If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   New Pennsylvania bill includes provision requiring women to prove they were raped. Want to guess which party inserted the provision?   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 160
    More: Sick, Pennsylvania, Equal Pay Act, welfare benefits, Paycheck Fairness Act, Priebus tried, shiny objects, Priebus, Violence Against Women Act  
•       •       •

8711 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Oct 2012 at 1:53 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-24 11:37:55 PM
14 votes:
And people wondered why I switched to Democrat....

keep this up and i'm going to have to actually run for office.
2012-10-24 10:14:51 PM
12 votes:
I'm convinced Republican voters are concerned more with needlessly punishing their fellow Americans than they are with helping their country.

These people are petty. They're ignorant beyond description. And, they are malicious, childish and very very sick.
2012-10-25 02:15:03 AM
11 votes:

IamAwake: ok honestly - I'm confused. So it's ok for a woman to claim - in welfare benefits - that she was raped...without having actually filed a charge with anyone? The woman isn't required to prove anything other than that she filed a report - the burden of proof of the actual crime isn't on her. Normally I'd be all "ah, another stupid anti-human (both genders, lets be real here) repub law..." but...really? Misleading rewording of headline much, subby? What exactly is /wrong/ about what they're doing here?


You're missing the big picture- why on earth does a woman NEED to discuss the circumstances surrounding her child's conception to obtain welfare benefits for that child?
2012-10-25 02:13:22 AM
10 votes:

Talondel: It doesn't even say that. It says they have to submit a signed, notarized statement indicating that she reported it to the authorities. A law that encourages the reporting of rape to the proper authorities? The horror. Truly PA republicans are monsters.


You're kidding right? You really think a rape vicitm's first thought upon being raped is going to be "Oh, I've just been raped! Clearly I need to go to the police right now because if I don't and I get pregnant and can't afford to raise a child, a year or so from now I'm going to be totally screwed."

Because I'm pretty sure for most people, it's more like numbness, rage, grief, horror, anger and the general beginnings of PTSD.

Don't be obtuse. This doesn't "encourage reporting". This punishes women who get pregnant, don't have abortions, and then have the nerve to require basic assistance... that is, the very, very minimal assitance that's available.

And if you want to encourage poor women not to get pregnant, MAKE CONTRACEPTIVES EASILY AVAILABLE TO POOR WOMEN. Any other approach to this particular problem trends towards authoritarian bullshiat.
2012-10-25 02:04:52 AM
10 votes:
Yea, at this point, this stuff just makes me feel tired.

The anti-abortion movement is and always has been deeply rooted in the desire to control women and our bodies. This is one more glaring example. This one can't even make the dubious claim that it's about "protecting life". This one is about punishing slutty sluts for having sex.

This is the party of making sure that poor women can't afford contraception and preventative health services... and the same party that then says "Oh and if you get pregnant, we're not helping you take care of your punishment baby."

Also, lots of victims choose not to report rape for good reasons. This is pretty well established as fact.
2012-10-25 02:06:37 AM
9 votes:
I'll just leave this here...

Also, to debunk the myth of "welfare queens":
• Less than 2% of the budget of the Dept. of Health and Human Services (DHHS) goes to
TANF (the program that gives money to poor families). Link
•Only 24% of the entire federal budget went to DHHS last year. Link
• Doing the math, that means 0.5% of the federal budget went to TANF last year. Less
than one percent of our federal budget went to "welfare queens" last year. I hardly
think they are the ones bankrupting our economy.
• TANF assistance is also capped (lifetime) at 5 years (since 1996). You cannot be on
welfare indefinitely (unless you have a physical disability). The average amount of time
families spend on TANF is about 3 years. Also, the average number of kids in a family
receiving TANF benefits is 2.3 children, with only 10% of recipients having more than 3
children
(very long report): Link
 



/fark these guys in TFA
2012-10-25 02:28:23 AM
7 votes:

david_gaithersburg: And we all know that PA is one of those states without access to abortions. Derp.



82% of counties in Pennsylvania have no abortion provider. 46% of women in Pennsylvania live in those counties. Pennsylvania also has mandated counseling designed to discourage abortion and a mandatory 24 hour waiting period.

That may sound like no big deal until you consider the fact that someone who requires welfare benefits and qualifies is already pretty desperately poor... so affording not one, but two days off of work, plus transporatation to another county and lodgings there is actually a pretty big burden on abortion access.

 Source: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/pennsylvania.html 
2012-10-24 10:09:52 PM
7 votes:
See, I understand what they're getting at. I do, I really do. It's a bit of a loophole, and theoretically some Ebul Welfare Queen could claim that all seven of her chil'uns is rape-babies, BUT THAT'S WHAT AUDITS ARE FOR.

You think people are abusing the system? Fine. Look for warning signs, and check the suspicious ones. You don't go around assuming every single welfare mother is lying and demand they prove otherwise. That's the "guilty until proven innocent" theory of law, and it has no place in the American legal system.

Coincidentally though, do you fundie wackadoos know where "guilty until proven innocent" is the core of the law? Muslim countries that practice Sharia law. Y'know, Sharia law, that thing you all seem so insanely worried about taking root here? Ringing any bells?
2012-10-24 09:25:36 PM
7 votes:
i110.photobucket.com
Republicans are assholes
2012-10-25 02:40:15 AM
6 votes:

Alphax: 'Demanding that taxpayers give her free money'. That's loaded language.



Yes it is. This virulent hatred for the people in this country who are the most marginalized is reallly depressing. I'm really tired of people acting like poverty is indcative of some great moral failing and the corollary, that wealth is proof of moral superiority and responsibility.
2012-10-25 02:24:38 AM
6 votes:

Lionel Mandrake: [i159.photobucket.com image 483x1500]


i49.tinypic.com
2012-10-24 09:44:38 PM
6 votes:

Parmenius: What ever happened to the Fark(tm) proposal to start referring to the GOP as the "White Male Christian Nationalist Party"?


Is there a reason we need to state the obvious with many more words? It's like calling the KKK racists; we know all ready. No need to waste time with it.
2012-10-24 09:01:22 PM
6 votes:
Well, to be fair, it says they have to prove they reported they were raped, not prove they were raped.
2012-10-25 03:25:42 AM
5 votes:

blindpreacher: Shouldn't a woman be expected to control her reproductive situation?


Not when that control is taken out of her hands by draconian legislation that defunds clinics that provide contraception and that make abortion inaccessible.

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp: it is cruel and punishing to remove all the tools women use to control our reproductive health and then blame us for having no control over our reproductive situations.

 
2012-10-25 02:13:39 AM
5 votes:
i159.photobucket.com
2012-10-25 02:09:15 AM
5 votes:

stainedglassdoll: I'll just leave this here...

