of Akin's remarks:
Brangifer ( talk) 18:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
After the protection expires, we ought to add this where Ryan is mentioned: Cwobeel ( talk) 20:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Ryan co-sponsored a bill with Akin in the House of Representatives that would have changed the legal definition of rape to "forcible rape" to narrow access to federal funding for abortions. [1]
I think that the article is a little thin. There should be be a section that detail Rep. Akin's views in greater detail, for example. Casprings ( talk) 12:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Obama has given a response to Akin's 'forcible rape' comment, if anyone wants to add it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19326638
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/08/20/obama-akins-rape-comments-way-out-there/
Euchrid ( talk) 22:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
This Todd Akin comments has enough coverage and enough reactions and fallout to give it its own article. I invite you to edit Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy . I suggest that we create a short summary here (as already exists) and then link the page. Casprings ( talk) 00:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The proper place for this is the article about the election. A sentence, maybe two, should go in the corresponding section of this article, reflecting the magnitude of the fallout. There's no reason for a separate section, let alone an article. Brithon ( talk) 01:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Everyone is free to take this to WP:AfD. I would just argue that this new article meets WP:N and it it involves more then Rep. Akin. Casprings ( talk) 01:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
It's become a big thing, perhaps big enough for an article of its own. Regardless, I think the seven-day full protection of this article is inappropriate, given the circumstances. GreenReaper ( talk) 02:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There's an article on George D. Weber; requesting wikilink to same. 84.203.39.242 ( talk) 01:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Suggestion for sub-section on Akin's position on the science of climate change. Source: [4] -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 02:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest that the following would be a good summery and link to Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy article. I suggest that we work on a summery and then edit it in.
The Todd Akin rape and pregnancy controversy involves comments by Todd Akin and the controversy that resulted from the comments. Todd Akin is a a representative from Missouri and current candidate for the US Senate (See United States Senate election in Missouri, 2012). In an August 19, 2012 interview aired on St. Louis television station KTVI-TV, Akin was asked his views on whether women who became pregnant due to sexual assault should have the option of abortion. He replied:
Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child. [1]
The comment was widely criticized as being misogynist and inaccurate. [2] [3] [4] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone. [5] A separate 2003 article in the journal Human Nature estimated that rapes are twice as likely to result in pregnancies as consensual sex. [6]
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request you change the name of the section that talks about his comments and provide a link to an expanded article. I request the following edit:
Casprings ( talk) 05:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This article most certainly needs a link to the controversy article as it has become the defining and most public story in this person's biography.-- Oakshade ( talk) 06:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I disagree with the proposed section title; there's no reason to include Akin's full name in a heading on his own article. I would find "Rape and pregnancy controversy" or "Rape and pregnancy comments" to be better headings than the current one ("Comments on abortion in cases of rape"). Theoldsparkle ( talk) 13:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The comment was widely criticized.[34][35][36] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone.[37]
Surely this can be improved? The comment was widely criticized not because people don't agree with an opinion he expressed, but because medical experts say his assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant via rape is flat-out wrong. See this New York Times article, in which four doctors debunk his statement, calling it "nuts," "absurd" and "nonsense." There is also this detailed debunking from Scientific American, and this story headlined Doctors appalled over Rep. Akin's comments that 'legitimate rape' prevents pregnancy from NBC.
Why don't we try something like this:
The comment was widely criticized as false. Medical experts say there is no evidence to support the assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant from rape compared with consensual sex, [1] [2] [3] [4] and a three-year longitudinal survey of 4008 adult American women, published in 1996, found that rape-related pregnancy occurred with "significant frequency." [5]
-- Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
So, as per the conversation above, can I ask an admin to make this edit?
Replace this: The comment was widely criticized. [1] [2] [3] Related news articles cited a 1996 article in an obstetrics and gynecology journal, which found that 5% of women who were raped became pregnant, which equaled about 32,000 pregnancies each year in the US alone [4] (comparative from pregnancy studies: likelihood for any single act of intercourse is around 1% - 10% depending on timing, averaging around 3% [5]).
