[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Akin and other politicians tried in the past to change the legal definition of rape. I think his statement of legitimate rape is an example of how the legal definition can change or the typologies of rape can change. I cant defend his comments though because he claims to have evidence from doctors yet has failed to even paraphrase it, so I am left wondering whether he misunderstood.

Galloway is in a bit of a different position. I'm not sure if he's trying to make his views seem less extreme and appeal to the masses, if he's trying to accept a redefinition of rape more subtly than Akin, or couldn't word his argument in a clearer manner. At first he condemned Mr. Assange's personal sex behaviour, which probably is where the masses might sit. He then did a 180 degree turn by stating he's understanding of the actions and may go as far as supporting them. I cant defend him because his argument that Mr. Assange was "set up" is completely circumstantial. Additionally, there's a massive leap in logic he seems unaware of. It's akin to paying for gum at a store once but not paying when you visit a second time because of the thought that it's legally allowed.