Welcome to PatsFans.com

Republicans want to deny abortions to victims of statutory rape

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Patters, Jan 29, 2011.

  1. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    307
    Ratings:
    +568 / 22 / -19

    Think the Republican Congress isn't nuts? Think again. They are introducing legislation that would permit federal funding of abortions for only forcible rape. Thus, when a little girl is a victim of statutory rape, not only will Medicaid not cover an abortion, she won't be allowed to use here healthcare savings account, or deduct the cost from taxes. So, old men, if you want a kid, trick a little girl into consenting and, in some states the worst that will happen to you is a year in jail.

    The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape | Mother Jones

    Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

    For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

    With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2011
  2. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    Is statutory rape always defined as consentual?
     
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,575
    Likes Received:
    166
    Ratings:
    +452 / 12 / -14





    This sounds like a dishonest article. SInce a minor cannot consent the sex is forceable by definition, the article also says the minor couldn't use their MSA account how many minors have MSA's ?

    Fear mongering by the left not suprising.
     
  4. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    It said the parents' HSAs couldn't be used, 13.

    Dishonesty indeed...

    Are you able to look at any issue with even a minimal degree of objectivity?
     
  5. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    307
    Ratings:
    +568 / 22 / -19

    Statutory rape is considered coercive rape, not forcible.

    Statutory rape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Statutory rape differs from forcible rape in that overt force or threat need not be present. The laws presume coercion, because a minor or mentally challenged adult is legally incapable of giving consent to the act.
     
  6. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,417
    Likes Received:
    399
    Ratings:
    +773 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    Not everywhere, it's not.

    Forcible Rape, by UCR definition, it the carnal knowledge of a person forcibly or against that person’s will, or when a victim is mentally or physically incapable of giving consent. Attempts to commit rape are included in this category. One offense is counted for each victim of rape. Statutory rapes and other types of sexual assaults are not counted as rape under the UCR program.

    FORCIBLE RAPE
     
  7. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,437
    Likes Received:
    321
    Ratings:
    +897 / 7 / -3

    My guess is it's not so nuts to those who see abortion as killing a baby.

    Statutory rape is when one person is underage or a minor right?
     
  8. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,636
    Likes Received:
    753
    Ratings:
    +1,988 / 41 / -31

    #24 Jersey

    The title is misleading in this thread. the debate is over federal funding
    ... not the denial of certain kinds of rape.

    Apparently an effort to keep taxpayer dollars from paying for abortions ... some states are doing this as well.

    Here are some stats on American opinions on the general topic.

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/fact_Planned_Parenthood_polling_memo.pdf

    Very tough choices are going to be made over the next few years in attempts to reign in government spending ... some are not going to be very popular. You cannot possibly feel bad for every American while at the same time reducing the deficit. The left will be more angry than the right - in the end the American voters will decide if the proper choices have been made.

    Obama has done nothing to ease the deficit and has in fact increased it exponentially. Pelosi's Congress also did not decrease the deficit ... I think we need to see how the next few years go overall. Being angry at every cut is what we are going to be seeing in the media - getting the public angry is how we have bloated the budget since Bill Clinton left office.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2011
  9. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Its cute the way Icy calls the title of this thread misleading and then goes on to imply that this awful bill would have some sort of noticeable effect on the national debt.
     
  10. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,636
    Likes Received:
    753
    Ratings:
    +1,988 / 41 / -31

    #24 Jersey


    1: It is misleading ... the bill is about federal funding and the title says "deny abortions" ... they are not denying abortions - it is a bill about who will pay for some of them.

    2: noticeable? Did I say that or are you trying to get the thread onto a different path because you have nothing of substance to add to what I said?

    Noticeable ... good try SD ... but try harder next time without inventing untyped words or meanings.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2011
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    307
    Ratings:
    +568 / 22 / -19

    In practice, if you don't have money, you'll have a more difficult time getting abortions. One way to deny someone an abortion is to block its funding. It's a shame that Republicans believe that a young raped girl should be forced to carry a fetus to term if she's too poor to pay for abortion out of pocket. Imagine the stigma of a 13 year old, seduced by an older man, walking around pregnant. Think she'll last in school? Think she'll have much of a future?
     
