Contact: Nathaniel Darnell, American Vision, 770-222-7266 ext 223

ATLANTA, Aug. 23, 2012 /Christian Newswire/ -- Researcher and writer Joel McDurmon is calling the GOP's treatment of Rep. Akin "political gang rape" in a recent article published by American Vision. Rep. Todd Akin received a lot of criticism for misspeaking in an interview about his policy on rape and abortion earlier this week, even to the point that many of his Republican colleagues called for him to bow out of the race in Missouri. But Christian and pro-life groups are beginning to realize that what is at stake in this controversy is not the political candidacy of one man, but the sacredness, even through the tragedy of a rape, of all human life.

Rep. Akin said in his interview that it is the rapist, not the baby, that should be punished for the crime. Many pro-life groups understand that it is this notion that has truly infuriated the far-left, not his medical assertion or his misstatement. A recent Washington Post article listed as its number one concern "Akin believes that there should be no exceptions in abortion laws [for rape]."

"We expect liberals to lie, spin, and twist, but why should conservatives wage a propaganda attack against a man holding the very position of the National Right to Life on rape-related abortion?" writes Joel McDurmon, the director of research at American Vision, a group devoted to restoring America's biblical foundation. His answer: "Politicians like Akin, who represent the clear contrast and strong conservatism desired by the tea party, are a real threat to the old Northeastern establishment Republicans like Romney. And thus that establishment savages him -- violently and in unison. Call it a political gang rape -- a legitimate one."

TheWeek.com today praised Joel's article, quoting from it and labeling is as the "Best Opinion" on the controversy. Dr. Voddie Baucham Jr. also linked to the article on his Voddie Baucham Ministries Facebook wall. TheBeast.com quoted from Joel's article this morning as well in reporting on the outrage of pro-lifers over the attacks on Akin's position.

Other far-left liberal sites such as Jezebel.com, MEDIAite, and Mother Jones have attacked the article as "misogyny." But the attack that matters the most to American Vision is the attack on lives of judicially innocent babes. According to many of the studies being tossed around by the media over this flap, upwards of 15,000 babies are murdered via abortion each year because they are conceived in rape. Rep. Todd Akin, as the defender of those babies, has become the human dart board by not just the liberal media but also many Republicans.

"It's an old and reliable political reality: liberals care for even the criminals in their midst, while conservatives shoot their wounded," continued Joel McDurmon in his article. "So, for example, Joe Biden can put all three of his left feet in his mouth twice a week and the media performs damage control (and perhaps leash training as well). The Right can scream and howl but the matter gets buried in no time. And thus, the male-prostitute hiring Barney Franks of this world retire from Congress as alleged civil rights heroes.

"Meanwhile, let a conservative utter an awkward phrase, and it's ready, aim, fire -- not only from the leftist media, but from alleged conservatives like Ann Coulter, Senator Scott Brown, the Romney-Ryan campaign, and the RNC itself. 'We're not associated with him!'

"And in this case, the volley of verbal bullets came with disproportionate verve. It's almost like the GOP establishment is more than eager to get rid of the most conservative tea-party types among them."

Joel's article goes on to investigate the medical studies liberals have shot at Akin, claiming tens of thousands of rapes result in pregnancies each. But he also posed the question: Even if it was conceived in rape, why kill the child?

"Since when does being physically and emotionally shaken give one the right to kill someone else?

"If the unborn have a right to life, from what or whom does that right derive? God? Nature? Man? We know it's God, and nothing else. And what has the God-given authority to take away that right from an unborn child? Man? Circumstance? We know it's nothing but God. Thus, why would we think we can determine, based on any circumstances, why one child in utero deserves that right and another does not? Again, while the thought of carrying a rapist's child is an emotionally difficult issue, that fact does not negate the child's God-given right to live. And thus anyone denying that right, even in cases of rape, is not pro-life. They are worse, in fact: trying to play God by setting determinations for when that right applies and when it does not."