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |last=
(
help)
With this: The comment was widely criticized as false. Medical experts say there is no evidence to support the assertion that women are less likely to get pregnant from rape compared with consensual sex, [1] [2] [3] [4] and a three-year longitudinal survey of 4008 adult American women, published in 1996, found that rape-related pregnancy occurred with "significant frequency." [5]
FT2, I would be fine with you or someone else merging in some of the other stuff that's in the original paragraph if you want -- I'm not saying it shouldn't be there. Just wanted to stick with the exact text proposed here, for the purposes of asking an admin to make the edit. Thanks Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request that an Admin update the format of the Succession Box, such that for his current office it would say "Incumbent," instead of "Succeeded by Incumbent" almost as if Incumbent were a man's name. The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 05:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request that the Admin add some additional biographical information which I believe is non-controversial To whit:
and
I wish I could add that his father Paul B. Aiken was president of Laclede Steel (which in fact is the case). I could find various reputable one that say there was a Paul Aiken who was president of Laclede Steel but can't off hand find one that states categorically the relationship. Thanks. Americasroof ( talk) 08:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
1. In the phrase "Media columnists considered the comment had not been mis-spoken", change "columnists" to "commentators". More accurate as not all the commentors on this incident are columnists.
2. In the same phrase as above, change "mis-spoken" to "misspoken", for correctness and also consistency with "misspoke" as used in the previous sentence.
3. In the sentence "His opponent in the 2012 Senate race, Sen. Claire McCaskill, responded via Twitter, stating 'as a woman...'", change the middle to "responded via Twitter that 'as a woman...'" It's simply smoother and more efficient phrasing. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 12:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
The press in Finland has reported this man's bizarre opinions - about both rape and abortion. It seems also to have been reported in the national press in Australia, Britain, South Africa, Canada, France, and Germany (the ones I have checked). This being so, the man now has global renown and these facts about him should at least be mentioned in the lead paragraph and not buried down at the bottom.-- 80.223.105.147 ( talk) 12:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Replace the current introduction, quoted as follows:
William Todd Akin (born July 5, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party.
The district includes the western St. Louis suburbs of Ballwin, Kirkwood, Chesterfield, Wildwood, Town and Country, and Des Peres located along Interstate 270 in western St. Louis County (West County) and the northwestern exurbs of St. Charles and St. Peters in St. Charles County.
He won the 2012 Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat in a crowded field. He will challenge Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill in the general election.
with the following:
William Todd Akin (born July 5, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party. He won the 2012 Republican primary for the U.S. Senate and will challenge Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill in the general election.
Directly underneath the heading "U.S. House of Representatives", place the following (moved from the current intro):
Missouri's 2nd congressional district includes the western St. Louis suburbs of Ballwin, Kirkwood, Chesterfield, Wildwood, Town and Country, and Des Peres located along Interstate 270 in western St. Louis County (West County) and the northwestern exurbs of St. Charles and St. Peters in St. Charles County.
These changes have nothing to do with the current controversy; they're just cleanup. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 15:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
As a new paragraph at the end of the intro (hopefully along with the changes above), add the following:
In August 2012, after winning the primary, Akin drew widespread attention for commenting in an interview that women were unlikely to become pregnant due to what he referred to as "legitimate rape."
