The Rapist Protection Act of 2011

1. 59

   Doug Hughesposted 13 years ago

   The Rapist Protection Act of 2011
   
   by Dennis G.
   
   "As an expansion of John’s quick post below, I wanted to point out that Teabaggers and wingnuts everywhere are taking it as a great victory and good news that Republican Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) has introduced a Bill to protect child predators and rapists and to ensure that any women or child raped by these creatures is forced to become a mother (if the union is so ‘blessed’ by the Lord).
   
   In an effort to prove that irony is alive and well, Smith has given his Rapist Protection Act of 2011 the nickname: “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”. 173 Republicans have rushed to support this effort to punish victims of rape and give predators ongoing power over their victims and the peace of mind that comes with the Bill’s assurance that anybody they get pregnant will be forced by the State to carry the child to term."
   
   http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/01/28 … t-of-2011/

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I would like to point out that libertarian / anarchist views on this vary greatly from tea-bagger ideas such as this.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Duly noted.

         replyreport
   2. 75

      Wesman Todd Shawposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I hate it when I'm frightened to even start forming an opinion. . .think I'll grab a coke, and some popcorn, and watch this from the sidelines.

      replyreport
2. 66

   Flightkeeperposted 13 years ago

   Next thing you'll know Doug considers tax as insurance.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      A couple of  friendly suggestions, FK.
      
      First, figure out what the OP is about.(If you don't understand the OP, ask questions. We are willing to help.)
      
      Second, comment on the OP - or something related to the OP in a coherent way. If you stick to those two guidelines, you won't look like an idiot.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks for the friendly suggestions. However an idiot by your definition would actually be rather sane in the real world.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            And your questions are ?

            replyreport
            1. 66

               Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               none of your business

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  So Doug is right - no question, no understanding, no contribution, just a vaccuous noise.

                  replyreport
                  1. 66

                     Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     I don't think Doug will appreciate your namecalling.

                     replyreport
                  2. 59

                     Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     It's called hijacking a thread.

                     replyreport
      2. 75

         Wesman Todd Shawposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         "OP?"  I've not been afraid of looking like an idiot for as far back as I can remember.  I just find that me talking about abortion . . . .seems to sometimes piss of close friends, and make friends of people that I otherwise wouldn't speak to.
         
         I used to top all blogs on myspace with the subject, but get massive headaches from it too.  I'll just watch, thanks.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            OP = Original Post.  A n example of a good question.

            replyreport
3. 60

   SomewayOuttaHereposted 13 years ago

   Hey WTS...pull up a chair why don't ya.....i have extra popcorn....
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Wesman Todd Shawposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I had no idea that neat shit like that could be done in the forums.  I was told that I was banned at one time; but I guess that didn't stick. . . .but me being here is still sort of rare, but thank you!

      replyreport
4. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 13 years ago

   All I can say is where do these guys come from, how many of them are women (I'm just curious), and do they know it's 2011, not 1911?
   
   Incredible.

   replyreport
5. 61

   EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 13 years ago

   I'm personally in favor of a woman's right to have a safe abortion, regardless of the circumstances, within the first two trimesters and this is an awful bill that just seeks to find another way to restrict access to abortions.
   
   Having said that, it doesn't change the criminal definition of rape or in any way protect rapists. It's pretty sad that political discourse has become a contest to see who can come up with the scariest ways of distorting the true intentions of their opponents' positions.
   
   That and the fact that so many otherwise genuine people are so eager to jump into the game.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Christy Goffposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Just wondering, the people trying to pass this bill, if they had been raped, would they feel the same?  They are not only violated by the rapist, but by the "justice system" as well.  They have to re-live the situation over and over again.  They question themselves, is it my fault, did I dress wrong, did I send the wrong impression, what did i do wrong?? People trying to pass this bill never lived through that kind of situation, if they had, they would be more understanding.  How many times does a person have to be raped??  Physically, mentally, emotionally.  They have to go to court, and try to prove it, and they are raped again, you asked for it, you wanted it, you dress wrong, you live in the wrong neighborhood.  The power these people enjoy, makes them no different than any other rapist.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         SomewayOuttaHereposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         ...i put my popcorn down.....right on!

