GOP: Raped? Pay for it yourself.

[aurik]

This thread is exactly about the insertion of the word "forcible" in the otherwise verbatim Hyde amendment that they are trying to pass.

Also statutory rape would not be covered under the new bill whereas the Hyde amendment covered it.

[archibaldcrane]

Obviously, to get rid of ambiguity, but that's not what this thread was mainly about.

That's exactly what this thread is about. Plenty of state statues draw distinctions between "force/threat of force" vs. "unable to give consent", and it wouldn't be difficult to argue that "unable to give consent" situations are not "forcible rape".

Welcome to the conversation though Swampy. Can't wait to see your gymnastics now.

[Demosthenes11]

rape is rape. that's really the only argument that needs to be made

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

having sex with 12 year olds is ok, so long as you brainwash them first

This is the majority of the thread. People who didn't bother reading. What you are raising is different.

What is apparently intellectually above Demo, I do agree with you on. They should have taken out the word forcible. I can see why it's there, but there's no need to put it there. And I don't think the GOP intended for drugged victim's to not get aid.

Edit: Look at the title of the thread. Hardly what were discussing.

[archibaldcrane]

Edit: Look at the title of the thread. Hardly what were discussing.

Dude, if you statutorily rape a consenting 14-year old, they wouldn't be able to get federal funding under this bill for an abortion, because it wouldn't be "forcible rape". That's exactly what the thread title is referring to - a bill which would increase the number of circumstances in which someone can be raped and be denied federally funded abortion.

[Demosthenes11]

This is the majority of the thread. People who didn't bother reading. What you are raising is different.

What is apparently intellectually above Demo, I do agree with you on. They should have taken out the word forcible.

Edit: Look at the title of the thread. Hardly what were discussing.

that comment was in response to you, not the bill.

and yes, the GOP is saying that if you were raped by a family member, you are a minor or while under the influence, you must pay for your abortion.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Ok true, but that's not the context of what was being brought up. You wanna bitch about that, then you wanna bitch about abortion generally, have fun with that.

[archibaldcrane]

and yes, the GOP is saying that if you were raped by a family member, you are a minor or while under the influence, you must pay for your abortion.

Not exactly, if the word "forcible" could be applied in any of the above rapes then this bill would still allow funding.

[archibaldcrane]

Ok true, but that's not the context of what was being brought up. You wanna bitch about that, then you wanna bitch about abortion generally, have fun with that.

So do you acknowledge that what the GOP is trying to do is unnecessary and harmful or not?

[Demosthenes11]

Not exactly, if the word "forcible" could be applied in any of the above rapes then this bill would still allow funding.

ya I just see not distinction between rape. raped while in a coma? fuck yo abortion. raped by a family member that brainwashed you into thinking it was normal and wanted? fuck yo abortion. held down and raped? ok we'll pay for it. ...what?

[archibaldcrane]

ya I just see not distinction between rape. raped while in a coma? fuck yo abortion. raped by a family member that brainwashed you into thinking it was normal and wanted? fuck yo abortion. held down and raped? ok we'll pay for it. ...what?

Yes, it's a stupid distinction designed strictly to limit abortions aimed at satisfying those who want to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

[miokomioko]

It's just trying to asses from funding the abortions that weren't actually "rape" since the word has grown to be rather vague (and taken advantage of).

People see "drug-induced" and automatically think that being unknowingly drugged disqualifies something from being called rape. They see "incest" and automatically think that a guy persuading his niece to hump. These both obviously involve "force" in different ways.

If you're a dumb bitch who gets wasted on your own accord and gets pregnant from unprotected humping, or some weird bitch who fucks your own nephew and realizes that conceiving an incest baby was a bad idea, you're not going to get a free abortion. What's the problem again?

[Callisto]

It's just trying to asses from funding

lol

[archibaldcrane]

It's just trying to asses from funding the abortions that weren't actually "rape" since the word has grown to be rather vague (and taken advantage of).

No.

Just because you don't like what "legal consent" means, doesn't mean it's vague.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So do you acknowledge that what the GOP is trying to do is unnecessary and harmful or not?

I just said it was dumb b/c of ambiguity. Hopefully in the legislative history there were debates about this and a judge can figure it out. I think I can check later.

[archibaldcrane]

I just said it was dumb b/c of ambiguity.

It is clearly being left intentionally "ambiguous" in order to exclude certain types of rape.

This isn't an accident or an omission of laziness, it's an intentional addition to put another roadblock between a rape victim and an abortion. It's fucking disgusting.

[SilverBreeze]

I just said it was dumb b/c of ambiguity. Hopefully in the legislative history there were debates about this and a judge can figure it out. I think I can check later.

It's ambiguous on purpose. Are you really that daft?

@ Mioko I don't think anyone has a problem with exactly what you're saying, the problem is the bill adding "forcible" to the equation, which is just stupid.

The way it's worded right now, excludes women who actually would want and deserve help from an unwanted pregnancy from being raped.

Someone dropped something in your drink, and you were raped because of it? You're shit out of luck.

There's different kinds of "force" than punching someone in the face. Hell if you were raped, threatened with violence or a gun, but he didn't actually "harm" you physically, by the way things sound, you could be shit out of luck.

That's exactly the point, and I don't see why people are having such a hard time grasping it.

Rape is rape. There should be no distinction between it or say that one victim of one type of rape is more deserving of aid than another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

[archibaldcrane]

Rape is rape. There should be no distinction between it

I wouldn't go that far, I think that there should be varying punishments depending on the circumstances and severity of the rape, as there are.

In terms of abortion aid however, there should be no distinctions drawn.

[SilverBreeze]

I wouldn't go that far, I think that there should be varying punishments depending on the circumstances and severity of the rape, as there are.

In terms of abortion aid however, there should be no distinctions drawn.

I'm sorry, that's what I meant. I'm glad you understand my intent with my statement though.

Rape victims have enough to deal with when it comes to dealing with what happened. Physical trauma, emotional distress and disorders that it causes, amongst other things. The last thing they need on top of it is for the government to fuck them too.

[Demosthenes11]

Rape is rape. There should be no distinction between it or say that one victim of one type of rape is more deserving of aid than another. It's absolutely ridiculous.

I wish I could this to death