Also, to debunk the myth of "welfare queens":
• Less than 2% of the budget of the Dept. of Health and Human Services (DHHS) goes to
TANF (the program that gives money to poor families). Link
•Only 24% of the entire federal budget went to DHHS last year. Link
• Doing the math, that means 0.5% of the federal budget went to TANF last year. Less
than one percent of our federal budget went to "welfare queens" last year. I hardly
think they are the ones bankrupting our economy.
• TANF assistance is also capped (lifetime) at 5 years (since 1996). You cannot be on
welfare indefinitely (unless you have a physical disability). The average amount of time
families spend on TANF is about 3 years. Also, the average number of kids in a family
receiving TANF benefits is 2.3 children, with only 10% of recipients having more than 3
children (very long report): Link 



/fark these guys in TFA


Actually, I should correct myself: "The average number of persons in TANF families was 2.3, including an average of 1.8 recipient children. One in two recipient families had only one child. One in 10 families had more than three children. The average number of children in closed-case families was 1.8. Nearly one in two closed case families had one child, and only six percent had more than three children."

Yea, the problem is TANF recipients are having too many kids. UNFARKINGBELIEVABLE
2012-10-25 01:05:39 AM
5 votes:
Just to be specific, and you can quote me:

Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.

Without fail.
2012-10-25 12:29:21 AM
5 votes:

Fark It: If the GOP really cared about clamping down on welfare or at least getting more out of it they'd require that welfare recipients who are not employed volunteer at least 20 hours a week.


So your solution to reducing welfare is to make volunteering a job? You realize you can't call it volunteering if you're required to do it right? Then it's a job that you aren't being paid for.
2012-10-25 12:06:39 AM
5 votes:
If the GOP really cared about clamping down on welfare or at least getting more out of it they'd require that welfare recipients who are not employed volunteer at least 20 hours a week.

But they don't care about that, they care about controlling women and infliction a protestant caliphate on the rest of the country.
2012-10-24 09:02:06 PM
5 votes:
What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.
2012-10-24 08:55:22 PM
5 votes:
ah, yes - the rape-publican party strikes again.
2012-10-25 03:30:00 AM
4 votes:

blindpreacher: No where in the article is it mentioned the bill is trying to limit access to birth control or abortions. You're trying to fit the article to your own narrative.



Yea, you're either being willfully obtuse or you've only just now awakened from a Rip Van Winkleesque sleep and you've missed the last two or three years of legislation on contraceptive access and abortion rights.
2012-10-25 03:09:09 AM
4 votes:

sticky2shoes: Irrelevant question, but the answer is no since you're curious.


When my daughter was born in 1990, I was making a little over 100k a year. She had some very serious medical issues at birth that insurance didn't want to cover.

We nearly had to file for bankruptcy over the medical bills. CLEARLY, based on your post, we were irresponsible for having a child when we "couldn't afford it".

That is how farking idiotic your blanket condemnations are.
2012-10-25 02:48:43 AM
4 votes:

sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: Alphax: 'Demanding that taxpayers give her free money'. That's loaded language.


Yes it is. This virulent hatred for the people in this country who are the most marginalized is reallly depressing. I'm really tired of people acting like poverty is indcative of some great moral failing and the corollary, that wealth is proof of moral superiority and responsibility.

Not having a baby from consensual sex when you can't afford to raise a child IS proof of responsibility.


Yes, I understand. This is why many of us have worked for a long time to try and make sure that all women can access affordable, accessible birth control so that women can decide when to have children. Unfortunately, those efforts have been systematically dismantled by the same people who deride poor women with children as "welfare queens".
2012-10-25 02:48:40 AM
4 votes:

SanchezSucio: I love all this Hate Mongering by "tolerant open minded liberals" talking about what hate mongers all Republicans are. The headline was so sensationalized it did not even match the article. Just another day of Left-wing yellow journalism. I love how "all" Republicans are labeled as racist woman haters, female Republicans are called traitors and black Republicans are called Uncle Toms and worse, while any sexist comments by female liberals or racist comments by liberal minorities are tolerated and encouraged. Every time I hear some complaint about Republicans/conservatives are turning extreme, it just comes off as a Projection. 
It is funny how it came out 24 hours ago the Obama White House lied about Benghazi on day 1 for the election and the President went campaigning. This is disgusting behavior, but not a peep and no green light article on Fark.


Not one thing you said is true. Looks like another old account reactivated and given to a troll.
2012-10-25 02:21:54 AM
4 votes:
If women were allowed easy access to abortion this wouldn't be an issue, but there we have another arena that the republicans have put their foot in. I can't imagine women even wanting a child that was forced on them through brutality.
2012-10-25 12:55:01 AM
4 votes:

GAT_00: Fark It: If the GOP really cared about clamping down on welfare or at least getting more out of it they'd require that welfare recipients who are not employed volunteer at least 20 hours a week.

So your solution to reducing welfare is to make volunteering a job? You realize you can't call it volunteering if you're required to do it right? Then it's a job that you aren't being paid for.


Isn't there another word for forced labor for food?
2012-10-24 08:58:59 PM
4 votes:
A bill in the Pennsylvania House proposing the reduction of welfare benefits for low-income women contains a provision requiring a woman who became pregnant from rape to prove that she reported her assault.

As ThinkProgress reported, the measure, proposed by five Republican state lawmakers, seeks to eliminate an increase in benefits if a child is conceived while a woman is covered under the Temporary Assistance To Needy Family program. A woman can seek an exception to this if the child is conceived as a result of rape. However, she must prove that she reported the incident to the authorities and gave the police her assaulter's identity


Jesus Christ, you heartless bastards.

Ok, this is clearly a unified thing the GOP is pushing. But why? Simply because 'abortion bad, even in case of rape, oh rape is bad, well let's change that'?
2012-10-25 04:05:45 AM
3 votes:

bonobo73: "I'm pregnant again."
"Why? You know this eliminates your benefits"
"I was raped."
"Ok. Did you report the assault?"
"No, it was my pimp that raped me and if I tell the police it was my pimp I'll go to prison for prostitution and then when I get out he'll slit my throat and put my body in a dumpster and no one will so much as bat an eyelash.."
"But you want me to believe that you were raped."
"Yes."
"Even though you're providing no proof whatsoever."
"Yes."
"And even if the sex was consensual, it's in your best interests to lie about being raped to keep your benefits."
"Yep."
...


Welcome to the really real world asshole, where fathers rape their stepdaughters and husbands rape their wives. Where 14 year old girls have sex with strangers for food and drugs and some men would just as soon as kill you and your unborn child then face ever having to pay child support. The world is a scary farked up place and apparently you've been lucky enough to avoid the vast vast vast majority of it's terrors. So how about you go rest your head on your $5k bed set and let adults deal with he aftermath of what your ignorance breeds.

part of that includes giving women an anonymous support network so the men in their life don't gut them like fish and dump them in a lake.
2012-10-25 03:37:40 AM
3 votes:

sticky2shoes: geek_mars: This provision accomplishes nothing. There's not a deadline on when a woman can file rape charges. So, if a woman with a (for example) six month old child (product of rape or not) files for assistance and is told she has one kid too many, she can simply call the cops and report that she was raped fifteen months ago (whether that's the case or not) and has no idea who attacked her. She gets her police report, she gets her assistance, nothing changes except the woman, already in a desperate state, had to bear the added insult of being treated like a second class citizen.

This does not encourage women to report rapes, though it could be argued it encourages the filing of false claims. It makes it harder to get assistance. I can't stand the mentality that making a child suffer is a productive way to punish that child's parent (which is what happens when "x" number of children get assistance but "x+1" is too many). I understand preventing abuse of the system is a desirable goal, but treating people with a sense of humanity should also be a desirable

What this law accomplishes is enabling a punishment for people who lie about being raped to get welfare, because they can be charged with filing a false police report. They may not be the brightest people to begin with, but "I could go to jail for lying to the police to get welfare" will play into their decision to raise the baby without welfare, give it up for adoption, move to a state with different rules, abort, or abstain or use contraception the next time around.