I am open to other wording suggestions; one of my goals was to try to be as neutral and objective as possible to encourage reaching consensus on including something relatively quickly. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 15:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think it requires a much more prominent paragraph. This is not just a gaffe and has very substantial political implications. Cwobeel ( talk) 15:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I disagree strongly. Give it time. There is no deadline. This is not a reactionary news service. There is already undue weight given. -- Nouniquenames ( talk) 05:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Would someone substitute in the table below for the tables currently in the article? under the "Electoral History" section. This table includes missing information on elections and updated sourcing with current links. It does not include anything new that has occurred since the full protection on the article. Thanks. KeptSouth ( talk) 14:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
==Electoral history==
Year | Office | District | Democrat | Republican | Libertarian | Ref | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | Tedd House | 42% | Todd Akin | 55% | James Higgins | 1 % | [1] |
2002 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | John Hogan | 31% | Todd Akin | 67% | Darla Maloney | 2 % | [2] |
2004 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | George Weber | 33% | Todd Akin | 65% | Darla Maloney | 1% | [3] |
2006 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | George Weber | 37% | Todd Akin | 61% | Tamara Millay | 2% | [4] |
2008 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | William Haas | 35% | Todd Akin | 62% | Thomas Knapp | 2% | [5] |
2010 | U.S. House | Missouri 2nd | Arthur Lieber | 29% | Todd Akin | 68% | Steve Mosbacher | 3 % | [6] [7] |
The Devil's Advocate has pointed out on my talk page I added material on the recent matter after protection. He's right, I hadn't noticed protection. So I'm bringing it here for eyeballs and a decision to keep or remove.
DA's post:
In terms of WP:BLP on controversial issues, I don't think the sentence added diverged from sources, though I'm open to disagreement. They accurately and validly state exactly what sources state with no elaboration or synthesis. I gave 3 sources for a statement of how a significant part of the "columnist" or "media" landscape is perceiving and responding to his self-correction, since it's useful to show that the views are in multiple reputable sources, not just one. (There were numerous others)
What they said | What I characterized |
---|---|
|
Media columnists considered the comment had not been mis-spoken but a reflection of personal belief taken back for political expediency... |
|
...with attention drawn to Akin's scientific ignorance... |
|
...and distrust of rape reports and past actions and statements consistent with this belief. |
I also added a brief note from clinical research from a very highly regarded series of studies into pregnancy, which analyzed exactly the question at point - how often would a single incident of intercourse at random be expected to result in pregnancy. It's certain this is information that a reasonable reader would expect in this controversy (to compare to percentage of rape victims), and is very highly sourced. |
Collapsed to avoid publicizing the original article quotes. Eyeballs please, and apologies again (and thanks to DA) for not noticing the protection. FT2 ( Talk | email) 15:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Here is an alternative wording I just worked up:
Commentators critical of Akin suggested the comment had not been misspoken but was instead an accurate reflection of his personal beliefs and that he rescinded the remarks for political expediency. These commentators claimed Akin's past actions and statements were consistent with the comment and constituted evidence of scientific ignorance as well as a general distrust of women.
That would reasonably satisfy my concerns.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 18:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
On January 22, 2008, Todd Akin addressed the House of Representatives with a long speech condemning abortion.
In his speech, he drew comparisons between abortion and slavery — even going so far as to suggest that abortion is fundamentally more "un-American" than slavery. "We have one of the most polarizing issues that has confronted our nation since the days of slavery. And yet, just as slavery is fundamentally un-American, so even moreso, anything that violates the most fundamental right -- the right to life -- is contrary to everything that Americans have stood for and fought for." Akin goes on to say that "we have terrorists in our own culture called 'abortionists,'" and that abortionists are "heartless doctors."
http://www.businessinsider.com/todd-akin-abortion-is-more-un-american-than-slavery-video-2012-8 Cwobeel ( talk) 18:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Here are links to all the polls for the 2012 Senate race Akin vs. McCaskill
Senate - Akin vs. McCaskill RealClearPolitics
2012 Missouri Senate: McCaskill vs. Akin Huffpost DLH ( talk) 23:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please capitalize "senate" in this sentence since it is a proper adjective describing the election as one for a seat in the United States Senate, which is a specific entity whose name is always capitalized. Thanks!
Political analysts believe that the comments have the potential to swing the 2012 United States Senate election in Missouri;[39][40] the Washington Post reported a "stampede" of Republicans dissociating from Akin as part of damage limitation, with NRSC chairman John Cornyn saying the GOP would no longer provide him senate election funding and describing Akin as "endangering Republicans’ hopes of retaking the majority in the Senate".
