A Superior Court justice is admonished for his despicable remarks to a rape victim four years later
By Mary Elizabeth Williams
"That's right, a judge who said, in a court of law, that if someone doesn't want intercourse her body will magically shut down, thought that what would be an insult, what would trivialize rape, would be to impose a tougher sentence on a rapist. Good one, Judge Johnson."
...A mere four years later, a Commission on Judicial Performance admonished the judge for his remarks. On Thursday, it issued a statement: The judges remarks reflected outdated, biased and insensitive views. Such comments cannot help but diminish public confidence and trust in the impartiality of the judiciary. The Commission added that Johnson, who remains on the bench, had apologized for his words, though his attorney told reporters Thursday he would be making no public comment.
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/14/a_judge … down_rape/
Another man telling women how their bodies work...it's unbelievable that he has such a high political and legal status and believes this
Amazing how so many old men are making decisions for women! Maybe they failed biology?
That paternalistic approach is the GOP brand and you reaffirm that it is quite unwelcome attention. This is just one of the several nails that can be identified on the GOP coffin from November 6th.
How brazen can you get? Surely they did not think that their enlightened view of female reproductive matters was going to get them any traction?
Oh, never as brazen as Obama and his collective liberal supporters get! It was he and they who "failed biology" when they can't even figure out when human life begins. Far be it from them to judge "an old Republican man" who makes a similar (and less consequential!) mistake about female sexual organs.
If you judge any Judges or anyone at all, you should include the Left and also whichever Supreme Court Judges conclude that abortion is okay.
So many keep saying less government? But you want government involved in abortion? Abortion should be a decision between a husband and wife. Who made you GOD to decide if it's right or wrong? You're probably against Obamacare to? If that's the case, I guess allowing people to die for lack of insurance is okay, but abortion isn't? Both end up the same, with death. In the end God will judge those who had abortions and those who are against saving lives thru affordable medical care! Leave the judging for God! Unless of course you are God and then I do apologize! lol
It's not "government involved" really. It's simply a fact that life begins at conception, and American people know that, and for shame that they've collectively allowed such crimes to be sanctioned. There are times when a decision has to be made by the parents, yes, but those times are rare cases.
As far as Obamacare, honestly, I would be all for it if he hadn't thrown in his own agenda into it. I really think "universal health care" is a good and humane idea, BUT the Great Misleader of course is simply thrusting in his own agenda by adding such things as mandates about the government (all taxpayers collectively) and insurance companies being mandated to pay for birth control, and his others additives. He's got a far Left agenda, and everything he does that COULD be a good thing turns out to be a twisted mass of red tape and confusion and leftist non-ideals.
Planned Parenthood was a good thing. Until it became a group of abortion clinics. I used to go there myself years ago; it provided birth control based on income etc., and was very helpful to women and wives who couldn't afford more immediate and expansive health care. It was a way to actually, ya know, PLAN for parenthood, to avoid getting pregnant at that time. Now what is it? Like I said, an abortion clinic that helps women decide to NOT be a parent after they're already pregnant.
I'm not against affordable medical care at all. What I'm against is killing babies.
I've never claimed to be God and never will. You might want to ask that question about who God is to his Royal Lowness Mr. Obama instead of me.
wow, I find the judge's ruling on that down right offensive.
Let's tie this in with current events. Let's look at the Gun control issue.
Guns are killing peoples - correction, people are killing people, as in people are putting the guns to use to make things not be alive. There is a huge uproar going on about whether or not the second amendment should be amended or abolished completely.
I know this is entirely different than abortion and rape, but hear me out.
It is our right as Americans to chose to have a gun or not. However, having said that, there are people who are unstable who ought not to have a gun because of tragic events such as school shootings, mall shootings, movie shootings and so on, never mind the gang related crimes and so on and so forth.
However, what about the people that are responsible but find themselves in a position where they need their gun to protect themselves, their family and or their property? Don't they deserve that protection? That right to choose whether or not they can have a gun?
It is the same thing with abortion. There are many responsible people who find themselves in a position where it is not feasible to bring another person into the world. For their own mental and/or emotional stability or instability, their lack of financial stability - whatever. They are not capable of bringing a child into the world and ensuring that it will get all that it deserves. There are other women, who are married and get pregnant but are faced with a disability which leaves them with the option: have the baby and face the possibility of dying as well as the baby during term or birth, or abort the baby to continue living. These are real things that really do happen.
There is of course the often argued debate of rape. Some mothers are strong enough to be able to not be effected by how their child was conceived. But that is a pretty small few. The PTSD from rape can damage a person for many years, for too long for a person to recover enough to be the mother they want to be for their child. Never mind that for most, every time they looked at that baby it would be a reminder of an extremely traumatizing incident. Some may even see carry the child as a gratifaction to the rapist, a carrying on of his lineage.
The point is, when some on is in a desperate situation, should they not have the right to protect themselves?
As far as it being on affordable medical care, and people not wanting to pay for it - if a person is not in a financial place to start with and can't afford to have an abortion, then they will be living off your taxes, and having your taxes to support this child they couldn't afford to have in the first place. That will be a minimum of 18 years that every one's taxes will be paying for this person, vs a one time termination.
If we're going to talk about how we have rights here in America, then we need to actually have rights to chose, and rights to our bodies.
I was going to post a funny gif along the lines of "The stupid... it BURNS"
Then I read the article. That Johnson bloke is more than just stupid - he sounds like a nasty, misogynistic sack of sh1t.
While I think these people are idiots I do want to point something out. It is common for women who go through a "Violent" rape vs an alcohol or other type of rape to miscarry if they become pregnant. They didn't pull this out of no where when they said it. There is some fact behind it. With that said I don't think anyone should have a right to tell anyone what to do with their own body.
by Jackie Lynnley7 months ago
I read this was true and I just have to know if it is, please! Please provide links to prove what you say. Surely we are not going to be aborting babies ready to come into the world fully developed and healthy?
by Credence24 years ago
How wide spread is the message that seems to come from the Republican Right that among the parties involved in a rape crime, the status of the woman is less important that that of the offender or that of the unborn...
by Tom Cornett6 years ago
Because.....If liberal progressives are for abortion and gay marriage, then it makes sense that mostly progressive liberals will most often enact those rights...far more than conservatives.Which means...there will be...
by My Esoteric28 hours ago
My thought is No, they should go ahead and filibuster Judge Gorsuch now and not wait. The fear of filibustering now is that the Rs might use the "Nuclear Option" - using a simple majority to change...
by R. Fritz2 years ago
Is it right or wrong even though it is legal?
by TMMason5 years ago
-"ALAMOGORDO, N.M. (The Blaze/AP) — A state district judge Thursday ordered an Alamogordo man to immediately take down a billboard that implies his ex-girlfriend had an abortion.As we reported earlier this month,...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.