I really have to disagree with you on this one, for several reasons.
1: I don't consider denying aid for a child to be an acceptable punishment for the parent. That's sort of like saying, "Sorry kid, we can't help feed you because your mom should never have had you."
2: Good luck convicting a woman who makes a false rape claim of filing a false police report. If she claims she was raped and has no idea of her attackers identity, then there's a total lack of evidence; total. Can't prove she was raped; can't prove she wasn't.
3: "They may not be the brightest people to begin with," is a terrible statement to use when trying to make a point. There are plenty of people who need assistance that are in no way unintelligent.
4: "...give it up for adoption, move to a state with different rules, abort, or abstain or use contraception the next time around." The only part of this that makes any sense is the abstain part.
Adoption? Requesting assistance is what people do when they want to keep the child, not when they want to give it up. Not many parents want to give up a child.
Move to a different state? You don's just do that like talking about it. Moving is expensive and often not an option for people who are so broke they have to ask for government assistance.
Abortion/contraception? You say that as if it were a casual option without countless hurdles and roadblocks with various legislatures trying to add more every day.

Consider this, and I mean seriously consider it...
What is gained (gained by society, but government, by communities, by parents, by children) by punishing someone who is so desperate, or so immoral, that they would claim rape to get more government aid? These are the exact people who we should be helping. Desperate people need opportunities, education, etc. Immoral people need to get their minds right, counseling, therapy, education, mentoring, etc.

Punishing someone in this situation doesn't put an end to their situation, it just kicks the can down the road and makes it easier to ignore. Punishment is not a satisfactory solution, especially when you look at the number of people not abusing the system.
2012-10-25 03:34:09 AM
3 votes:

sticky2shoes: If you weren't raped, you had control. If you were raped, the law still allows you to get welfare.



Ah, and we are right back to the idea that poor women should just be abstinent unless they're in a committed relationship and are  wealthy enough to afford children or birth control.

Because that is totally realistic and an excellent basis for determining policy.

*facepalm*
2012-10-25 03:21:05 AM
3 votes:

ThrobblefootSpectre: But, in some circumstances I can see the point of this. I can't, for example, make an insurance claim for a robbery, if I never reported a robbery to the police and can't prove anything was taken.



It always amazes me that the best comparison many men can come up with for rape is property crime. It's... a very dehumanizing way to discuss the subject.
 
Besides the point though. As I said above- there is no reason on earth why the circumstances around a child's conception should affect whether or not their parents can receive minimal government assistance to help keep them fed.

 Seriously, these benefits are next to nothing. The people who receive them are STILL living in desperate poverty.
2012-10-25 02:14:31 AM
3 votes:
"I'm pregnant again."
"Why? You know this eliminates your benefits"
"I was raped."
"Ok. Did you report the assault?"
"No."
"But you want me to believe that you were raped."
"Yes."
"Even though you're providing no proof whatsoever."
"Yes."
"And even if the sex was consensual, it's in your best interests to lie about being raped to keep your benefits."
"Yep."
...
2012-10-25 02:09:21 AM
3 votes:
Blaming the GOP is kind of a dodge, as it would be more accurate to say that Christians inserted this, from entirely valid Christian principles well-supported by the bible. Which is a book that has occasional statements to the effect of love and peace as the advertising claims, but for every one has two more condoning something on par with murder or slavery. Ten more if you count the old testament.

Some day Christianity's going to have to stop passing the buck and accept that y'all's religion makes you demonstrably worse people than you would otherwise be on a regular basis. God knows I've successfully been convinced to stop regarding the imaginary king in the sky shiat as a fun and harmless delusion over the last few months.

//Not that the GOP isn't bad on non-religious matters as well, but things related to a Christian philosophy are most of the worst, it's where the warmongering and the desire to poke Iran with a sharp stick repeatedly comes from, too. At least being bad at budgeting isn't tantamount to an attempt to start WW3.
2012-10-25 02:02:50 AM
3 votes:
This is getting sick, and redundant.

It's a two-fer. Hurt poor women, and calling rape victims liars.
2012-10-25 01:31:33 AM
3 votes:

Amos Quito: FTA: "According to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network, 54 percent of rapes and sexual assaults are not reported to the police."


And those are just the ones that are reported as not being reported.


Many don't want to feel raped again by the process of reporting it.
These men have absolutely no business inserting themselves into women's health issues. They need a f*cking hobby like hanging out in public restrooms.
2012-10-25 12:48:00 AM
3 votes:

MorrisBird: What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.


This is a thinly-veiled response to the idea that...well, any female that is "raped" was, in some way, asking for it.

If she was home studying the bible, she couldn't have been raped.

..unless it was her father, in which case the resulting RapeBaby[tm] was God's will.

...sorry.

Let's just all say what we're thinking: Conservatives hate/are afraid of women.

Remember that not-so-many thousands of years ago, women were revered because stupid men thought that women just...well, EJECTED new babies. They had no grasp of how babies were made.

Conservatives grasp that even though a married woman gets pregnant, there is no 100% guarantee that her husband is the father.

And they hate that.
2012-10-25 12:14:18 AM
3 votes:
Rapeublicans love inserting unwanted things into places they shouldn't go.
2012-10-24 09:42:39 PM
3 votes:
What ever happened to the Fark(tm) proposal to start referring to the GOP as the "White Male Christian Nationalist Party"?
2012-10-25 08:32:25 AM
2 votes:

Cataholic: gadian: Why are we still doing this? I mean, as a society, why is this still even a discussion? Didn't we decide this in the 60's and 70's? That it was OK for women to have sex, like sex, and to take responsibility for their reproduction - even when that responsibility meant having an abortion?

You can't decide to cut reproductive education, cut sources of and funding for reproductive services, and then make welfare benefits harder to get for women with children and label your reasoning as "pro-life" and "Christian" and "moral". You say that abortion punishes children, but what about the children that are born? Why are you punishing them to get at their mothers? Why their mothers? Motherhood is hard enough without having to justify how your children came to be conceived.

You're despicable. Genuinely despicable. Going backwards on women's rights is not the solution. Do some women need more out of welfare benefits than others? Yes. Give it to them. Also give them education, job training, therapy, birth control, child care, and whatever else they need to make being off welfare more profitable and comfortable than being on welfare.

What's despicable is a system which for generations has ACTIVELY ENCOURAGED people to have kids when they cannot afford them, and then discouraged them from marrying the fathers of these kids. What's despicable is creating a permanent cycle of dependency with women in their early 30's trying to care for their grandchildren. What's despicable is creating this system of dependency JUST SO YOU HAVE A PERMANENT CONSTITUENCY OF PEOPLE WHO WILL VOTE FOR YOU. It's not compassion.


