$#@!ing disgusting pieces of @#(!

[Pos_21]

Can't get past the Senate, can't get past the White House, 5-4 and pick 'em whether it makes it past SCOTUS if it did the first two in the constitutional challenge that would happen the instant this passed.

Call me when the House of Representatives stops trying to wave their cocks around.

[Adept]

QUOTE House Republicans used “a sly legislative maneuver” to insert a “backdoor reintroduction”[/quote]

QUOTE (Broodwich @ May 9 2011, 03:09 AM) am i the only person who thought this wording was hilarious given the subject at hand?

[mcwarren4]

QUOTE (Bard @ May 9 2011, 03:57 AM) One thing I noticed about the GOP: Ever see them stand up AGAINST rape in any meaningful way? Ever see any GOP-sponsored anti-rape legislation?

Anyone?

I can't think of anything. In fact, in some heavily GOP-controlled southern states, a rape victim has to PAY FOR HIS OR HER OWN RAPE KIT.

The GOP is the Pro-Rape Party. If you vote for the Republicans, then you are voting FOR RAPE.

This is *far* from the first proposal this year that sets out to marginalize women in a major way. These guys are trying PURPOSEFULLY to take steps down a very dark road.

It's time to stop voting for people who are trying to return us to the misogyny of the 1800's and before.
Apparently, these days, that means *all* Republicans.

Do you have any idea how insane you sound saying that any mainstream mass group of people are pro-rape?

[tsubaki_sanjuro]

QUOTE (mcwarren4 @ May 9 2011, 03:03 PM) Do you have any idea how insane you sound saying that any mainstream mass group of people are pro-rape?

very few people are pro-rape apart from rapists, but there are more than a few people who subscribe to the "well she was probably asking for it dressed / acting like that" view. agri would guess that all of the alleg massive know a few people like this.

as for this, it is just another reminder of what a massive tragedy it is that "conservative" politics - small state, responsible government, honest politicians, pro-personal freedoms etc etc - has been totally and utterly hijacked in the us by inbreeds of this kind. in fact its these "family values" twats - who of course are almost always the biggest sexual deviants around - who are to blame for much of what enrages agri in american politics.

agri should add however that, personally, he is personally against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, medical problems or whatnot... though obviously as he will never give birth himself the point is a bit moot. the legal position with regards to abortion (or rather a "womans right to choose") is somewhat hypocritical - of course the woman has the right to choose, but that right should be extended to the father as well (not to say that he can demand an abortion, but he should be able to indicate his wishes before the child is born and should have some legal protection as a result).

[Bard]

QUOTE (mcwarren4 @ May 9 2011, 09:03 AM) Do you have any idea how insane you sound saying that any mainstream mass group of people are pro-rape?

Just because they're not loud about it doesn't mean that they're not consistently voting and behaving that way. What else do you call it when they purposefully, specifically, and regularly marginalize women and take away their recourse in cases of rape/date rape/coercion rape? What do you call it when those in positions of judicial power refuse to convict for it in the face of hard evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt, or when they convict lightly instead of harshly as they should? What do you call it when they cover up instances of themselves or their own family members date-raping or forcing themselves upon women against the women's will and making sure they get away with it?

Sure, not every politician is a rapist/date-rapist (after all, that's what high-priced escorts paid for with your tax dollars are for), but they're certainly voting as though they think the most common forms of sexual violation against females are a-okay.

I call that being pro-rape. What do you call it?

Rape is not just shoving a gun to some girl's head and ravaging her in a back alley, bud.

Not everyone who's a racist runs up and down the streets shouting the "N" word either.

[Adept]

QUOTE (tsubaki_sanjuro @ May 9 2011, 05:38 PM) agri should add however that, personally, he is personally against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, medical problems or whatnot... though obviously as he will never give birth himself the point is a bit moot. the legal position with regards to abortion (or rather a "womans right to choose") is somewhat hypocritical - of course the woman has the right to choose, but that right should be extended to the father as well (not to say that he can demand an abortion, but he should be able to indicate his wishes before the child is born and should have some legal protection as a result).

This is a subject best avoided in my experience, but I want to chime in a bit despite that.

The equal right of the father goes somewhat against our biology. Sperm is cheap to produce, and hence blokes are easy to proposition for casual sex. Pregnancy on the other hand is a huge effort and investment by the woman. Once the child is actually born, I'm all for equal rights of mum and dad, but the decision of having a pregnancy come to term should rest on the woman.

[HSharp]

QUOTE (Bard @ May 9 2011, 04:02 PM) Not everyone who's a racist runs up and down the streets shouting the "N" word either.

Naggers?

[tsubaki_sanjuro]

QUOTE (Adept @ May 9 2011, 04:22 PM) This is a subject best avoided in my experience, but I want to chime in a bit despite that.

The equal right of the father goes somewhat against our biology. Sperm is cheap to produce, and hence blokes are easy to proposition for casual sex. Pregnancy on the other hand is a huge effort and investment by the woman. Once the child is actually born, I'm all for equal rights of mum and dad, but the decision of having a pregnancy come to term should rest on the woman.

Agri agrees - but the point he was making is that if the "right to choose" exists, then the father should in all fairness be able to indicate his wishes as to whether or not he wants the child before the child is born, and should be able to seek some legal and financial protection from the subsequent costs and responsibilities if he doesnt want to be a father. Those protections would not be automatic, they would depend on the nature of the relationship between the mother and father at the time of conception and would not totally free the father of all responsibility (ie: he would still be acknowledged as the father, and the child would still enjoy some rights when it came to inheritance).

[Adept]

QUOTE (tsubaki_sanjuro @ May 9 2011, 06:52 PM) Agri agrees - but the point he was making is that if the "right to choose" exists, then the father should in all fairness be able to indicate his wishes as to whether or not he wants the child before the child is born, and should be able to seek some legal and financial protection from the subsequent costs and responsibilities if he doesnt want to be a father.

Ah, got it. I agree.

[mcwarren4]

QUOTE (Bard @ May 9 2011, 11:02 AM) Just because they're not loud about it ....

Who exactly is this 'THEY'? That's the problem I have with your post. That, and making the extreme accusation that nearly a third of Americans are pro-rape. Would I be right in saying that Democrats are anti child education because they largely don't support charter schools? Or is it ok for me to say that all Democrats are anti-infant because they are pro-abortion? That is the equivalent of the stance you are taking.

Furthermore, the co-author of the bill is a Democrat. It sounds more like you just have a problem with the GOP and this was just a convenient target for you.