FA+
Shop
Stop this bill!
15 years ago
From the beak of Serif and his human core:
http://moveon.org/
See that link? Click it. Sign your name, give your email, and jot down your zipcode. This bill needs to be stopped. Know why? Because rape is rape.
Congress is trying to re-define what rape is, so they can save money. Yes, you read that right. To save money. If you aren't bruised, if you aren't bleeding, if you don't have any broken bones, you weren't raped. So if a "friend" you've known all your life takes you to bed, and you tell him to fuck off, to leave you alone, and he rapes you without leaving a physical mark, guess what, your government fucked you. That's right.
Never mind that you're mentally broken, never mind that you're sobbing every night alone in the dark. Never mind that you're afraid to be touched ever again. You can't do ANYTHING to this douche, because the government decided that since you weren't physically hurt it wasn't rape.
Why are they doing this? Because they don't want to have abortions. They want abortions to be illegal. But people cry "What about in the case of rape!" So to fight that, they decided to ask "Well, what's rape?" And when people tell them, they can go "Nope, not anymore!" and plug their ears and line their pockets.
Stop this bill. It's bullshit. Oh, and while you're at it, take a look at who is in office in your state. Who is your Senator? Who is your Representative? Do you know their names? You should. You should also know how long they've been in office. It's time to get these low-life incumbents who have been in office more than ten years out.
Politics, NOT a career. Get these fucktards OUT of office, and get new people in there, people that will listen to their state, and people that know what's going on with US! Not with their butt-buddies up on the hill.
Edit: to those reading this, I got it from
sigil
Edit two: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h3:
Section 309, points out how it has to be "forcible rape" in order to obtain an abortion. So, sorry ladies, was it forcible? Can you prove it? No? Then no abortion help for you! Oh, and good luck with the mental turmoil you're going through along with the hormones and then having the kid!
Note: I'm not saying that all women that are raped should get an abortion. In the end, this is their choice. I am saying, however, that if someone chooses to have one, the government should not be the one to judge how "raped" a person can be. And if they start here, when will people start using it as "I didn't rape her, it wasn't forcible , see no bruises!" It boils down to "what is forcible rape." Which is where this "re-defining rape" comes into play. I fully believe if they remove the word "forcible" that there would be little to no issue with this bill other than for or against abortion.
I HATE slippery slope ideas, but I however do not like laws that start defining what something is or isn't, even more so when it can hurt someone's life.
See that link? Click it. Sign your name, give your email, and jot down your zipcode. This bill needs to be stopped. Know why? Because rape is rape.
Congress is trying to re-define what rape is, so they can save money. Yes, you read that right. To save money. If you aren't bruised, if you aren't bleeding, if you don't have any broken bones, you weren't raped. So if a "friend" you've known all your life takes you to bed, and you tell him to fuck off, to leave you alone, and he rapes you without leaving a physical mark, guess what, your government fucked you. That's right.
Never mind that you're mentally broken, never mind that you're sobbing every night alone in the dark. Never mind that you're afraid to be touched ever again. You can't do ANYTHING to this douche, because the government decided that since you weren't physically hurt it wasn't rape.
Why are they doing this? Because they don't want to have abortions. They want abortions to be illegal. But people cry "What about in the case of rape!" So to fight that, they decided to ask "Well, what's rape?" And when people tell them, they can go "Nope, not anymore!" and plug their ears and line their pockets.
Stop this bill. It's bullshit. Oh, and while you're at it, take a look at who is in office in your state. Who is your Senator? Who is your Representative? Do you know their names? You should. You should also know how long they've been in office. It's time to get these low-life incumbents who have been in office more than ten years out.
Politics, NOT a career. Get these fucktards OUT of office, and get new people in there, people that will listen to their state, and people that know what's going on with US! Not with their butt-buddies up on the hill.
Edit: to those reading this, I got it from
sigilEdit two: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h3:
Section 309, points out how it has to be "forcible rape" in order to obtain an abortion. So, sorry ladies, was it forcible? Can you prove it? No? Then no abortion help for you! Oh, and good luck with the mental turmoil you're going through along with the hormones and then having the kid!
Note: I'm not saying that all women that are raped should get an abortion. In the end, this is their choice. I am saying, however, that if someone chooses to have one, the government should not be the one to judge how "raped" a person can be. And if they start here, when will people start using it as "I didn't rape her, it wasn't forcible , see no bruises!" It boils down to "what is forcible rape." Which is where this "re-defining rape" comes into play. I fully believe if they remove the word "forcible" that there would be little to no issue with this bill other than for or against abortion.
I HATE slippery slope ideas, but I however do not like laws that start defining what something is or isn't, even more so when it can hurt someone's life.
rape is rape sex with out consent is RAPE. broken bones bruises is assault and battery two differnt crimes. in money sense you can get moeny for both crimes done. you make more money in this ordeal. Ye you can never change the meaning of no consent. place your own child or daughter in the victoms shoes. Do think your diea of change of definition to rape will bring jsutice?. means her Boyfriend or girlfirend or any one can suddnely drag your child off have sex and long as no bruises or wounds they get away. You want that to happen? i dont think so.
now i say a law to keep ladys from aborting at 3rd trimester woudl be good
Because if you want to get THAT picky about it, the government should outlaw spermicide, because that's killing a potential child. Or outlaw condoms, because that's keeping a potential child from developing. They won't, because that's not their choice, nor any of their business. The government shouldn't have a damn word in what you do in your personal life.
