'If Rape Is Inevitable, Lie Back And Enjoy It'

[aubiefifty 18,237]

Michigan GOP Candidate Tells Daughters 'If Rape Is Inevitable, Lie Back And Enjoy It'

 

Sebastian Murdock

Tue, March 8, 2022, 1:07 PM

 

 

A GOP candidate running for Michigan’s House of Representatives said during a Facebook Live broadcast that he tells his daughters to “lie back and enjoy” rape if it’s “inevitable.”

Robert “RJ” Regan, who won the GOP special primary in the state’s 74th district last week, was discussing how to decertify the 2020 presidential election during a Facebook Live broadcast for the Republican group Rescue Michigan Coalition on Sunday when he made the comment.

“Having three daughters, I tell my daughters, ‘Well, if rape is inevitable, you should just lie back and enjoy it,’” Regan said roughly 10 minutes into the broadcast. “That’s not how we roll, that’s not how we won this election.”

“That was a shameful comment,” attendee Amber Harris said in response.

 

Host Adam de Angeli then joked that the show might not stream “for much longer after what Robert said.”

De Angeli also defended Regan later on the same broadcast, telling a commenter that Regan was describing what “you should not do.”

Regan did not respond to multiple requests for comment from HuffPost.

 

Robert

Regan, who won his primary by just 81 votes, lost that same race in 2020 after a viral tweet from his own daughter told people not to vote for her dad, Fox 17 noted.

“If you’re in michigan and 18+ pls for the love of god do not vote for my dad for state rep. tell everyone,” Stephanie Regan tweeted at the time.

During Sunday’s Facebook Live event, Regan also defended Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose forces are currently invading Ukraine.

“Putin said, ‘I have to protect my country, I have to protect my children, and I can’t count on the United States,’” Regan said.

“So what he did was took some proactive action, he went into Ukraine, knocked out the bio labs, knocked out the missile sites, so he can protect his people,” the candidate added, likely referring to a QAnon conspiracy theory about bioweapons.

That’s not what Putin did. Instead, he launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, where Russian forces have bombed civilians and have been attempting to capture the country’s capital city, Kyiv.

Republican Tori Sachs of the Michigan Freedom Fund condemned Regan in a statement to Fox 17.

“RJ Regan’s disgusting and dehumanizing comments on the horror of sexual assault along with his support of murderous dictator Vladimir Putin are despicable and completely disqualify him from holding public office,” Sachs said. “I teach my four young daughters to stand up for themselves, to know their worth, and to fight back and speak out against creeps like Regan. RJ Regan doesn’t belong anywhere near the state Capitol, and that is why we endorsed and supported his opponent.”

Regan will now face Carol Glanville, a Democrat, in the special election for the seat on May 3.

Need help? Visit RAINN’s National Sexual Assault Online Hotline or the National Sexual Violence Resource Center’s website.

 

i know this is the huff but i believe it to be true. and just wow at this idiot.

[SLAG-91 1,611]

History damn near literally repeating itself.

I had a flashback to the 1990 Texas governor's race, which was a close one...Clayton Williams said pretty much the same thing late in the race, and likely sealed his fate. Ann Richards ended up winning.

Why anyone would think that was an acceptable thing to think, never mind utter, at any point in time is beyond me. Idiot deserves every bit of lambasting that is coming.

[wdefromtx 3,611]

14 minutes ago, SLAG-91 said:

History damn near literally repeating itself.

I had a flashback to the 1990 Texas governor's race, which was a close one...Clayton Williams said pretty much the same thing late in the race, and likely sealed his fate. Ann Richards ended up winning.

Why anyone would think that was an acceptable thing to think, never mind utter, at any point in time is beyond me. Idiot deserves every bit of lambasting that is coming.

Yeah, I saw the thread title and wondered why he was digging up a 32 year old story. History just repeated!! 

Dumb people are dumb!! 

Edited March 8, 2022 by wdefromtx

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Sadly, he probably isn't dumb, just that fundamentally corrupt. 

When people tell us who they are, we should believe them.

[CoffeeTiger 5,873]

19 hours ago, SLAG-91 said:

History damn near literally repeating itself.

I had a flashback to the 1990 Texas governor's race, which was a close one...Clayton Williams said pretty much the same thing late in the race, and likely sealed his fate. Ann Richards ended up winning.

Why anyone would think that was an acceptable thing to think, never mind utter, at any point in time is beyond me. Idiot deserves every bit of lambasting that is coming.

 

Except this guy comes from a rural, heavily Republican district and is likely to be elected no matter what he does or says. 