What's really dispicable is letting a baby go hungry because you're mad his mother had sex.
2012-10-25 07:50:34 AM
2 votes:
I see a lot of folks here saying women have a duty to report rapes. I used to feel that way as well. However, for reasons I won't go into, I now have a very good insight into how the justice system treats women who report rapes. Police are often hostile towards them and treat them as if they assume they are lying, from the moment they report the crime. With what other crime does that happen? They also often discourage women from pressing charges in an a attempt to "juke the stats." You make the rape go away, and you have less crime. If you do, magically, get to the point that you actually have a suspect in the rape, it's extremely likely that the prosecutor will either cut a plea deal to a lesser crime or just drop the charges because it's "hard" to prove a rape case. Finally, if by some miracle you do actually end up with the scumbag on trial, you will be called to the stand and the defense attorney will rake you over the coals and treat you like the suspect. Your entire sexual history will be explored in depth and he will try to prove you are a slut or worse. Essentially, the system victimizes you again and again if you actually go to the trouble of reporting the rape.

Honestly, if I were a women and I was raped, I would think long and hard before actually reporting it.
2012-10-25 06:05:55 AM
2 votes:
To all the white male conservatives posting how they support the fact women should report their rape OR ELSE.

Please volunteer for a butt-raping (it doesn't need to be FORCIBLE and I have it on good authority that your body will prevent you getting pregnant).

When the fellow has finished holding you down and pounding you hard, and has wiped off and left, please make your way down to the police station.

Tell the nice man in the policeman costume all about what happened, being careful to answer his questions in detail.

You may be asked to drop your pants so people can take a look, I recommend you just stare up at the light socket while they poke around down there.

When you are finished, go home and tell your mom, dad, brother, sister, friends and - if you have one - your girlfriend, all about your experience.

Because sharing these things is FUN, and I wouldn't want you to miss out on the kind of FUN you are demanding these women experience.
2012-10-25 05:06:29 AM
2 votes:

blindpreacher:
1) The article doesn't mention birth control or abortions once. The only reason it's brought up in this thread is because it loosely fits the narrative that Republicans are united in taking away women's rights. The bill was co sponsored by a Democrat for crying out loud.


I'm not sure why "co sponsored by a Democrat" is supposed to mean it's not a bad bill. All it really demonstrates is that there are some Democrats who are as morally bankrupt as some (these days it's looking like most) Republicans. If you check the Democrat in question's voting record, he's as anti-abortion as the Republicans, so it's no surprise he'd vote with them. Pretty much entirely explained by him being a Catholic, as they have extremely backward views on abortion, sexuality and rape (sadly I know quite a few Catholics who would agree with the "if you got pregnant from a rape, God intended you to" viewpoint).

While I'm not against the concept of combating welfare fraud, I tend to draw the line at "prove you were raped!" type legislation.
2012-10-25 04:59:55 AM
2 votes:

Bullroarer_Took: Ebbelwoi: I'm hard pressed to imagine there are that many rape pregnancies to justify writing this into the law. What seems silly is that if a poor Republican woman on benefits gets accidentally pregnant (busted rubber, whatever), and then doesn't have an abortion based on her religious beliefs, the the law will punish her for not believing in abortion. People have a right to have sex and frankly accidents can happen to anyone.

The law is written to deal with non-rape pregnancies. The rapes are exceptions to the law.

Still stupid though.

Will create many more problems than the few it hopes to solve.


This law does not hope to solve problems. It hopes to demean and dis-empower women.
2012-10-25 04:33:08 AM
2 votes:
Can anyone point to some Republican authored/sponsored bill of any type that is a good idea and improves the lives of the average American?

I can't find any.
2012-10-25 04:21:51 AM
2 votes:

dramboxf: Just to be specific, and you can quote me:

Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.

Without fail.


Yep:
www.amptoons.com
2012-10-25 04:17:16 AM
2 votes:

sticky2shoes: It says name the attacker IF KNOWN. There is no financial incentive to falsely accuse a certain person than to say it was an unknown person.



So basically, it's a meaningless provision that requires women to take the time to file a report that they know no one will ever be able to follow up on, wasting police time and resources and further traumatizing the victim by forcing them to tell their story whether they're comfortabe doing it or not.

And this is all so that they can obtain minimal government assistance that covers very basic needs.

Yea. Imagine being so poverty stricken that you're desperate enough to have to need that money, and then imagine you've been raped and now you're being forced to tell your story in order to obtain the money to keep the lights on.
 
What about that sounds fair to you? What about that sounds like anything but absolute torture?
2012-10-25 03:54:42 AM
2 votes:

Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.


So now the woman will report a rape that didn't happen, perhaps even falsely accusing an innocent man, and still defraud the government. Brilliant!
2012-10-25 03:34:23 AM
2 votes:
The Republicans are lucky that men can't get pregnant.
2012-10-25 03:34:00 AM
2 votes:

brukmann: blueviking: //yeah, it'll never happen, accountability being nonexistent in politics

In my experience, this is the truth. Accountability is a rare orchid that almost always germinates from people holding themselves accountable; whole communities rise up to block external calls for it.


As though one is automatically "irresponsible" for not reporting their own assault. In the case of many sexual abuses of children, a lot of brainwashing occurs, and the victim is unable to see their own victimization in their circumstances or their own families and friends bar them from reporting it. Plenty of rape victims are scared to death of reliving their assaults, over and over again as they have to recount it in police reports, having their lives threatened by their attackers, or not being believed and stigmatized by their report takers, community, or even family and friends. Talk to such victims, and, given the cruelty under which the justice system and its enforcers sometimes operate, you could see why they would sometimes rather try to let it go or forget and move on. And, with many lovely abortion laws like the one here in Texas to prevent being thrown into debt over having a child, they try to go in to get one and are violated again by a doctor telling them why they're wrong for doing so and a transvaginal ultrasound, not the kinder "jelly on the belly".

I would hope that I would have the strength to make a report and go up against my attacker(s), if I were ever put in a situation like this, but that hardly gives me the right to look down upon those who couldn't bring themselves to do so.
2012-10-25 03:30:35 AM
2 votes:

ExperianScaresCthulhu: i don't see the problem with reporting rape if you have been raped.
instead of making it a punishment, make it a 'reward' or 'normal'.

if you're going to accuse someone of raping you, that's serious business.
it's just not right that rape is the only crime where someone's word
is supposed to be 'good enough'. .. and there is no defense for the falsely accused.

you want to claim rape, do the right thing: press charges.
or shut the fk up.


I can think of at least two examples of why a woman may have reservations about reporting that she was raped, especially if she ended up pregnant as a result:

1. Rape trials are often very messy, traumatizing sagas in which the victim's entire life is exposed and the defense attorney will do anything they can to shift the blame to the victim.

2. In 31 states the law allows the rapist to sue for parental rights. The first time I read this I thought "that's ridiculous, that can't be true", but it is.
2012-10-25 03:21:32 AM
2 votes:

Genevieve Marie: IamAwake: ok honestly - I'm confused. So it's ok for a woman to claim - in welfare benefits - that she was raped...without having actually filed a charge with anyone? The woman isn't required to prove anything other than that she filed a report - the burden of proof of the actual crime isn't on her. Normally I'd be all "ah, another stupid anti-human (both genders, lets be real here) repub law..." but...really? Misleading rewording of headline much, subby? What exactly is /wrong/ about what they're doing here?

You're missing the big picture- why on earth does a woman NEED to discuss the circumstances surrounding her child's conception to obtain welfare benefits for that child?


