 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 'Legitimate Rape'???
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Bobert Date: 24 Aug 12 - 07:41 PM We keep hearing these people who would force a woman to carry a rapist child complaining about the "Nannie State"... Well, consider this scenario... Single woman raped and impregnated by rapist... "Pappa State" decides for woman that she must carry the child... Given the fact that the rapist is unknown and not able to support this woman and her child it is logical that the "Pappa State" would be obligated to act as a surrogate father and owes this woman and that child everything that any responsible father would be required to provide, including college funding... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: SINSULL Date: 24 Aug 12 - 08:39 PM My comment "maybe there's something to it" was irony not surprisingly lost on many. Stress had nothing to do with my not getting pregnant - later medical history confirmed and I will leave it at that. Thousands of pregnancies result from rape in the US every year - not my statistic, NPR's. The tragic suffering of the mothers carrying proof of their nightmare to term and the children, hated, abandoned, put up for adoption - innocent children contrasted against a smug misogynist who believes he has divine support - incredible ignorance and hubris. You and I are on the same page, Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Janie Date: 24 Aug 12 - 09:53 PM Or women who choose to have and keep babies from pregnancies that result from rape, and then are faced with a justice and family system unequiped to deal with the rapist father who later demands parental rights.... http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/08/31-states-grant-rapists-custody-and-visitation-rights/56118/ The referenced CNN article |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 25 Aug 12 - 02:52 AM I am not suggesting that any woman is "forced" to carry a rapists child. Simpy that the abortion issue is much more complicated than that, thankfully very rare tragedy. Polititical agendas always try to make complicated social issues seem simple......it is often referred to as "dumbing down the populace" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Jim Carroll Date: 25 Aug 12 - 03:02 AM "You and I are on the same page, Jim." My sincere apologies Sinsull. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 25 Aug 12 - 03:12 AM Frogprince...that very difficult choice must be left to the mother. I do know of a person who had a child under similar circumstances brought the child up, loved her, and they were extremely close until the lady's death about five years ago. The girl was and still is the image of her mother. I know that is, as Bill is always saying, "meaningless"; but it is another nuance to a difficult social issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: frogprince Date: 25 Aug 12 - 09:28 AM "...that very difficult choice must be left to the mother." I agree with that unreservedly. I believe that most, if not all, of those here whom you regularly castigate as "liberals" would also agree unreservedly. I'm not sure that you grasp the extensiveness of the effort by American so-called conservatives to take that choice away from the mother. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Wesley S Date: 25 Aug 12 - 10:38 AM And now the right doubles down: Tennessee state Sen. Stacey Campfield (R) falsely claimed on Thursday that it was nearly impossible for someone to contract AIDS through heterosexual contact. "Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community," he told Michelangelo Signorile, who hosts a radio program on SiriusXM OutQ. "It was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall." "My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex." It is generally accepted that at some point HIV crossed species from chimps to humans, but there is no evidence that this was caused by bestiality. Rick Sowadsky of the Nevada State Health Division AIDS program noted in 1998 that it highly unlikely that HIV was transmitted through inter-species sexual contact, given the behavior of chimps and the differences between the sexual anatomy of humans and other primates. According to the the Center for Disease Control, male-to-male sexual contact has been the most common way to transmit AIDS, followed by injection drug use and heterosexual sex. Campfield briefly gained national attention in 2011 when he introduced legislation that critics derided as "the don't say gay bill." "[Homosexuals] do not naturally reproduce," he told Signorile. "It has not been proven that it is nature. It happens in nature, but so does beastiality. That does not make it right or something we should be teaching in school." Raw Story (http://s.tt/1de0M) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 25 Aug 12 - 11:08 AM > "It was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall." Totally moronic and a good indication of how this guy thinks and retains facts. Just imagine trying to "screw a monkey." My guess is that it's neither easy nor very desirable. The first reported case of AIDS was diagnosed in an Air Canada steward. So far as is known, he hadn't screwed any monkeys. Several earlier probable cases have since been identified. It's more likely that AIDS jumped the species barrier when infected monkey blood flowed into an open wound on the hand of a hunter. But Campfield believes that more gays than straights have sex with monkeys. The absolute number of such people may well be zero. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: John P Date: 25 Aug 12 - 12:17 PM "As i said before, this is not the place for a serious discussion on abortion......political polarisation rules." The only reason this has become such a political issue is that so many people want to make laws about how other people should behave. If we get the so-called conservatives out of our personal lives, the issue stops being anything other than an extremely difficult personal decision on the part of a woman who finds herself with an unwanted and/or unsupportable pregnancy. It doesn't matter how the pregnancy was caused. That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not our government has the right to force citizens to adhere to a moral code -- and one most often based on religion -- that is only believed in by a portion of the citizens. It's a privacy issue and a separation of church and state issue. "Taking responsibility for a situation" can be defined as terminating a pregnancy if termination is the more responsible of the choices. Many, many factors are involved. Trying to say that the only "responsible" action is to bear the child is the same as trying to force others to adhere to a moral and/or religious code they don't share. To be fair, akenaton doesn't seem to be proposing that abortion be illegal. But since he is putting up the same flawed arguments as the people in the United States who are trying to make it illegal, he's getting tarred with the same brush as they are. The big commonality between him and the American theocrats is the apparent assumption that acting according to his moral code is the only responsible and natural course of action. I can put up with that kind of arrogance in him, since there's no way he can have any effect on anyone's choice -- he's extremely unpleasant to have in a conversation, but not really dangerous. It's the theocrats that are the real problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 26 Aug 12 - 02:06 AM Statistically Wesley, the is exremely uncommon to become infected by heterosexual sex....."impossible" is incorrect. In the USA. Homosexuals by CDC's reckoning account for 2% of the population. They also account for over 70% all new cases. The calculation is relatively simple. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: ChanteyLass Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:09 AM Here's what the Renegade Raging Grannies have to sing about the subject. I'm not fond of the f-word or final gesture, but in spite of that thought this was too good not to share. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anc_gP2_QeI |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 26 Aug 12 - 08:42 AM It's physiologically difficult for a *male* to get AIDS from heterosexual sex. It's a cinch for female. The reason is not hard to find. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Penny S. Date: 26 Aug 12 - 12:45 PM I don't think ake has included figures from Africa in calculating the difficulty of getting HIV from heterosexual sex, or else he's just ignoring women again. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Bill D Date: 26 Aug 12 - 12:53 PM a longish article about early AIDS and possible origins |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Saulgoldie Date: 26 Aug 12 - 02:21 PM Well, it is inevitable that a deconstruction of which rape is legitimate and which is not, that the true goal is to ban abortions, period. Since we have waded into those waters...whatever the cause of the pregnancy, whatever one's definition of a living human deserving full rights, it comes down to this. Does the mother/womb decide for herself if she will carry the fetus to term, or does the government? Clearly many people feel that the government should make the decision, and that it does, indeed have the right to do so. Rationalizing it on religious grounds--that are not the same for everybody, by the way--does not change the fact that it is not the person directly involved making this huge decision. Many of us feel that she should be allowed to make that decision for herself, whatever the reason, and that to make public policy to the contrary is to diminish her personhood. Making decisions as to what happens in a woman's womb is tantamount to rape, which is where the current round of this discussion began. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 26 Aug 12 - 02:41 PM Here's your friendly neighborhood pedant with a "...that very difficult choice must be left to the mother." The girl/woman who is thought to harbor a zygote or fetus, whether as a result of rape or of consensual coitus or of supernatural intervention, is not "a mother" at the point where abortion is a question. She's a pregnant woman, or a gravid female, or a maybe a biologic incubator, or, informally, a preggie. But not until the birth--be it natural or induced or by caesarean section--occurs is she "a mother". Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 26 Aug 12 - 05:11 PM They used to be called "mothers-to-be," but for some reason that term has fallen from favor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:05 PM Bill, nearly 30 years after coming up with this idea, Cantwell (a dermatologist) seems to be alone in accepting it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:06 PM I mean among AIDS researchers, of course. As for the general public.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,nobody in particular Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:54 PM I simply asked SINSULL and Jim Carroll to relate her personal experience without politics, and what do they both do? yap politics. So, is politics a way of avoiding discussing reality, so you hide behind it, like someone is supposed to be your spokesperson?and you feel or know nothing of your own? Politics: Keeping an arm's distance from reality Get a life! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 27 Aug 12 - 04:24 AM Frog prince....I DO understand the issue, even from the US perspective. Simply using abortion as a means of ridding oneself of an inconvenience....as in for career purposes, because the child would affect ones lifestyle, or simply being too lazy, stupid or drunk to ensure adequate contraception methods are used, is morally repugnant, irresponsible and a sure sign of society in decline. To force women to carry a child when it may harm her health, or several other factors like some forms of rape, is just as repugnant. The problem is universal and compromise is required from both side. Rape has come to mean so many things......so many definitions....have WE always asked specifically for permission before having sex? I doubt it very much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: John P Date: 27 Aug 12 - 10:06 AM Rape has come to mean so many things......so many definitions.... Nope. Not in my book. Rape is rape. have WE always asked specifically for permission before having sex? I doubt it very much. The question should be "Have we always taken 'no' for an answer, even if the women was unable to enforce it?" The answer for me is yes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 27 Aug 12 - 10:26 AM > "so many definitions." Like what? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 27 Aug 12 - 12:18 PM When we were young, body language and nuance were our guides in these matters.....permission was never sought.....OR expected. Anybody asking "permission" would have been thought weird, to say the least! It was deemed to be bad sexual etiquet to give the young lady the impression that you thought her "available". of course we all took no for an answer, but in the Assange case he had sex with the girl with consent they both slept in the same bed till morning, then he had sex again while she was asleep....is that rape?.....that is one of the charges Mr Assange is to face in Sweden. How does one police "rape within marriage" is it always clear who means what and is "force" always physical? How does revenge for some previous slight fit in? It is a veritable minefield. These issues are never simple, and legislation must have common sense at its core. Precious little common sense in "liberalism" as can be seen from the equality agenda....populist nonesense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Richard Bridge Date: 27 Aug 12 - 01:04 PM Ake, you appear to be simple. And not in a good way. A person may and can consent without the use of words. But a person who is asleep (or otherwise unconscious) cannot consent. Therefore when Assange introduced his penis (if he did) while the woman was asleep, it was rape. Depending on the relevant applicable law he might have a defence on the basis that he reasonably thought she was awake and was consenting. I doubt it would run under English law. Implied consent to sex within marriage has not been part of English law for some time now. Please try to keep up, and to learn right from wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: GUEST,nobody in particular Date: 27 Aug 12 - 03:16 PM You're still making it political! Absolutely astonishing how uninvolved and insensitive can politics turn people into! It's like talking about leaning about 'relationships' instead of people, that way you just ended a 'relationship' and chalk it up to a 'learning experience', and now you add it to your 'relationship knowledge', to use for your next 'relationship', instead of actually losing a person! a wife, husband or child: so what? They are only 'relationships', and you are a loveless idiot! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: artbrooks Date: 27 Aug 12 - 05:27 PM {I sincerely hope that I did not completely change the intended meaning of this sentence by omitting several words:} Simply using abortion as a means of ridding oneself of an inconvenience....as in simply being too lazy, stupid or drunk to ensure adequate contraception methods are used, is morally repugnant, irresponsible and a sure sign of society in decline. So, a woman gets drunk (or her date gets her drunk), has sex while in a state of diminished capacity (or maybe she is entirely unconscious), and becomes pregnant. Newsflash: this is what is called rape. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 27 Aug 12 - 06:23 PM Art....as I think you probably know, I was not discussing rape in the post you quoted, but abortion. Newsflash: One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant. Never a good trick to edit peoples posts to score points. Stick to your league....or go play with Richard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: artbrooks Date: 27 Aug 12 - 06:37 PM Ake, you were discussing both rape and abortion in that post...or at least you mentioned both, if that doesn't count as discussing - 'abortion' is in line 1 and 'rape' in line 3. My point is that one of the events that you specifically list as resulting in what you term "an inconvenience" is a form of rape. In fact, in that particularpost, you actually use the term "some forms of rape". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: akenaton Date: 28 Aug 12 - 11:04 AM Art...sorry for being snarky, i think i see what you are getting at but it is not the meaning i intended. Please read that post again and i think the meaning will become clear, as i dont think altering it will help....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Aug 12 - 12:50 PM ""These issues are never simple, and legislation must have common sense at its core. Precious little common sense in "liberalism" as can be seen from the equality agenda....populist nonesense."" Strip away the totally irrelevant politics aand the bottom line becomes: It is not my business, your business, the government's business or any body else's, other than the woman concerned. We are entitled to approve or disapprove according to our own beliefs, but not to control or coerce. In the UK the Church of England, which has some input into government, is taking a moderate stance. In the USA religion is expressly debarred from influencing government by the Constitution, yet so called Christians are ignoring that fact and attempting to control government. In neither case is government legislation based on religious beliefs appropriate. The argument about falling populations is specious. This world needs fewer people......desperately! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: frogprince Date: 28 Aug 12 - 03:27 PM But if the heterosexual people stop reproducing, eventually most of the population will be gay men with HIV! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: John P Date: 28 Aug 12 - 10:27 PM Ooh, if gay people became the majority they could get married legally. Not only that, they could tell the rest of us that since being hetero is a choice, we don't get to have the same civil rights as they do. I remember well the day I decided to be heterosexual. I was thirteen, and this girl at school suddenly became the only thing I could think about, specifically about kissing her and . . . stuff . . . that I didn't really know anything about yet. I remember thinking, "Gosh, I could be a homosexual if I want. I wonder if I should? I could try to kiss a boy . . ." And then, of couse, I decided to go ahead and like girls after all. I'm sure everyone remembers that moment when you decided what you will be turned on by. Fond memories . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Legitimate Rape'??? From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Aug 12 - 02:59 PM It'd probably be a much more caring, sensitive and tolerant world if gays of both sexes were in the majority. It might take some of the testosterone fueled nastiness out of mankind. Don T. |