He won his primary by saying incredibly stupid things, so I actually think this is the type of person that at least some segments of Michigan Republicans want to represent them. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,873]

 

Someone can add Mr. Regan to this list.  

[TitanTiger 21,242]

25 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

Someone can add Mr. Regan to this list.  

I didn't check all the quotes, but the one for Santorum is not a direct quote, but a paraphrase and should be denoted as such.  Here's the full quote (Santorum was asked about abortions in the case of rape):

"Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn’t have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn’t, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I’ve always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can’t think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation."

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,873]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

I didn't check all the quotes, but the one for Santorum is not a direct quote, but a paraphrase and should be denoted as such.  Here's the full quote (Santorum was asked about abortions in the case of rape):

"Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn’t have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn’t, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I’ve always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can’t think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation."

 

 

You're correct. Thanks for the clarification. 

 

I still don't agree with Santorum that pregnancy created through rape should be considered a 'gift from God', and I think that's just a way to try and use Religion to shame women who are already going through a very emotional and traumatic event. 

 

"No...don't abort that fetus...that's a gift from God...God wanted you to get pregnant. Even if it was a traumatic event...aborting would be turning your back on God's and his will."

 

I don't think that's a good mindset and isn't helpful to women or Christianity in the least.  

[TitanTiger 21,242]

13 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

I still don't agree with Santorum that pregnancy created through rape should be considered a 'gift from God', and I think that's just a way to try and use Religion to shame women who are already going through a very emotional and traumatic event. 

I really don't think Santorum is being disingenuous and trying to shame women.  I think he's sincere and it's not that a "pregnancy" from rape is a gift from God, but that a new human being with all the inherent worth and wonder and dignity thereof is a gift from God.  

I get what you're saying, but I think it's a misunderstanding to read it as some sort of ulterior motive for really just wanting to keep women down.

 

 

[CoffeeTiger 5,873]

20 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I really don't think Santorum is being disingenuous and trying to shame women.  I think he's sincere and it's not that a "pregnancy" from rape is a gift from God, but that a new human being with all the inherent worth and wonder and dignity thereof is a gift from God.  

I get what you're saying, but I think it's a misunderstanding to read it as some sort of ulterior motive for really just wanting to keep women down.

 

 

I get what you're saying. 

Santorum is very religious and I know that shaming or putting down women isn't his goal in saying or believing this...he beleives he's saying and doing the right thing according to his religious beliefs.. but I don't think that it justifies that it have an impact on women who are actually experiencing that situation. 

I know the religious angle of all of this, but that doesn't change the fact that if Santorum or someone with his beliefs were talking to or counseling a woman who was raped and just learned her rapist impregnated her, that his advice and opinion to her would be that she shouldn't even consider abortion and should have to carry the pregnancy because the (life/fetus/baby,) whatever you call it is a gift from God. Women should be given 'just the facts' given the options she has, relevant medical data about pregnancy and the abortion process. If she wants religious guidance on the issue she should be free to get it, but people like Santorum shouldn't be trying to force their religious beliefs into situations where it's not warranted or asked for. 

A woman has a legal and medical right to an abortion....people using their religion to try and convince her that that decision would be morally and religiously wrong or sinful isn't in the woman's or potential child's best interest, and can and does create further guilt and trauma for women who face this situation who don't want to have a child.   

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by CoffeeTiger

[homersapien 12,237]

41 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I really don't think Santorum is being disingenuous and trying to shame women.  I think he's sincere and it's not that a "pregnancy" from rape is a gift from God, but that a new human being with all the inherent worth and wonder and dignity thereof is a gift from God.  

That's fine as far as Santorum's opinion goes.  The problem begins when he tries to express or support that religious opinion via legislation, which is unconstitutional (at least).

I get what you're saying, but I think it's a misunderstanding to read it as some sort of ulterior motive for really just wanting to keep women down.

But intent aside, that's precisely the practical effect of laws that take that personal choice away from women.

 

 

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,468]

16 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I really don't think Santorum is being disingenuous and trying to shame women.  I think he's sincere and it's not that a "pregnancy" from rape is a gift from God, but that a new human being with all the inherent worth and wonder and dignity thereof is a gift from God.  

I get what you're saying, but I think it's a misunderstanding to read it as some sort of ulterior motive for really just wanting to keep women down.

 

 

He is absolutely disingenuous.  Shaming women isn't the point.  The arrogance, indifference, ideology that dictates his laws/religion will determine the fate of a rape/incest victim is the point.

I appreciate you standing up for the rights of the unborn, for their very lives.  However, a woman has rights also. 

When ideology/religion compromises one's sense of humanity, morality is compromised. 