Exactly. If the GOP is truly pro-life, well, here's a real-life god-sworn living person, the newly minted child straight out of the vajayjay chute. Now show me how pro-life you are. Make that person get the most of his one chance here on earth. Or would you rather condemn that newborn to poverty and misery for its possibly short span here on earth?
2012-10-25 03:14:10 AM
2 votes:

SanchezSucio: Alphax: SanchezSucio: I love all this Hate Mongering by "tolerant open minded liberals" talking about what hate mongers all Republicans are. The headline was so sensationalized it did not even match the article. Just another day of Left-wing yellow journalism. I love how "all" Republicans are labeled as racist woman haters, female Republicans are called traitors and black Republicans are called Uncle Toms and worse, while any sexist comments by female liberals or racist comments by liberal minorities are tolerated and encouraged. Every time I hear some complaint about Republicans/conservatives are turning extreme, it just comes off as a Projection. 
It is funny how it came out 24 hours ago the Obama White House lied about Benghazi on day 1 for the election and the President went campaigning. This is disgusting behavior, but not a peep and no green light article on Fark.

Not one thing you said is true. Looks like another old account reactivated and given to a troll.

Same guy. I see you just drink all the party koolaid. Have you seen the reaction to Stacey Dash supporting Romney? Its disgusting behavior. Libs never put their great leaders or commentators under any of the scrutiny they put the political right under. All the things you hate Bush for, which abama continued, the outrage seems to have disappeared.


Blah blah blah.

Obviously, you weren't here for the intense subatomic dissection of the "Bengazi lie" that we did just last week when your precious "lie" came out. The scrutiny was intense and blistering. And at the end, nobody on the right could tell anyone on the left exactly what would have been accomplished had the President said on 9/12 "Yes, this was a terrorist attack" that wasn't accomplished by waiting till he knew for sure two weeks later that it was in fact a terrorist attack. And neither will you be able to. What we do know, by your bringing it up in a totally unrelated thread, is that you are someone's precious little alt, probably kept in reserve for just such an occasion, and you need to crawl back under your bridge now.
2012-10-25 03:10:46 AM
2 votes:
I hope someday Republicans learn to love their children more than they hate their fellow Americans.
2012-10-25 03:08:57 AM
2 votes:
You know what brand of assholes is even worse than the people who propose this sort of legislation? The people who defend them. Nothing incenses me so much as people who are willing to defend assholes and cover up for them. It's bad enough that we have evil motherfarkers in this world -- do we really need people who go around defending them and covering up for them? Well. I know where your loyalties lie, and I say this: fark you, you evil motherfarking assholes.
2012-10-25 03:00:19 AM
2 votes:
Maybe I've missed it in another thread or above, but is there a FARKING REASON the GOP is obsessive about rape?

The only thing I can think of is a high number of spoiled rich male children (as well as their fathers) wanting protection as they physically fark over women. Has the number of allegations and investigations of rich kids accused of rape increased in recent years?
2012-10-25 02:47:33 AM
2 votes:

Talondel: This isn't anti-abortion legislation. It's anti 'get pregnant while poor and on welfare' legislation, which contains an exception for women who were victims of rape or incest and reported it (or are willing to submit a signed notarized statement that they reported it)


Oh do please tell me precisely in which ways small government, freedom-loving Republicans are justified in using government power to pressure people into choosing whether or not to have a baby.
2012-10-25 02:36:35 AM
2 votes:

AbbeySomeone: Add to that transportation issues, childcare and cost. I don't know if state benefits cover abortion in that area and I am sure that funding for PP has been cut.



State benefits only cover in the case of rape or incest, which means for the most part, nope, no benefits. Planned Parenthood hasn't been defunded yet, but it's been proposed.

It's an ugly pattern, this making it difficult for women to access reproductive care and then blaming them for getting pregnant. Very authoritarian and anti-sex.
2012-10-25 02:34:41 AM
2 votes:

Vodka Zombie: I'm convinced Republican voters are concerned more with needlessly punishing their fellow Americans than they are with helping their country.

These people are petty. They're ignorant beyond description. And, they are malicious, childish and very very sick.


Well, in all fairness, if Americans are stupid enough to vote for Republicans, don't they deserve to be punished?
2012-10-25 02:33:07 AM
2 votes:
So, once again, the Republican Party proves they are "Pro-Birth" and "Anti-Life. Every fetus must be saved, but once it is here, we are going to do every farking thing we can think of to make sure you single mothers have as little support as possible.
2012-10-25 02:18:14 AM
2 votes:

Talondel: They may well be doing that in other places, but this isn't one of them. This is waging a war on 'welfare moms' that contains an exception for rape victims.


Strawman. Might as well wage war on people struck by lightning twice.
2012-10-25 02:16:53 AM
2 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Some day Christianity's going to have to stop passing the buck and accept that y'all's religion makes you demonstrably worse people than you would otherwise be on a regular basis.


Maybe another 2000 years?

But then I'm really going to be out of patience.
2012-10-25 02:04:28 AM
2 votes:
It kind of makes you wonder how many of these Republican politicians are rapists themselves. Not necessarily recently, but more likely when they were in high school or college. They may have committed their crimes years ago, but they still are, and always will be, rapists.

How else can you explain their sympathy--and even affinity--for rapists?
2012-10-25 01:52:54 AM
2 votes:

MorrisBird: What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.


Sorry for your daughter.
2012-10-25 01:42:37 AM
2 votes:

MorrisBird: What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.


No. Actually they're gaining votes by going after all the ignorant bigots out there with crap like this. They know -- well, most of them know -- that this kind of logic is cynical and messed-up, but they also know it works.
2012-10-25 01:34:56 AM
2 votes:
So, they'll help you raise your rape baby, but your broken condom baby gets nothing?
2012-10-25 07:59:48 PM
1 votes:
I wish I could remember who said it, so I could attribute it properly, but a while back someone said something to the effect that Democrats live their lives in fear that something bad is happening to someone who doesn't deserve it whereas Republicans live their lives in fear that something good is happening to someone who doesn't deserve it.

I don't much like generalizations, but damn if a f*ck ton of politics threads in the past few months done their damnedest to try and confirm it as nearly absolute.
2012-10-25 03:33:51 PM
1 votes:

SandMann: Big deal.

If someone is claiming a government handout they should have to prove they qualify. It doesn't matter what it is. If not, the system will be abused.


The amount that anyone can get from abusing the system for TANF type handouts is so minuscule as to be irrelevant. Compare this to the unrestricted financial bailouts and handouts we give to oil companies, banks and other multi-nationals. Shouldn't those have to prove they qualify, as in that they need the handout?
2012-10-25 01:51:20 PM
1 votes:

machoprogrammer: Genevieve Marie: The Jami Turman Fan Club: I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?

Make sure that reproductive health care and therefore birth control is available cheap or free to any woman who needs it and stop restricting abortion rights?

The idea of having more kids to get more money is laughable. I know it's always part of the conversation on welfare, but seriously- the extra benefits don't even begin to cover the cost of taking care of another child for 18 years.

You act like those people take that into consideration. They just see "Ohh, $180 more!"


