• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Republicans: No Big Government - Unless It's About Rape.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
glenn1 said:
Does this extend to assisted suicide, prostitution, drug use, and other laws which proscribe what women (and men) can do with their bodies? Fine with whatever answer you give but want to see if you're consistent.
Click to expand...

I know you didn't ask me but I'll answer anyway, 110% absolutely yes.

I believe that we own our bodies, they are our "property" at the very basic level. Being that we own our own bodies I believe we should be able to put any substance we so desire inside of them. I believe we should be able to rent out our property to other consenting adults for a fee if we so desire (prostitution). I also believe that we should also have the right to stop living if we so desire, I'd put some sort of restriction on assisted suicide (such as having to see a 3rd party councilor or therapist first). Some people have terminal diseases and live in complete agony, how is it not torture to force these people to continue living in an agony that will never end and often will only get worse?

The fact that prostitution is illegal alone means that we do not own our bodies as the tenant of ownership is being able to rent, lease or sell what you own as you see fit.
 
CitizenKain said:
Let us know when that happens in your family next and fill us in on the details.
Click to expand...

Debating abortion is one thing. This whole thread is about the "suffering" of women wanting an abortion after 20 weeks as a result of being raped. The reality is the number of women that would actually affect is so low that it probably would not make it past the margin of error on any study.
 
rudeguy said:
What's wrong? Did reality interfere with your ignorance?

For the record; more people are addicted to eating rusty nails and toilet paper than would be affected by the provision you are so against.
Click to expand...

How many peole are addicted to eating rusty nails and toilet paper?

If it's not going to affect anyone, why do you care?

Oh yeah, 'cause those dirty, dirty sluts will lie and take advantage, right?
 
It's funny how the only person who lacks control and restraint is the one complaining over people who lack control and restraint.
 
glenn1 said:
I'm no expert, but I think that someone else being raped is a far bigger "indignity" than dealing with a dickwad police officer. If there was ever a choice you could question it would be allowing another's life to be completely shattered just to avoid a few minutes of discomfort.
Click to expand...

At the trial it is the defenses job to make the victim appear to be a slut or a liar and forces them to relive the entire experience. Some rape victims have claimed that the trial was worse than the actual rape itself. Having never been raped myself I'll have to take their word on it.
 
glenn1 said:
Yep, the clearest evidence that we live in a rape culture is that people argue with a straight face that victims should be allowed to decide whether to do nothing to help prevent it from happening again.
Click to expand...

No, the clearest evidence of 'rape culture' is, you know, actual rape.
 
Blackjack200 said:
No, how many people with Pica are specifically addicted to rusty nails and toilet paper?

Could you please answer the simple question?
Click to expand...

Studies say anywhere between 8% and 72% depending a lot of different factors.

Now could you please tell me why the provision being discussed is worth all this hype? If you yourself said it would not affect anyone, then why the rage?

Is the debate here honestly about women who have been raped?
 
glenn1 said:
Forest for the trees. I already support abortion because I think it's the least shitty among shitty options, but if you're enabling rapists just to help women get them you're morally obtuse and stupid. If you get raped and don't do anything to help catch the perp (even such a minimally demanding thing as file a police report) then I not only lose most of my sympathy for you but think you're acting as an accessory after the fact should he rape again.
Click to expand...

I suggest you read what an actual rape victim has to say instead of speaking from a place of complete ignorance.

http://www.cracked.com/personal-exp...legal-system-screws-rape-victims-like-me.html
 
Blackjack200 said:
Yeah, got it. It's fucking horrible.
Click to expand...

Great, so why are you still talking about having a problem with police reports when that has nothing to do with why you think its a bad law.

And when I obtained the policy I signed a contract agreeing to that stipulation.

What if men that were raped were required to file a police report before getting an HIV test? Do you think that would be unfair and invasive?
Click to expand...

If there was such a restriction I would be talking about the craziness of not allowing everyone to get tested for HIV at any time, and not derail a discussion over such by talking about how its absurd that rape victim be forced to file a police report to get an HIV test



I'd say if anything illustrates the chasm between pro-lifers and pro-choicers, it's that pro lifers think that women having control over their own heath care decisions constitutes "special treatment".
Click to expand...

I didn't know this was a discussion about pro-life vs pro-choice, that was neither the topic of the op or of your posts in the early part of this thread that I was replying too. You should started with how the whole law is a bad idea and not gone on about how you are unhappy about someone having to show they qualify for an exception to a law if you didn't want to talk about exceptions to laws.