Any sensible person who votes against this bill, which is completely redundant except for those few despicable manners where it further curtails Federal money for abortion (currently rape, incest, life of the mother) will be pilloried in ominous sounding ads about how "big-spending Rep so-and-so voted against a law that would have stopped Federal funding for abortions, that dirty heathen baby-killer".
I can kind of get how they're trying to roll back the definition of rape. These idiots are all Christians, and it says right in the Bible that if the woman isn't heard crying out or the rapist isn't caught in the act, then she's just a dirty lying slut.
"Hey, this guy raped me in my sleep, I didn't know it until I woke up at the very end so I couldn't give consent or defend myself. I'm now carrying his child. I need an abortion, and I can't afford it. Please help me?"
"I'm sorry, you said you were asleep?"
"Yes."
"Sorry, that's nor forcible, you're not able to get help, next please!"
Which then calls into question what is forcible rape, and what isn't?
This is simply a counterpoint.
The question also remains, how can you prove rape? Or that sex was not consensual?
We need time machines and mind readers.
This sounds very much like a "oh the poor mens!" cry. Here's the thing: rape accusations don't screw up a man's life that horrifically. Considering even if a man is convicted, most people around will say, "Oh he would never do that, he's a nice guy," or, "She's just a lying bitch who wants money," (you know, like you're doing here), his life isn't all that damaged. And it's those responses that are the reason most rapes go unreported in the first place. That's the problem with living in a rape culture like we do.
I think its really that in pretty much every society, men and women are still not viewed as equals. Or at least not treated as such, regardless of how they were raised or what they believe.
A rape culture is a complex of beliefs that encourages male sexual aggression and supports violence against women. It is a society where violence is seen as sexy and sexuality as violent. In a rape culture, women perceive a continuum of threatened violence that ranges from sexual remarks to sexual touching to rape itself. A rape culture condones physical and emotional terrorism against women as the norm.
In a rape culture both men and women assume that sexual violence is a fact of life, inevitable as death or taxes. This violence, however, is neither biologically nor divinely ordained. Much of what we accept as inevitable is in fact the expression of values and attitudes that can change.
From here
This appears as though I'm saying men are still innocent and I blame the women for dressing that way. No infact I blame the men and women who design these fashion lines, attack the self-esteem of women with beauty magazines, and cause these women to dress as they do.
I also know a man who had false rape claimed on him. In the South you have to be registered a sex offender after it. So now an innocent man has to be registered with child rapists and other real offenders, which in the South they just label you and do not differentiate. He can no longer find a job having a criminal record, nor can he find housing in certain areas people run him out of the area. This girl did it out of spite. So yes it should matter. So if you had to constantly move about and can't afford it would your life be destroyed for something you where innocent of?
It happens, yes. Very rarely, and I feel it's more disgusting to automatically assume that all rape cases need to be looked at as though the woman is lying. That goes right back to "Reasons women don't report rape".
I thank the law when it sacks the right person, but it is infinitely unfair when anyone who is innocent suffers from a false guilty verdict. >.> Sacrifice has always been a necessary part of justice and freedom. and the world isn't fair, something to this day I will not quite get over.
You don't realize a joke when you see it do you?
YES THAT.
If you read subsequent posts I admit to not being able to get over the fact of life's unfairness.
Which is the point of trying to sign against this bill.
Btw what is this Bill's number? I may ask him about it.
As for your local congressman, I'm glad he lives within, and even under, his means. Though I'm not sure what makeup as to do with having paycuts. Putting on makeup before going in front of a camera, even more so now that everything is seventy inch HD televisions, is just so you have some color and don't look like you're dead. Most men just put on a bit of foundation, so they don't look like they just walked out of their grave.
Here's the bill's text, but I'm not sure of it's actual number at this moment in time. I'm sure a bit of google will find it though.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h3:
Also, the bill's name is H. R. 3, it means it is the third bill introduced in this congress by the House of Representatives.
Have you any idea how many abortions we pay for that aren't rape or incest related? I say, the majority are just fooling around, irresponsibility. Like hell anyone I know wants to pay for someone else's mistakes. More than 50,000,000 abortions have occurred since they were made legal, and that's alot considering the population of the US is between 300-400 million.
I'm not buying this 'redefinition of rape' story, it is a smokescreen to keep abortion free. Frankly, it is murder.
My stance is if they would change the bill to just "rape" rather than "forcible rape" it'd be an alright bill. Putting in that one little clause of "Well, was is forcible?" means that they are defining which rape victims are allowed to get help, and which aren't.
Quoting you about how rape is not about sex, but power and control.
Woman is grabbed as she's walking down the street. She's tied up, her clothes are torn off, and she's held at knife point and has no choice.
Would this be forcible rape? There are bruises, she's bleeding, she's hurt.