I know I asked this of Brostorm before, but do strangers ever punch you in the face, for seemingly no reason? I'm just curious.
2012-10-25 12:54:28 PM
1 votes:

The Jami Turman Fan Club: I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?


Make sure that reproductive health care and therefore birth control is available cheap or free to any woman who needs it and stop restricting abortion rights?

The idea of having more kids to get more money is laughable. I know it's always part of the conversation on welfare, but seriously- the extra benefits don't even begin to cover the cost of taking care of another child for 18 years.
2012-10-25 10:51:08 AM
1 votes:

Alassra: ?


Alassra: I think I've figured out what's behind all this....remember when all the legislators were all like "jobs...jobs...jobs"?

They have new evidence that shows that the key to job creation is spurred from Ovaries! They are trying to get all up in my vagina and every other woman's to create jerbs! I'm so relieved! Here I thought they were starting a "war on women" but now that I've been shown this "expert testimony" I'm convinced that I have nothing to worry about for me or any other American female I know... thank goodness these well-educated legislators will be able to create MILLIONS of jobs thanks to this!


I think, in a round about way, these are about jobs - for men, at least. You see, if women are always pregnant and raising children, they will be out of the workforce. Then they will all be filled by men and unemployment will go down (because women without jobs is just the way it should be).
2012-10-25 10:28:33 AM
1 votes:

Brostorm: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Brostorm: cuz birf control is hard.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

citation needed. Im not even a republican nor do I think planned parenthood should be defunded.


Here ya go, sport!

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA-House-lawma k ers-introduce-bill-to-de-fund-Planned-Parenthood.html
2012-10-25 10:17:29 AM
1 votes:

machoprogrammer:
This is what I am proposing:

If you are on welfare, and you get pregnant while on welfare, the amount you receive does not go up...

This means that if you have 3 kids, then go on welfare, you get the 3 kids amount. If you have 2 kids and are on welfare and you get pregnant, you don't get the 3 kids benefit, you still get 2.

The incentive to not having kids then is you don't get more money for having more kids. Kids are expensive.


How about instead we make it stupid easy both in terms of effort and financially to not have kids in the first place.
2012-10-25 10:15:43 AM
1 votes:

Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: CPennypacker: machoprogrammer:
Yeah, good luck with that. Like they would do anything, considering what she did is perfectly legal (having more kids to get more state money). And even if she gets arrested, that punishes the child, since his mom is in jail, no?


So then its not actually fraud. Again, incentivise her not to have kids, not to be on welfare, but now the kid exists. Don't punish it.

exactly, you are the problem. If she cant care for her kids it should be seen as the abuse it is.

If she is an unfit parent then that's entirely different and I support her children being taken away if that results in what is best for the child.

having children y cannot afford by definition makes you an unfit parent. The fact that your ability even feed your children relies on the state is a problem. When you decide to have more children while already being in this situation, you have just make the argument that you are unfit stronger.

Cuz all pregnancies are planned

cuz birf control is hard. Cuz taking responsibility for your actions is hard. Cuz realizing the link between more money=more kids is hard. Cuz crying "what about the children" is so damn easy


No, but it can be expensive and/or hard to get. Why are you so intellectually dishonest? It actually hurts me physically how intellectually dishonest you are.
2012-10-25 10:05:22 AM
1 votes:

MyRandomName: With all the videos of acorn telling people how to game the system is filing a report when a rape really does occur so awful?


Not that I think you give half a shiat because you're about as vile as they come, but for anybody reading this it could be beneficial to point out the fact that rape victims often feel ashamed of their victimization, depressed, feel as though they're to blame and avoid reporting a rape as either a coping mechanism, because they're afraid of reprisal or because the abuser is a friend or family member and they feel conflicted about getting that person in trouble.

But, yea, I'm sure adding a pile of bureaucratic bullshiat on top of all that emotional baggage won't have any negative impact on rape victims at all. What's a little extra mental stress on a crime victim's head when you could also be punishing women who had sex consensually, right?

God, you and your kind are terrible, vicious and cruel human beings...
2012-10-25 09:49:17 AM
1 votes:

Brostorm:

You know family court doesnt work that way right? Please show me a valid cause of action where the court accepted the rapists argument ad it went to trial PRETTY PLEASE. These scare tactics are hilarious.



Here is a pretty good article, with citations from specific cases.
2012-10-25 09:36:50 AM
1 votes:

TheMysteriousStranger: Kome: In 31 states, a rapist can sue for custody. Seriously. Google it. This country affords more ways for a rapist to harm someone than every other crime.

This is pants on fire. Just because they did not explicitly say in the law "Rapists can't sue victims for custody, is not grounds for saying it allowed. If the law is followed, no one found guilty of rape can possibly get the child.

There is no state that will not consider being convicted by rape (or any felony) to be a HUGE black mark against someone trying wanting custody of a child. Indeed getting convicted of a sex crime puts draconian restrictions on the convicted pretty much everywhere. Equity also has a principle of Clean Hands (google it or stick it into Wikipedia) which clearly goes against any rapist. And laws for determining custody always mention things favoring the more fit parent and can you really see any court thinking that a rapist is a fit parent. Also in many places the law favors the mother and judges as a rule tend to favor the mother as well.

And since when are people in prison allowed to sue for custody of a child? If they admit to being a rapist then convicting them will be trivial and they won't get the kid. Or are you trying to say that 19 states will not allow someone who was accused, but not convicted, to sue? Well duh. Indeed if the Constitution is followed it will be 50 states. People really are supposed to be convicted to receive any sanction from the government.

No court that thinks the father is a rapist is going grant custody.


/ This being said, the Pennsylvania bill is asinine.



A couple of things. 1) A rapist will eventually get out of prison. 2) Rape is mostly about power. 3) Even if the rapist doesn't win, dragging their victim through months (and hundreds of dollars) of legal BS is just another way to victimize them. 4) the rapist may not get custody, but might get visitation (maybe supervised) meaning he will be in the life of the woman he raped at least until the kid is 18. Another way to exert power over their victim.

Or they could offer to drop the custody suit if the victim recants her story.
2012-10-25 09:31:49 AM
1 votes:

machoprogrammer: That doesn't make sense... The child of a person not on welfare isn't getting anything from the state, so they aren't getting treated better by the state.


The child of a person not currently recieving welfare would be protected by the social safety net if something goes wrong in their life. The child of a person currently on welfare is not protected. That's a difference
2012-10-25 09:24:12 AM
1 votes:

machoprogrammer: We need to get rid of incentives to have kids. Especially if you cannot afford them. Safety nets are great; and I am totally pro-social welfare programs, free birth control, universal healthcare (including abortions) and such. However, if you are already receiving welfare, you shouldn't get more money if you have a kid. If you have the kids (or get pregnant) before you start receiving welfare, that is another issue (bad luck happens), but once you are on it, don't have a kid.


At the same time, why should a child of a person on welfare be treated worse by the state than a child of someone not on welfare? What's more important, helping the child or punishing the parent?
2012-10-25 09:23:14 AM
1 votes:
You know, I don't think false claims of rape happen as much as people on here claim they do. I won't say how, but I know that even if you don't report it to the police, a regular old claim of "I think I was drugged and I may have been raped but I'm not sure" among friends WITHOUT naming the suspected rapist can cause your entire life to implode. Friends stop speaking to you, boyfriends dump you, and everyone you know close to you is scarred by it, because that knowledge will always be there.