5reided ( talk) 03:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think is is time to un-protect this article. Where can such request be made? Cwobeel ( talk) 15:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As a long-time member of the Missouri Libertarian Party, I'd like to ask for an inclusion of _all_ the candidates in Rep. Akin's congressional races. All data below from [1]
2000 House, Ted DEM 126,441 42.4% Akin, Todd REP 164,926 55.3% Higgins, James LIB 2,524 .8% Gimpelson, Richard J. REF 1,264 .4% Odell, Mike GRE 2,907 1.0%
2002 Hogan, John DEM 77,168 31.1% Akin, Todd REP 166,696 67.1% Maloney, Darla R. LIB 4,547 1.8%
2004 Weber, George D. DEM 115,366 33.0% Akin, Todd REP 228,725 65.4% Maloney, Darla LIB 4,822 1.4% Leefe, David CST 954 .3%
2006 Akin, Todd REP 176,452 61.3% Weber, George D. DEM 105,242 36.6% Millay, Tamara A. LIB 5,923 2.1%
2008 Akin, Todd REP 230,976 62.3% Haas, William C. (Bill) DEM 131,303 35.4% Knapp, Thomas L. LIB 8,576 2.3%
2010 Lieber, Arthur DEM 77,467 29.2% Akin, Todd REP 180,481 67.9% Mosbacher, Steve LIB 7,677 2.9% Cannon, Patrick M. WI 7 .0%
Hsemerson ( talk) 18:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Many immediately decried both the insensitivity of the comments, and the lack of scientific understanding they reflected.
Professor Erica Frank, MD, MPH ( talk) 22:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC) [1]
References
This article needs a mention of the Akin rape controversy in the intro: something NPOV like "In August 2012, Akin became the subject of media controversy regarding his comments on abortion and rape" would do. Akin has catapulted himself to the centre of the U.S. political agenda by his remarks, to the point where they currently overshadow other campaign narratives about both the Senate and presidential elections. Not to mention this in the intro is ignoring the elephant in the room. -- The Anome ( talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Most political biographies of politician that are in national office have sections on personal life. Has his section gotten lost in all the recent editing? While you all are here focused on the controversy I would request you update the Personal Life section. Thankyou. 97.85.168.22 ( talk) 02:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
"Born in 1947, Todd grew up in Missouri’s second district and attended local schools. He met his future wife while working at IBM and married Lulli in the summer of 1975. Todd and Lulli have six children: Wynn, Perry, Micah, Ezra, Hannah, and Abigail. Eight grandchildren have also joined the Akin family. Todd commutes from St. Louis to Washington every week to be with his family and to meet with constituents, business leaders and other elected officials throughout the greater St. Louis community.
Today, Todd continues to write and lecture on the principles of America's Founding and Heritage. He is active in the Boy Scouts of America, a leader in his local church, a former board member of Missouri Right to Life, and sits on the board of the Mission Gate Prison Ministry."
[1]
Another reference:
Family: Wife: Lulli; 6 Children: Wynn, Perry, Micah, Ezra, Hannah, Abigail
Current Legislative Committees
* Armed Services, Member
* Budget, Member
* Science, Space, and Technology, Member
* Subcommittee on Energy and Environment (Science, Space, and Technology), Member
* Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, Chair
* Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Member
* Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces, Member
Education
MDiv, Covenant Seminary, 1985
BS, Management Engineering, Worchester Polytechnic Institute, 1971
Professional Experience
Management Director, Laclede Steel Company, 1977-1980
Officer, United States Army, 1972-1980
Marketer, International Business Machines, 1974-1977
Teacher
Political Experience
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2000-present
Representative, Missouri State House of Representatives, 1989-2000
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees
Member, United States Constitutional Bicentennial Commission, 1987
Member, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Member, Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus
Member, Republican Study Committee
Member, Tea Party Caucus
Organizations
Assistant Troop Leader, Boy Scouts of America
Board Member, Mission Gate Prison Ministry
Member, Executive Board, Missouri River Township Republican Organization
Former Board Member, Missouri Right to Life
Additional Information
* Astrological Sign:
Cancer
* Awards:
-Guardian of Seniors Rights, 60-Plus Association
-Hero of the Taxpayer, Americans for Tax Reform
-Champion of Small Business, Small Business Survival Committee
[2]
97.85.168.22 ( talk) 09:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Ballotpedia Wiki has a section of external links which you can raid for sources: external links section 97.85.168.22 ( talk) 09:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
(I'm starting this section pre-emptively just in case there's danger of an edit war over this.) In the lede, I just changed this:
"The comment led to widespread calls for Akin to drop out of his Senate race. Akin apologized, clarified his comment, and said he would continue his campaign."