Woman had a bad breakup, and called her best friend who happens to be male over for non-sexual comfort. After taking her anti-anxiety medication, she falls asleep on the couch, and won't wake up for hours. He then rapes her while she's asleep.
Would this be forcible rape? He didn't force her to have sex, but he didn't ask her either. There are no bruises, there is no bleeding. But now she can't trust anyone. Does she qualify for an abortion now that she's pregnant?
Which would be able to get help? This is the problem with the bill. It's all up to the person behind the counter to decide if the victim was forcibly raped or not. While I and several others who support taking the bill down would agree that she would, it leaves it open to where she won't be able to get the help she needs.
Likewise on his website it is easy to send contact, or invite him to speak somewhere.
I volunteered for his campaign, kept a close eye on him. I think we out of the whole US got the best congressman elected of them all.
That's a pretty small discrepancy to put the whole bill down for imho.
I'm probably going to be eaten alive for playing the devil's advocate but... this isn't as black and white as we'd like to think it is. I'm not saying I'm agreeing with this bill, but some people are assholes and use sex to get leverage over someone. Due to the very nature of he-said, she-said stories sometimes physical harm may be the only proof that someone didn't want it.
Mind you, I'm pretty sure date rape looks consensual too. So would sex under duress.
This situation SUCKS no matter which way you slice it.
This bill is unbelievably short. It lacks any of the substantial definitions which would hold it up in court.
FURTHERMORE, IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS.
This is the Republicans in the house grand-standing, when Democrats control the Senate and the White House. It won't even come up on the Senate floor, it's a joke.
MARK MY WORDS, as someone with a fair knowledge of the American political system, this won't actually happen, so we can relax.
THIS RIGHT HERE. Thank you!
Edit two: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h3:
Section 309, points out how it has to be "forcible rape" in order to obtain an abortion. So, sorry ladies, was it forcible? Can you prove it? No? Then no abortion help for you! Oh, and good luck with the mental turmoil you're going through along with the hormones and then having the kid!
2) Your link mentions nothing about "If you aren't bruised, if you aren't bleeding, if you don't have any broken bones, you weren't raped."
Are you sure you aren't misreading...
*****or*****
`(2) in the case where the pregnant female suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the pregnant female in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
...and missing that all important "or" and thinking that applies to rape victims?
Because there's nothing in the bill that says that a woman must sustain an injury for it to be considered rape.
And yes, your icon does say that. It also shows me that not only do I not watch you, but you don't watch me. So somehow you magically came here without knowing about my journal. Probably from some one else's journal. Yeah... I'm not even touching that.
All rape is forcible - you're trying to claim that redundant language is redefining it - that's the height of intellectual dishonesty.
Definition of rape
force (someone) to have sex against their will; "The woman was raped on her way home at night"
the crime of forcing a woman to submit to sexual intercourse against her will
I suggest reading the comments here, we've covered it rather well.
I suggest reading the definition of rape, I've covered it rather well.
And yes, your icon does say that.
Then why in God's name ask such a redundant question?
It also shows me that not only do I not watch you, but you don't watch me.
Your point? I get tons of non-watchers commenting on the art and journals I post - should I act like a paranoid git when they post on me too?
So somehow you magically came here without knowing about my journal.
So you're saying that you do believe in magic in a young girl's heart, how the music can free her, whenever it starts?
Probably from some one else's journal. Yeah... I'm not even touching that.
Good call - you've got a fairly baseless accusation going here with "proof" so slim one needs an electron microscope to see it from the side - probably best to just delete this journal and bail while you still can, or, if you're feeling particular sure of yourself, come on over and debate the facts.
No, I'm not going to your journal. I don't go to random people's pages and stir shit. If you get your giggles out of it, have fun with that! You pretty much came here to do that, since you've clearly been having the same conversation with others if you followed them here.
force (someone) to have sex against their will; "The woman was raped on her way home at night"
the crime of forcing a woman to submit to sexual intercourse against her will
So then why have the term "forcible rape" rather than just "rape?" If it's just being "redundant" then why did the lawyers that support and pretty much make up our congress word it as such?
And you know what, you're open to your own thoughts and opinions. No, I'm not a "paranoid git" when other people that I don't know post. It makes me wonder where they came from, and why. In this case, I'd say you came from another journal after having a comment-string with them. Meaning you've already had this conversation with other people, and felt you had to come over here and say your piece. Which was fine.
I just wanted to know.
However, you started to sling insults, and started to try to tell me what to do because you happen to not agree. I don't take too kindly to being called a "git" or being told that my opinion is a baseless accusation that needs to be removed, simply because you don't agree with it. I have not told you to change your opinion just because I say so. I present my side, and give my proof. You on the other hand start off with insults and belittlement.
Well done! You aren't here for an intellectual debate, you're here to insult others when they think differently from you. I'm going to keep you from doing just that on this page. I was TOTALLY up to having a conversation with you, as I have in previous comments on this journal. But with you deciding to be an asshole, I've decided not to. Had you not resorted to insults, we could have had a very interesting conversation that may or may not have changed a mind, be it yours or mine. Instead, you were a jerk, and will now be added to the list. Bye!