I can't imagine that a majority of rape claims fall under these pretenses. So, we will punish the relatively few ..and what's worse, the children of all of them.
2012-10-25 09:16:45 AM
1 votes:
img.photobucket.com

American Taliban, how hard is it to go two weeks without mentioning or legislating rape? Just farking stop it. We get that you're terrible people and you hate women, but why the pile on right before election day? Is your God telling you to lose on purpose?
2012-10-25 09:10:16 AM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: However, any of his future victims would likely not.


I love how altruistic you expect a woman to be for the 'sake of all' but cannot spare that same altruism towards a child, no matter how it was conceived.

Has anyone asked what happens if it is the woman's first child that is born of rape but the second was not? Then what?
2012-10-25 09:07:00 AM
1 votes:

littleray42: All people on welfare are on it because they are irresponsible. I'm not saying that to be mean at all, it's just a fact.


I would argue that only two things really drive conservative morality: is us versus them, and punishment and reward. Worship of free markets, psychological dependence on dualistic religious schemes of heaven and hell, and even their apparent mass lack of empathy is really all about punishment and reward. If you didn't get rich enough with the right job, you deserve to be poor and die of untreated medical conditions. If you didn't keep your legs crossed, you deserve to be forced into childbirth. If you did anything to bring yourself under government suspicion, you deserve to be subject to police brutality and torture. The rest of the racial and religious aggression and resentment is just a function of tribal us versus them mentality. Sanctity, loyalty and authority aren't core values of the conservative mind, but simply functions of the principles of punishment and reward, and us versus them. Link 

Pegged.
2012-10-25 09:00:33 AM
1 votes:

Brostorm: Lost Thought 00: LiberalConservative: So poor people (starving or non-starving) should be entitled to a free pass on welfare fraud just because they are poor?

I'm not going to cry too much if someone who is dirt poor gets a little extra money than they deserve and can live their life just a little bit further from the brink of destruction


so fraud is ok if i makes you feel better? Continuing the cycle of people that cant afford kids having more kids generation after generation in larger numbers is ok because it makes you feel better? You are the problem


It shouldn't be fraud in the first place because the kid should be covered no matter how into it his mother was.
2012-10-25 08:56:49 AM
1 votes:
FFS its not about the mother its about the kid. The kid is born, it exists. Want to incentivise people to have less kids? Do it in a way that doesn't punish the kid that is already born.
2012-10-25 08:47:39 AM
1 votes:
In 31 states, a rapist can sue for custody. Seriously. Google it. This country affords more ways for a rapist to harm someone than every other crime.
2012-10-25 08:46:45 AM
1 votes:

LiberalConservative: Alphax: SandMann: Alphax: SandMann: Big deal.

If someone is claiming a government handout they should have to prove they qualify. It doesn't matter what it is. If not, the system will be abused.

What part of 'keeping desperately poor mothers and their children from starving' is something to be abused? Afraid they might double dip and get to eat until they're not hungry?

I know people who game the system. None of them face starvation.

You'll have to do better than that.

FFS. Help the small proportion of child starvation cases by providing targeted food/money, not by willfully allowing welfare fraud/rorting by a majority who are not starving.


Know how I know you've never been poor?
2012-10-25 08:32:12 AM
1 votes:

Tommy Moo: Calm down, subby. I'm with the GOP here. The article doesn't say she has to prove she was raped; it says she has to prove she reported it.

If you consider yourself an environmentalist, you have to confront the fact that we are overpopulated. Too many humans is the answer to virtually every economic, environmental, and social issue facing the 21st century. Now, it would be nice to fix the problem with unicorn farts and pixie dust, but in practice, the only way to slow population growth is to pass measures with financial teeth, such as refusing to give people more money for having more kids, whether that be through TANF or through tax deductions for the middle class. If we make parents confront the true cost of raising children and seriously police immigration, the population in this country will begin to decrease, as it desperately needs to.


Overpopulation is a global problem. Reducing the U.S. population, especially through anti-immigration measures, won't have much of an impact on that.

Let me say it again, for anyone who may have missed it. While fraud is a problem to be addressed, punishing the child for the poor choices of its parent is hardly a satisfactory solution. Anyone who can't look a child in the eye and say, "Sorry kid, I can't help feed you because your mother should never have had you," needs to stop advocating for things like "financial teeth" as a means to confront the issue of people on assistance making poor choices about family planning.
2012-10-25 08:29:54 AM
1 votes:

SandMann: Big deal.

If someone is claiming a government handout they should have to prove they qualify. It doesn't matter what it is. If not, the system will be abused.


What part of 'keeping desperately poor mothers and their children from starving' is something to be abused? Afraid they might double dip and get to eat until they're not hungry?
2012-10-25 08:25:48 AM
1 votes:
I volunteer as a victim's advocate. What that means is that when a rape victim shows up at an area hospital I will be called to go and be with that person, since they generally don't show up with moral support, and generally only have a vague idea of the process that goes on that comes from watching Law and Order SVU. They don't know that they are going to be spending the whole day at the hospital, first getting blood tests, then going through an invasive exam and evidence gathering session that can take upwards of six hours. And if they have decided to press charges at that point, they will be subject to several hours of police interrogation immediately after the exam. Sometimes going through the exam is too psychologically traumatic for someone. Sometimes there's virtually no chance of conviction because it is someone you were in a consensual sexual relationship with prior to the rape, and unless it was violent in a way that left bruises etc. that gets really difficult to prove. Sometimes you know these women would be putting themselves through hell for absolutely nothing.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm big in favor of reporting and prosecuting, and getting these people off the street so that they don't hurt anyone else. But it is far from a black and white issue. There have been times that I have sat in a room with a victim and a specially trained forensic nurse, and a police officer, in a situation where a victim is hesitant to press charges and none of us wants to really encourage her because we have all agreed that the chances of any kind of conviction was virtually nil because of various circumstances, even if none of us doubts that this person is telling us the truth. (I know that is vague, but I have confidentiality restrictions) And I wonder what is going to happen if these women go through the hell of reporting it, and the rapist is not convicted. Now she has a baby and a court has found that person not guilty due to lack of evidence. Now are we going to call her a liar and deny benefits? How is that supposed to work out?
2012-10-25 08:09:37 AM
1 votes:
Why are we still doing this? I mean, as a society, why is this still even a discussion? Didn't we decide this in the 60's and 70's? That it was OK for women to have sex, like sex, and to take responsibility for their reproduction - even when that responsibility meant having an abortion?

You can't decide to cut reproductive education, cut sources of and funding for reproductive services, and then make welfare benefits harder to get for women with children and label your reasoning as "pro-life" and "Christian" and "moral". You say that abortion punishes children, but what about the children that are born? Why are you punishing them to get at their mothers? Why their mothers? Motherhood is hard enough without having to justify how your children came to be conceived.

You're despicable. Genuinely despicable. Going backwards on women's rights is not the solution. Do some women need more out of welfare benefits than others? Yes. Give it to them. Also give them education, job training, therapy, birth control, child care, and whatever else they need to make being off welfare more profitable and comfortable than being on welfare.
2012-10-25 08:07:54 AM
1 votes:

Brostorm: Um, people on welfare getting more money because they cant keep it in their pants is a HUGE problem. Giving someone who just wants to have ore kids and get more aid from he state a free "more money" card o play is stupid. Its horrible is someone is raped and these welfare mothers that are should get the state aid for it. Just claiming they are raped, which happens because it is a "get out of paying for my stupidity" card should not be allowed.