to this:
"He later said that he "misspoke." The comment led to widespread calls for Akin to drop out of his Senate race. Akin said that he would continue his campaign."
I did this because the lede should not contain material, especially uncited material, that is not included and cited elsewhere in the text. From what I can see, all the text currently says about Akin's reaction is: "Akin said, 'In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year.'" This does not explicitly include an apology, nor a clarification (simply saying "I misspoke" does not clarify what you were intending to say). If he has apologized and/or clarified, that should be added and cited in the body of the article and then I have absolutely no objection to mentioning such in the lede. Theoldsparkle ( talk) 13:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
A representative of the American Family Association cited a 1999 article by Doctor John C. Willke to argue Akin "was exactly right".[45] Pro-life theologian Pia de Solenni called Akin's remarks "idiotic", but also claimed that there is "no solid data" on the question of whether rape inhibits pregnancy, and opined that it was not a "far stretch [from effects of long-term stress on fertility] to wonder if women who are raped might have a lesser rate of pregnancy resulting from the rape".[46] Robert Fleischmann, director of pro-life group Christian Life Resources, similarly argued that Akin's point was plausible but lacked data ("I have yet to see a study that demonstrates some sort of contraceptive effect from a rape. I do believe, however, it is not an unwarranted conclusion." and "Statistically speaking, it appears something happens in a rape, either with the victim or with the perpetrator, that reduces the incidence of pregnancy.").[47]
I think this section should be removed from the article. These are people being quoted on medical topics who have no medical expertise. It's fine to have them give their views on topics about which they have a particular expertise (politics, religion, etc.) but there's no reason to include their comments on issues they know nothing about. Sue Gardner ( talk) 05:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Interesting idea, Sue. You should chime in at the deletion discussion; this entire thing is based on the comments made by some moron with no medical expertise. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
There has been some back-and-forth about how to refer, in the introduction, to the controversy caused by Akin's comment. The two versions that have been used are:
"Akin made a controversial comment..."
vs.
"His comment caused media and political controversy"
My preferred version is the former, which seems clear and succinct. To me, the latter seems awkward and fairly meaningless; what is "media and political controversy"? Controversy that is reported by the media and involves politics? Both those attributes seem like they could be pretty well assumed by the reader.
Other opinions? Theoldsparkle ( talk) 14:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I have removed it because the article on Akin does not meet the criteria: "The current event template may be used optionally to warn the editor or reader about the great flux of edits and the fast-changing state of the article", see, WP:Current event templates
There is not a great flux of events going on, nor are there a huge amount of edits. He is either going to get the court order and resign from the race or he is not, which is not exactly a great flux of events. Besides, the situation now is in limbo, with Akin still campaigning as the party nominee. Please discuss here if you disagree and wish to re-add the template. KeptSouth ( talk) 15:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I couldn't find a source for this after looking diligently, so I removed it
Hopefully, someone will see this note, provide a source and re-add the material to the article. KeptSouth ( talk) 12:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In External links, CongLinks template, please fill out the nyt parameter with a/todd_akin 184.78.81.245 ( talk) 14:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
at the start of the second paragraph, it is written that Akin expressed a controversial opinion. I was surprised to hear it described that way because it entails an element of subjectivity where none exists. It isn't an opinion like his opinion on which genre of music is best, and he wouldn't be "entitled to his own opinion" in this matter, so the saying goes. I'm not saying he doesn't genuinely believe it, but I mean it's recognized to be not a matter of opinion, but one of scientific inquiry and that his idea of how biology works is genuinely incorrect.