As for pro-life/choice I don't know if I really qualify for either camp, If I ever had to come up with regulations as to how to deal with it I might come up with some crazy idea about allowing abortions at any time, with the caveat that doctors have to remove the fetus intact and if there is a chance for it to be viable to attempt to get a living baby out of the deal (the mother giving up any parental rights and the baby being a ward of the state)
 
glenn1 said:
I'm no expert, but I think that someone else being raped is a far bigger "indignity" than dealing with a dickwad police officer. If there was ever a choice you could question it would be allowing another's life to be completely shattered just to avoid a few minutes of discomfort.
Click to expand...

Some Canadian figures and info:

Why don’t women report rape? Because most get no justice when they do

"Some felt young and powerless, or ashamed, or they blamed themselves or just wanted to move on. Many felt reporting would do little good.

And in that last respect the evidence bears them out, at least when it comes to conviction.

Twenty-three per cent of sexual assault charges in 2011-12 adult criminal court resulted in a guilty verdict, according to Statistics Canada.

And that’s only the cases that go to trial. Many, many more never make it that far.

Women reported being victims of 472,000 sexual assaults in 2009, according to Statistics Canada’s General Social Survey; men, 204,000. Yet police-reported crime statistics for that year show barely 21,000 incidents of sexual assault, and 7,951 persons charged.


sexual-assault_poll_p0y.jpg



http://globalnews.ca/news/1845136/w...ape-because-most-get-no-justice-when-they-do/
 
Victorian Gray said:
Snip
Click to expand...

Here is my take:

Girl goes through the horror of being raped. Girl has to tell police in detail what happened and answer degrading questions. Girl has to go to hospital to be prodded, scraped, degraded even more. Girl has to talk to prosecutors who ask even more degrading questions. If the police are lucky enough to actually catch the guy, the whole thing has to be relived at trial where she is made out to be a dirty whore.


You want to fix something that will actually help victims? Fix that shit. Not some made up scenario where a woman would have waited 20 weeks to have an abortion. The 48 hour wait is NOTHING compared to what the system puts women through.

Oh..and start a program to arm women free of charge. Especially college women. Let these dirt bags know their penis may get shot off and maybe they will stick to internet porn.


/rant
 
Rebel_L said:
Great, so why are you still talking about having a problem with police reports when that has nothing to do with why you think its a bad law.
Click to expand...

The discussion in this thread is not limited to the specific language in the law. This is a law that puts unnecessary and cynical hurdles in front of women trying to make their own health care decisions.

If there was such a restriction I would be talking about the craziness of not allowing everyone to get tested for HIV at any time, and not derail a discussion over such by talking about how its absurd that rape victim be forced to file a police report to get an HIV test
Click to expand...

I feel that it is similarly absurd to not allow any woman to make her own decision at any time. Unfortunately there are some who only think that women have the right to do that if they are raped. Thus the conversation in this thread.

I didn't know this was a discussion about pro-life vs pro-choice, that was neither the topic of the op or of your posts in the early part of this thread that I was replying too. You should started with how the whole law is a bad idea and not gone on about how you are unhappy about someone having to show they qualify for an exception to a law if you didn't want to talk about exceptions to laws.
Click to expand...

You didn't know that a thread about a bill banning late term abortions was about pro-life vs pro-choice? Really?

As for pro-life/choice I don't know if I really qualify for either camp, If I ever had to come up with regulations as to how to deal with it I might come up with some crazy idea about allowing abortions at any time, with the caveat that doctors have to remove the fetus intact and if there is a chance for it to be viable to attempt to get a living baby out of the deal (the mother giving up any parental rights and the baby being a ward of the state)
Click to expand...

Fantastic. Glad I don't live in your world.
 
rudeguy said:
Here is my take:

Girl goes through the horror of being raped. Girl has to tell police in detail what happened and answer degrading questions. Girl has to go to hospital to be prodded, scraped, degraded even more. Girl has to talk to prosecutors who ask even more degrading questions. If the police are lucky enough to actually catch the guy, the whole thing has to be relived at trial where she is made out to be a dirty whore.


You want to fix something that will actually help victims? Fix that shit.
Click to expand...

How? Women do make false rape allegations sometimes. Duke lacrosse anyone?

Rapists are entitled to due process, and that involves collecting evidence and testimony. That is, btw, excatly the reason it would be so insidious to compel rape victims to go through it.

Not some made up scenario where a woman would have waited 20 weeks to have an abortion. The 48 hour wait is NOTHING compared to what the system puts women through.
Click to expand...

Yeah, only the sluts wait 20 weeks. It would be impossible for woman to get raped and be so ashamed/in denial that she waits 20 weeks to deal with fallout of her attack.

Oh..and start a program to arm women free of charge. Especially college women. Let these dirt bags know their penis may get shot off and maybe they will stick to internet porn.
Click to expand...

🙄
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top