         replyreport
      2. 61

         EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Which is all the more reason the issue doesn't need to be distorted. There are plenty of things to take umbrage with based on the actual content of the proposal.

         replyreport
6. 74

   Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

   Given the increase in Republican governors in the November elections, NJ could be the trendsetter with this kind of anti-woman legislation.
   *sigh*

   replyreport
   1. 60

      SomewayOuttaHereposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      ...no way...really?....that's just so backwards....

      replyreport
7. 66

   Flightkeeperposted 13 years ago

   Yup, first the distortion, then the dehumanization of the opposition.  Never mind that some of them might have had sisters, wives, mothers who might have suffered from rape and still carried the child to term because his/her innocence at conception.  Indeed, a very loud vaccuous noise. 

   replyreport
   1. 0

      china manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I doubt that any of these people have to live in the situation where they are exposed to the dangers of rape - except from within their own families.  And note that by default you point to the other issue in this - that the people behind this are men.
      
      I don't think this subject warrants the grinning face of an idiot smiley, trivialising it is demeaning to women generally.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Christy Goffposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you.

         replyreport
      2. 66

         Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         And lets add defamation.  Wow, you guys are on a roll. 

         replyreport
      3. 66

         Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         But pretending that there is a piece of legislation that protects rapists is being seriously discussed by a legislative body is not demeaning or trivializing to women at all.
         
         

         replyreport
   2. 59

      Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      WHAT distortion? WHAT dehumanization? Oh, I forget, wingnuts always pretend to be the victim.
      
      The current law does not REQUIRE anyone to have an abortion. If you are 13 and raped by a relative, get pregnant, and decide you WANT to have the baby - that's still your option.  The objection is forcing a woman to have a baby she did not consent to have.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Doug, I'm not surprised that you don't see any of those things.  Keep going!  You are a wonderful spokesperson for the lefties and thank you for bringing up that very illuminating OP.  You read it here folks. 

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            FK - I guess you are disappointed that the bill does not actually protect men from criminal prosecution for statutory rape of poor women.  You have a point that the title of the article - which is the title of the post is misleading, and for some, a  real let down.
            
            The bill only penalizes poor women, many or them underaged, who may have to carry a child to term that they don't want, aren't prepared to care for and in no way were old enough to consent to conceive.
            
            For the teabaggers the mantra seems to be, "If they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to breed."
            
            To add insult to injury, these Tea Party conservatives who would force a child to have a child want to cut off all public assistance to a  mother without means.
            
            I can't understand why any conservative would be unhappy that the title is not  exactly, precisely, factually true. And it's not. But the description of the Health care law as 'a job-killing takeover of health care" has been shown over and over to be false. Providing health care for 32 million Americans will create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the medical industry. And it's in no way a takeover of health care. But that deception doesn't bother wingnuts, so why should this be upsetting?

            replyreport
8. 74

   Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

   Not if you believe that abortion is murder.
   Then it's totally justified and the "right" (ha ha) thing to do.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Christy Goffposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      When you have been raped, you sometimes wish you had been murdered, then the question wouldn't be up for debate.  The rights to your body was already taken away from you once, why would people believe they had the right to keep doing so?

      replyreport
9. 0

   Onusonusposted 13 years ago

   They could have used a better term than forcable rape, but I detest the idea of my tax dollars going towards the millions of irresopnsible teens out there who don't have the common sense to use protection. Besides killing a baby is relatively cheap these days, anywhere from 200 to 1,000 dollars.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Ummm - Check the facts - your tax dollars can NOT go to fund abortions for 'millions of irresponsible teens'. It's already against the law EXCEPT in the circumstances listed above - which includes rape.

      replyreport
   2. 66

      Flightkeeperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No they couldn't, they really couldn't because that's how they see it.  I think they should use whatever terms they want to to argue for their position.  We should not stop them at all.

      replyreport
10. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 13 years ago

    We suffer the same here in Ireland as can be seen from my information below.
    
    Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein President whom Brendan Hughes says ordered the murder of innocent Mother of ten children, Jean McConville.
    
    
    Gerry Adams has been forced to admit that he concealed the sexual abuse and rape of several children, including the Rape of his 4 year old niece Aine Tyrrell.
    
    
    
    
    Gerry Adams, Dark Secrets of Peace Hero
    
    
    This week as Gerry Adams slipped around Dundalk in County Louth in his very comfortable hush puppy shoes, and his less comfortable bestowed British Title Baron Adams of Northstead, Gerry Adams meet with some brutal honesty in Louth as good people closed the door in his face and others told him bluntly:
    
    
    “You helped your brother Liam to set up home in this town when you knew he had raped his 4 year-old daughter Aine, may God forgive you”.
    
    However, Lord Adams was not to be deterred and took time out for well choreographed media interviews, mainstream media often happy to take their directions from the provo organisers simply fell in to line and Lord Adams answered their pre-arranged questions. Lord Adams told the media that he had not known that he would be bestowed with a British Title, however, that is the equivalent of saying a worker did not know that they were entitled to redundancy.
    
    Only a few short months ago Gerry Adams was forced to admit publicly that he had concealed the Rape of his 4 year old niece Aine and he was further forced to admit that he had given his father Gerry Adams Snr a full republican funeral when he had known that Gerry Snr had molested a number of Gerry’s own siblings. This crime against humanity would not have been so grevious if Adams and his mouth-piece puppets in An Phoblacht had not regularly made public pronouncements against people engaging in sexual crime and who had been brought before the courts.
    
    In 2010 the Brendan Hughes interviews exposed the fact that Gerry Adams had sanctioned the cold blooded and cowardly murder of innocent Catholic Mother of Ten Jean Mc Conville who had been kidnapped, tortured and murdered by criminals under the command of Gerry Adams at that time, and her body buried in County Louth, so that the stain of criminality would rest on the shoulders of the good people of Louth rather than the criminals in west Belfast.
    
    Several weeks ago The Irish Observer exposed the fact that Sinn Fein representatives had held secret meetings with ‘dissident’ terrorists in County Louth in order to gain safe passage for Gerry Adams to run in the Louth constituency. The ‘dissidents’ told Gerry Adams that he would have no problems from them as after all they all had the one objective, just different tactics.
    
    It is amazing that since the Omagh Bomb Sinn Fein have been so public at distancing themselves from the ‘dissidents’ yet behind closed doors deals are being done. North Louth is the strong hold of ‘dissident’ terrorists, yet not as much as a whimper as Lord Adams asks the good people of Louth for their vote so that Lord Adams can have a pension from both the British and Irish parliaments.
    
    
    Gerry Adams, heralded by many vested interests as a Peace Hero has many Dark Secrets, however, anyone who is not too bothered about child rape and the murder of innocent women should give him a vote.

    replyreport
11. 0

    SirDentposted 13 years ago

    Maybe a little reading is in order to really get down to business and know what is what.
    
    http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/PregnantByRape.html

    replyreport
12. 66

    Flightkeeperposted 13 years ago

    Do my ears deceive? Oh dear, Doug admits to putting up an OP that misleads people so that he can smear a group that doesn't agree with him.  Then says that it should be excused because that group did the same thing with the Health Care law, as proved by people who think the same way as he does.
    
    Gotta love that progressive thinking.
    
    NOT!
    
    

    replyreport
13. 0

    SirDentposted 13 years ago

    Drama all the way around.  So disappointing.  Reminds me of middle school children.  Did anyone click the link I provided?  There are testimonies from those who were raped and had their babies instead of aborting them.  Some from the babies that were born of the rape victims. 
    
    http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/PregnantByRape.html

    replyreport
14. 74

    Mighty Momposted 13 years ago

    For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction.
    Maybe not "equal" but a good start. Looks positive that Illinois is going to abolish the death penalty.
    I do think it's just coincidence that this is Obama's state.
    
    http://www.ktrs.com/newsinfo-mainmenu-1 … th-penalty

    replyreport