It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
In a move to curve abortion rights, the GOP decided to redefine rape as being only a product of force. This will effectively make date rape and other such non physical forced rape no longer rape verses...meh...just sex

motherjones.com...

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.


Anyone know the most effective legal date ra...erm...love drug out there?

I wonder if coma patients need some good loving.

Do my comments anger you? good...now write your congressman and tell them to vote against this bloody bill or there will be hell to pay. This will have consequences in real rape cases..."it is not rape, the federal government no longer recognises date rape as per this bill, therefore case dismissed!"

(ya, I am a bit annoyed by this.)
edit on 28-1-2011 by SaturnFX because: grammer nerfing elves





edit on 1/28/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: source link edited to actual

edit on Sat Jan 29 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: title change to something less volatile, used article title




posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Hey! John McCain and 29 other Republicans think that gang rape is perfectly ok. Fact is they voted against an anti gang rape bill last year.

So is it me or does the GOP have a pro rape agenda?



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
So is it me or does the GOP have a pro rape agenda?


It's you.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Hey! John McCain and 29 other Republicans think that gang rape is perfectly ok. Fact is they voted against an anti gang rape bill last year.

So is it me or does the GOP have a pro rape agenda?


I soo need to party with that guy...
-puts it on his bucket list-



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Seems pretty reasonable to me.

I'm not sure how you can claim rape if the sex is consensual.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Of course they do... Didn't you even feel it? They have been raping you and I for years! No dinner, no kiss and no Vaseline!



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Though I don't condone rape in anyway...any forceful " taking " of any woman, regardless of race color or creed, I'd have to say I'm on the fence in regards to " tax payers " having to pay for any abortion. ( Keeping in mind I'm all for abortion if said person wants one )

In the only aspect of it being yet another burden on the tax payer. Will have to do some research to see the pros and cons of this development.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
In a move to curve abortion rights, the GOP decided to redefine rape as being only a product of force. This will effectively make date rape and other such non physical forced rape no longer rape verses...meh...just sex


It doesn't limit "abortion rights" or change the legal definition of rape, it simply limits the circumstances in which someone can force me to help pay for their abortion.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Seems pretty reasonable to me.

I'm not sure how you can claim rape if the sex is consensual.



And by consensual, it means not being physically strongarmed down.
sure, them being passed out is considered by some as being unfair...but hey...they didn't specifically try to beat them off forcefully.

I like the way you think.

Maybe we can also do this to burglery also...unless a person tells you your not allowed in their home, then your default allowed (nevermind if they are home or not).

I see no problem with this line of thinking.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Seems pretty reasonable to me.

I'm not sure how you can claim rape if the sex is consensual.





I think the point is (maybe I'm wrong) that people could drug others or have sex with them (rape them) while they're drunk and passed out?


Obviously consensual sex and rape are two different things.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
I think the point is (maybe I'm wrong) that people could drug others or have sex with them (rape them) while they're drunk and passed out?

Obviously consensual sex and rape are two different things.


Well, many feminists will tell you that trying to persuade a woman to have sex with you is "coercing" etc. etc. and if she regrets it the next day, it means you have raped her and deserve to rot in jail for 20 years.

In any case, this has nothing to do with limiting abortion or changing the definition of rape, it simply limits when someone can make everyone else pay for their abortion.
edit on 28-1-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-1-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by SaturnFX
In a move to curve abortion rights, the GOP decided to redefine rape as being only a product of force. This will effectively make date rape and other such non physical forced rape no longer rape verses...meh...just sex


It doesn't limit "abortion rights" or change the legal definition of rape, it simply limits the circumstances in which someone can force me to help pay for their abortion.



Consequences will fall for a redefination of rape. this is how new views on law is installed, piggybacked off other things. date rape will eventually be redefined if this passes. If the federal government no longer accepts it, then it will flourish from there with enough big lawyers defending perv clients whom drug up their victims for fun.

rape = only forced..
"Did you say no?"
"I said no"
"Did he use force? Did you fight back?"
"I woke up bound to a bed..I couldn't move."
"Then no force happened."

ok, maybe a bit extreme, but technically, if the rules were being technical enough and the "spirit" of law was not in play (say an appeals court), this is a valid argument.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


That's just it. The lawmakers in question are trying to redefine what constitutes "nonconsensual." Under the law they're proposing, rape only occurs as the product of physical force.

Drug a girl? Not rape to the GOP.
Threaten her livelihood unless she puts out? Not rape.
Knock the hell out of her and then go at it while she's unconscious? Not rape, since she was out BEFORE you did anything (Still assault though)
Coma patient? Not rape!
Someone who lacks the ability to give consent due to mental state? Not rape!

But hey, let's give the GOP credit, at least they're not going whole hog; according to the bible, it's only rape if the woman cries out and is rescued, otherwise it's fornication and adultery. I Presume the GOP will still allow for gagged women who are sexually assaulted to be considered "raped."



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans
In any case, this has nothing to do with limiting abortion or changing the definition of rape, it simply limits when someone can make everyone else pay for their abortion.


The patriot act is only to spy on terrorist cells in America. Don't worry, it will not expand out.

I got a bridge in brooklyn to sell you also.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
*Suppressing profanities* The ignorance and corruption of people in power never ceases to amaze me. Having non-consensual sex with a woman is rape, whether it is forced by physical strength or a chemical influence. Either way, the rape victim is *forced* into sex against her will.

This reminds me of occasional lawmakers who try to legalize child pornography. Gee, I wonder why.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


Didn't I talk to you about the use of weasel words before, SevenBeans? "Many" does not a valid argument make.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Date rape does involve force.

The only difference between rape and date rape, is that the person knows the attacker in a date rape.

What was eluded to in the op I define as buyers remorse. That's female dogs who have consensual sex and later decide that they were raped. Those are among the worst type of people to me because it causes people to question most rapes.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Drugging someone against their will/without their knowledge is considered an assault (force).



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 





Well, many feminists will tell you



If anything comes out of the mouths of a feminist circus freak, why take anything they say seriously?



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Any sexual contact that is not agreed to by both parties, would be considered "forced".

So, I've yet to see the problem. Unless the bill specifies that "date rape" is not rape, as the title of this thread states. Do you have that bill that states this?
edit on 28-1-2011 by beezzer because: tpyo



new topics

top topics



 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join