Abortion Bill Would Force Rape Victims To Continue Pregnancy As 'Evidence'

[kippi]

So what you are trying to say is that I have misread it all and that the bill does not force the victim to keep her baby. She's just turned into a criminal.

I'm trying to say I don't think you can read.

The rapist is the "tamperer" in question, not the mother. Someone posted earlier in this thread, that if a rapist were to come by the next morning to sneak a morning after pill, that is a case that is defined under this law. Because he is tampering with the pregnancy without consent.

Please seriously, read it lol.

---------- Post added 2013-01-25 at 02:15 PM ----------

This whole thread is about B.

whoa whoa whoa. Why would the victim attempt to protect the criminal by aborting the baby? Is this a thing that happens?? Because its the fucking opposite of what we are all arguing about.

Most of these arguments are if the rapist returns to tamper with the pregnancy. Why in the fuck, under all the emotional bullshit I just read, would the victim ever protect the rapist, by procuring an abortion?



p.s. how are you guys gonna only talk about pregnancies and rape and then include examples of female on male rape lol.

Sorry but this becomes a completely different conversation when its no longer about male on female rape.

[gnomergon]

Usually, I find myself completely disagreeing with your point of view expressed in your numerous posts.

But I have to say THANK YOU for being the first person who agrees that the right to an abortion is a civil rights issue, not a woman's rights. And women need to have the civil right to terminate a forced pregnancy. that is a right women should have regardless of anything. I 100% agree with you.

[GreatSageCorban]

p.s. how are you guys gonna only talk about pregnancies and rape and then include examples of female on male rape lol.

Sorry but this becomes a completely different conversation when its no longer about male on female rape.

I'm just outlining the possible uses of this law. I'm sure it's happened somewhere, and it'd make a skinamax movie too. :-p

[kippi]

I'm just outlining the possible uses of this law. I'm sure it's happened somewhere, and it'd make a skinamax movie too. :-p

I think the conversation should have been that broad in the first place. We could've avoided the obvious breaking-into-our-preconceived-notions of these camps.

Your example I hadn't thought of was a parent returning to try and persuade an abortion, wow wtf?

[Senathor]

Obviously my answer is no. I don't care if I get infracted for this but anyone who likes this idea is a fucking idiot. cya

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I have to take my hat off to Rukentuts. He has had the time and patience to deal with you. Your one sentence reply to a well thought out and laid arugment is past insane. I watched you and him debating back and forth. From the moment you entered into this thread Lemon you said.

Still believing misinformation that Fused Spreads?

Even though I posted several sources and videos. You are still blind to the truth. Not only that when I personally responded to you. You replied with.

Still copying and pasting arguments?

Who exactly is copying and pasting. I cannot be held responsible if I am laying out a well thought out plain with detail and solution and your counter is a one sentence rhetoric of something I would watch on Fox News. You even call CNN Biased. They are by fair the most neutral party out there. In fact they started the entire Benghazi

It's just sad how when some posters do not agree rather then speak logically and common sense. You are throwing out almost blind insults and reply's that almost make no sense. I take it a tiny bit personal when you talk about my responding directly and not the thread. You are making it as such. In order to stay on topic at least provide viable counter arguments that can be debated.

To the poster above me. There is almost virtually no way to word something incorrectly. What took place she got caught by the backlash and now is trying to do massive PR cover up. Anyone who cannot see through this illusion she created pretending it was on accident clearly isn't paying attention.

1. Yes, CNN is biased, just like the other cable media television shows.

2. Yes, literally lying about what the bill says is spreading misinformation.

3. Yes, it clearly says "intent" in the bill.

4. You quoted me and of course didn't even respond to anything I said at all.

5. This post you made does not disprove me, or prove anything you had said.

---------- Post added 2013-01-25 at 10:14 PM ----------

I'm trying to say I don't think you can read.

The rapist is the "tamperer" in question, not the mother. Someone posted earlier in this thread, that if a rapist were to come by the next morning to sneak a morning after pill, that is a case that is defined under this law. Because he is tampering with the pregnancy without consent.

Please seriously, read it lol.

---------- Post added 2013-01-25 at 02:15 PM ----------



whoa whoa whoa. Why would the victim attempt to protect the criminal by aborting the baby? Is this a thing that happens?? Because its the fucking opposite of what we are all arguing about.

Most of these arguments are if the rapist returns to tamper with the pregnancy. Why in the fuck, under all the emotional bullshit I just read, would the victim ever protect the rapist, by procuring an abortion?



p.s. how are you guys gonna only talk about pregnancies and rape and then include examples of female on male rape lol.

Sorry but this becomes a completely different conversation when its no longer about male on female rape.

Agreed. The wording is very clear. For peple that don't know what some of these words mean, I will post them I guess:

INTENT

in·tent1 [in-tent] Show IPA
noun
1.
something that is intended; purpose; design; intention: The original intent of the committee was to raise funds.
2.
the act or fact of intending, as to do something: criminal intent.
3.
Law. the state of a person's mind that directs his or her actions toward a specific object.
4.
meaning or significance.

PURPOSE

pur·pose [pur-puhs] Show IPA noun, verb, pur·posed, pur·pos·ing.
noun
1.
the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc.
2.
an intended or desired result; end; aim; goal.
3.
determination; resoluteness.
4.
the subject in hand; the point at issue.
5.
practical result, effect, or advantage: to act to good purpose.

Sorry guys. Its very clear the bill is pointed at someone who is trying to destroy evidence. A rape victim would not destroy evidence in their own rape case. How can you prove intent? The jerk prosecutor would have to convince every single juror and the judge beyond a reasonable doubt that the rap victim intended to destroy evidence and not practice her right to abort.

Its sadly clear to me that no matter what republicans seem to do, you will always be waving your fist in anger. "Sorry, we want to clarify this is to help protect victims, and the bill is pointed at rapists, so we will reword the bill" DARN YOU REPUBLICANS! THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A LIE, BUT I HAVE NO REAL PROOF OR LOGIC TO SUPPORT THIS! *GRRRRR* *SNARL!*

---------- Post added 2013-01-25 at 10:16 PM ----------

Then normally right here is where I would suggest immediate psychiatric evaluation.

Like I said to your yesterday, and this poster is pointing out, no amount of sarcastic ridicule and smug rhetoric would be considered an argument. Thats just you being sarcastic and smug.