  12. Triple-T

    Triple-T Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yep, I can't see anything as a more pressing issue than this. First, stop federal assistance for statutory rape abortions, then we fix the economy, solve the debt, end our oversea wars, etc, etc, etc.

    Exactly! The nuts part is equating an embryo with a baby. Next stop "Save the Sperm!" The catholics have been fighting that battle for a while now, except in cases of child molestation, then it's "waste away!"

    FYI...this woman is a despicable monster.


    GOOD LORD REPUBLICANS!!!! IS THIS REALLY THE ONLY ISSUE YOU CAN EVER SEE?!?!?! HOW ABOUT FOCUSING ON MAKING SURE THE LIVING HAVE A DECENT LIFE AND FUTURE?!?!?!
     
  13. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    This thread title is misleading, the Republicans are misleading, and the protests are misleading.

    Bottom line, Federal funding of any abortion, or any medical treatment is a huge over-reach of the Federal government under the Constitution. Period.
     
  14. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,636
    Likes Received:
    753
    Ratings:
    +1,988 / 41 / -31

    #24 Jersey


    Bravo ..... :rocker::rocker::rocker:
     
  15. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    shirtsleeve and icy: so you guys want to do away with medicare and the VA?
     
  16. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yes. Hell yes. The veterans worked for our government, and as such and part of their contract, they are entitled to be insured by the government. Give them vouchers.

    Medicare would also need to be phased out over time, whereas many people have become "vested" in the system. For those 50 and older, like Social Security, its too late for an alternative. Ditto for the disabled.

    But vouchers for insurance should be paid to those over 30 and under 50 who have contributed heavily to medicare already. The eventual obvious replacement is tax exempt personal savings account for disability and senior medical insurance.
     
  17. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,183
    Likes Received:
    324
    Ratings:
    +815 / 26 / -33

    unwanted pregnancies=unwanted children, many of which have special needs=increased burden to the states and agencies that will necessitate involvement.

    Children who are not wanted during a pregnancy often have poor prenatal care, and can be rejected when born... overall they suffer the consequences of the poor decision making of the adult involved.

    There will be those that say adoption is the answer, however a closer look at any of the state adoption agencies are flooded with special needs children.. and further in life crime will increase as will our jailed population. Would like to see any of the congressman involved in stopping this funding to each pledge to take home a special needs child.
     
  18. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    *sigh*

    That is NOT the issue. The fact that any debate of Federal funds is taking place is the point.

    Is unwanted pregnancy an issue? Yes. Does it need to be discussed and redressed? Yes. Is this in any way a Constitutional responsibility of the Federal government as laid out by our founders? Hell, NO! This is one of those areas that is specifically reserved to the states.
     
  19. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    if I'm reading your post correctly, you do want to get rid of the VA but still have the Federal government pay for vets' healthcare -- is that correct? Should Fed funding apply to all Fed employees, not just vets?

    --------------

    By the way, I'm not sure your claim re its constitutionality is correct. It's certainly a good argument, but at the same time, the "general welfare" language is pretty broad -- perhaps intentionally so?
     
  20. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,649
    Likes Received:
    275
    Ratings:
    +1,120 / 3 / -10

    It's disgusting, it reminds me of women being Raped and not being able to find out if the guy that raped her had HIV, the pigs that make these laws should be shot dead.

    After a women carry's a fetus into late term they should not be allowed to have abortions, a women should only be allowed to have two early term abortions if she comes back a third time they should scoop her out with a stainless steel garden trowel then tell her she is free to go out and f-ck until the cows come home.

    America should have Abortion Clincs in all Wal Marts & Home Depot's to perform the above under those strict rules.

    Imagine if your wife was raped and you wern't allowed to know if The Raper had AIDS.
    Jesus Christ




    :bricks:
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>