[TitanTiger 21,242]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

He is absolutely disingenuous.  Shaming women isn't the point.  The arrogance, indifference, ideology that dictates his laws/religion will determine the fate of a rape/incest victim is the point.

I appreciate you standing up for the rights of the unborn, for their very lives.  However, a woman has rights also. 

When ideology/religion compromises one's sense of humanity, morality is compromised. 

The difference in standing up for the women in this situation and standing up for the unborn is that upholding the unborn's rights aren't a death sentence for the woman.  There's a huge disparity of outcome at play here.

[TitanTiger 21,242]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's fine as far as Santorum's opinion goes.  The problem begins when he tries to express or support that religious opinion via legislation, which is unconstitutional (at least).

But it's not just a religious opinion.  The idea that unborn human beings have human rights doesn't begin and end with religious belief or opinion.  

 

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

But intent aside, that's precisely the practical effect of laws that take that personal choice away from women.

Similarly, the practical effect of giving some people the right to kill other people is that those other people have all their rights snuffed out.  There's a disparity of practical effects that needs to be dealt more thoughtfully.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

The difference in standing up for the women in this situation and standing up for the unborn is that upholding the unborn's rights aren't a death sentence for the woman.  There's a huge disparity of outcome at play here.

True.  Now, thoughtfully, compassionately weigh the humanity of both.  It is far too simple to suggest that the moment sperm touches egg, the two are now equal in the human equation.

[TitanTiger 21,242]

And I say this as someone who from a pragmatic standpoint, if I was in power here, would go along with allowing exceptions for rape and incest.  If we could just get to a place where we could view the unborn as humans and at least not kill them off when sex wasn't forced or coerced, we'd be making quite an advance I think in our humanity.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

13 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

And I say this as someone who from a pragmatic standpoint, if I was in power here, would go along with allowing exceptions for rape and incest.  If we could just get to a place where we could view the unborn as humans and at least not kill them off when sex wasn't forced or coerced, we'd be making quite an advance I think in our humanity.

I absolutely agree.  Abortion should be highly regulated.  Probably why it is. 

[homersapien 12,237]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

But it's not just a religious opinion.  The idea that unborn human beings have human rights doesn't begin and end with religious belief or opinion.  

 

Similarly, the practical effect of giving some people the right to kill other people is that those other people have all their rights snuffed out.  There's a disparity of practical effects that needs to be dealt more thoughtfully.

I could make a similar argument concerning human legal and religious  traditions - as well as medical/scientific standards  - of when life begins.   

In other words, a woman who terminates a pregnancy - at least early in the term - is not "killing" anyone.  But eliminating her choice over how to manage her body is a natural right that is being "snuffed out".

Edited March 10, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 12,237]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

And I say this as someone who from a pragmatic standpoint, if I was in power here, would go along with allowing exceptions for rape and incest.  If we could just get to a place where we could view the unborn as humans and at least not kill them off when sex wasn't forced or coerced, we'd be making quite an advance I think in our humanity.

If so, that "advance" needs to at least account for the woman's ability to physically and financially deal with the consequences of a pregnancy that she is being forced to carry to term.

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,468]

The real sorrow in this is, humanity has little to do with the position of most people.  This has been politicized beyond rational, compassionate thought.  The inhumanity of no rape/incest, extreme defect exemptions is proof.  The lie of unlimited, unregulated, to the moment of birth abortion is proof.

Beware of those who prey upon your emotional thinking, particularly when they are politicians or preachers.

[TitanTiger 21,242]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

The real sorrow in this is, humanity has little to do with the position of most people.  This has been politicized beyond rational, compassionate thought.  The inhumanity of no rape/incest, extreme defect exemptions is proof.  The lie of unlimited, unregulated, to the moment of birth abortion is proof.

Beware of those who prey upon your emotional thinking, particularly when they are politicians or preachers.

We're in complete agreement here.  It's a political football for most politicians.  Whether they are on the left or the right, they know rattling sabres about this issue rustles up the votes.  It's just one more means to their own ends.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

We're in complete agreement here.  It's a political football for most politicians.  Whether they are on the left or the right, they know rattling sabres about this issue rustles up the votes.  It's just one more means to their own ends.

Completely agree.  It makes me sad because I believe life is sacred but, eternal life is the real goal.  I cannot pretend to know God's rules for the unborn(although it is mentioned in the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas).  But, I see it as an issue that often prevents us from truly seeking to help the human condition, mitigate human suffering.  Those are worldly and, we can influence those things.

I often see it used so disingenuously by Christians.  I know you ARE genuine.