Can I propose that that word be changed to something like comment or statement, so there isn't any ambiguity about whether it's fallacious or not?
THanks 71.234.13.90 ( talk) 18:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
You may believe that 2+2=4, but in addition to that attitude you're able to have knowledge of that fact by external confirmation, whereas with an opinion or belief, you are capable of having the attitude, but not progressing any further into certainty.
So, he definitely believes that, but it's not his opinion because it's not open to interpretation. 71.234.13.90 ( talk) 18:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Done Fewer words tend to be clearer. – MrX 18:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps we should delve into the relationship between Akin and Tim Dreste, an man who in the early 1990s made several threats against abortion clinics and doctors working there and who Todd Akin donated $200 toward his election campaign in 1992. What is a guy who wants to run for senate doing giving money to a domestic terrorist? -- Bushido Hacks ( talk) 07:00, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Akin went into the military in 1971, in the middle of the Vietnam War. His bio says he was in the U.S. Army, which has to be true for a small part of his career, at least - when he was on active duty to go the Engineer officer basic course. But two different sources say that he was in the National Guard, something not in the Wikipedia article:
Being in the National Guard rather than the U.S. Army is a big difference (see, for example, George W. Bush military service controversy, Dan Quayle). If Akin was in the National Guard for a while and then transferred to the Army Reserve, the article should be revised to say that.
Also, the second source says "rank of lieutenant (1971-1980)"; it would be nice to add his rank to the article, but more detail is needed (and a better source): there is no rank of "lieutenant" for Army officers; it's either 2LT or 1LT.
So, to repeat: it would be helpful if the article stated how many years he served on active duty; a typical commitment for an officer (via ROTC) would have been 2 years active duty and then 6 years in the Reserve. But if he was in the National Guard, he would have been on active duty only long enough to do go through officer basic school, and then he would have had a monthly drill obligation in the National Guard. (The article wording now gives no clue as to the date of "his discharge from active duty".) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
The first sentence under fiscal issues, while accurate, seems obviously written by someone who doesn't like Mr. Akin. It says that he brought earmarks to his district, voted for an unfunded Medicare prescription drug benefit, and voted to raise the debt ceiling, clearly implying that Akin is not fiscally responsible (which may, in fact, be true). However, I would say that most members of congress earmark pork for their districts, support raising the debt ceiling, and did or would have voted for the prescription drug benefit. I don't see other politicians getting treated like that on Wikipedia, and I doubt ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' would write it that way. Is there any way to clean up that sentence? 24.6.40.199 ( talk) 08:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
He is releasing a book where he defends the legitimate rape comment. This should be intergrated into his bio. See link:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/todd-akin-new-book-108745.html?hp=f2
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Todd Akin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Do we really have to have all this BS about "many scientists don't accept his theory"? He's wrong, blatantly wrong, and "from what he understands from doctors" is BS because that's not what doctors are saying. He lied, are we not allowed to point that out anymore? 204.11.142.106 ( talk) 16:37, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I was watching a channel on NEWSROOMMSNBC on youtube. The address is 51mi7dDbitk and this guy's name came up. He says "I take a look at both sides of the thing and it seems to me that evolution takes a tremendous amount of faith. I don't even see it as a matter of science because I don't know if you can prove....". It starts at 0:30. It looks like anti-abortion, anti-women's rights, anti-evolution, young earth creationism, anti - separation of church and state goes hand in hand. Can we have a section about this? Vmelkon ( talk) 01:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Todd Akin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)