Are we still under the impression that every rape claim is true and no woman would ever lie about it?


Do strangers ever punch you in the face for seemingly no reason? I mean I'm just curious.
2012-10-25 07:48:09 AM
1 votes:
I am genuinely surprised that a Republican politician hasn't just come out and simply said "Look, ladies, you owe us guys sex. So get over it. Call it rape, call it assault, call it whatever you like, but you owe it to men. And if you get pregnant as a result, that is either your fault for being a whore because the sex was out of wedlock or it is God's will, and you won't be allowed to have any say in the matter either way."

Because when you combine everything Republican politicians have said about rape, women's health, pregnancy, abortion, and women's place in society over the last 18 months that is the sum total of what they're saying. We don't even have to go back to the 1950s to find this repugnant sh*t, we can just look at the last year and a half.
2012-10-25 07:43:32 AM
1 votes:

Genevieve Marie: Yea, at this point, this stuff just makes me feel tired.

The anti-abortion movement is and always has been deeply rooted in the desire to control women and our bodies. This is one more glaring example. This one can't even make the dubious claim that it's about "protecting life". This one is about punishing slutty sluts for having sex.

This is the party of making sure that poor women can't afford contraception and preventative health services... and the same party that then says "Oh and if you get pregnant, we're not helping you take care of your punishment baby."

Also, lots of victims choose not to report rape for good reasons. This is pretty well established as fact.


If the rape baby is god's intention and your blessing ; wouldn't not feeding the baby bring god's wrath down upon somebody?
2012-10-25 05:57:18 AM
1 votes:
Oh, goddamnit. Just when you think your political party couldn't get any more freaking stupid, they go and prove you wrong.

The modern Republican party: Bought and paid for by religious extremism. Farking idiots.
2012-10-25 05:35:09 AM
1 votes:

letrole: DNRTFA
DNRTFT

It's easier to cry rape than face the fact that you're a whore.


1/10
the 1 is for the outrage, otherwise that trolling would have zero troll worthy qualities.
2012-10-25 05:15:57 AM
1 votes:
Mark Gillen (R): Old, white republican dude, alma mater - Bob farking Jones University ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_M._Gillen )

Keith Gillespie, old, white, republican dude, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_J._Gillespie

RoseMarie Swanger, white republican lady, college dropout, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoseMarie_Swanger

Mike Tobash, old white republican dude, elected as part of the teabagger wave in 2010, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Tobash

God damn. That's a big ol' wave of derp right there.
2012-10-25 05:14:17 AM
1 votes:

Bullroarer_Took: (They're writing the exception into it because they don't want to appear insensitive, yet want to still appear tough.)


That's what this mish-mash looks like to me too.

Look at us being all tuff on Welfare Queens and so compassionate to li'l rape-babbies!

4 Repugs and a token blue dog Dem in PA.

Go figure.
2012-10-25 05:03:26 AM
1 votes:

orbister: Genevieve Marie: It always amazes me that the best comparison many men can come up with for rape is property crime. It's... a very dehumanizing way to discuss the subject.

Just as dehumanising as those who think it's only the woman's body that matters.


What other body is involved?
2012-10-25 04:59:39 AM
1 votes:
R is for Racism. R is for Rape. R is for Rednecks. R is for Radical and Religious.

R is for Republican.
2012-10-25 04:59:24 AM
1 votes:

Bhruic: For the record, while 4 of the people who proposed this were Republicans, the 5th was a Democrat.


For the record, you're not very good at counting to six. Both sides are not equally bad.
2012-10-25 04:58:38 AM
1 votes:

Ebbelwoi: I'm hard pressed to imagine there are that many rape pregnancies to justify writing this into the law. What seems silly is that if a poor Republican woman on benefits gets accidentally pregnant (busted rubber, whatever), and then doesn't have an abortion based on her religious beliefs, the the law will punish her for not believing in abortion. People have a right to have sex and frankly accidents can happen to anyone.


The law is written to deal with non-rape pregnancies. The rapes are exceptions to the law.

Still stupid though.

Will create many more problems than the few it hopes to solve.
2012-10-25 04:56:01 AM
1 votes:

orbister: Genevieve Marie: It always amazes me that the best comparison many men can come up with for rape is property crime. It's... a very dehumanizing way to discuss the subject.

Just as dehumanising as those who think it's only the woman's body that matters.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, unless that's an attempt to subtly suggest that abortion kills a child (which is a constantly argued point). But, in cases of rape (and contraception) it is only the woman's body that matters.
2012-10-25 04:38:04 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: The Southern Dandy: sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: Alphax: OW! I just bruised my forehead.


Right there with you.

Very logical responses...not surprising coming from people who can't even tell that the headline of the article is a blatant lie that contradicts the actual law in question.

[englishedithelp.files.wordpress.com image 300x200]

Trouble reading? The headline says that the applicant must prove that she was raped. The law says that she must certify that she reported that she was raped. They contradict each other as to what is required of a welfare applicant.


Maybe you need to lookup the word contra and the word dict. "proved that she was raped" is not the opposite of "certify she reported she was raped". The are different, but not contra.
Comprehend English much?
2012-10-25 04:37:41 AM
1 votes:

dramboxf: Just to be specific, and you can quote me:

Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.

Without fail.


Not at all! It's only to punish those evil women if they have the temerity to like or enjoy sex. Now men, we get to manwhore it up all we want and it's OK. Though if we're poor we probably deserve to be punished too.

Look at virtually any of the far-right pricks who rant about "family values" and invariably at some point seem to get caught doing something kinky (bathroom tapping), creepy (Bachmann at the lesbian rally comes to mind...), gay (too many to list), and/or serially adulterous ("Newt likes blowjobs"). On rare occasions managing all four at once (Ted Haggard comes to mind)...

But it's OK, because they say how much they love Jesus. And the dumbasses just lap it up. Oy, I am so not looking forward to how these people are going to melt down on election day because I'm legitimately afraid of what they'll do.

/Inb4 simpering "b b but it's OK because some Dem once did something bad"
//lol, not a chance...
2012-10-25 04:30:27 AM
1 votes:

Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.


What about the women who will feel forced to falsely report a rape? I'm not saying this will happen in a majority of cases, but you know it'll happen. There will be policemen wasting time following up on the false reports. There will be more actual rapes reported-which is probably a good thing (in most instances)-but the false reports will likely make the officers jaded (think "crying wolf"). The already taxed justice system will be gummed up in this SNAFU. What about the people who will be falsely arrested or convicted because a woman was scared that her baby (that was conceived unintentionally) would go hungry if she didn't report her one-night stand as a rape.

I think if this law is enacted: outreach groups ought to hand out flyers with the names and pictures and identifying characteristics (height, weight, birthmarks, eye color, vehicle description, etc.) of the people that proposed it-that way when a woman feels a need to report a rape to feed her baby-she can ID someone who will have the resources to fight it in court instead of giving cops binders full of suspect descriptions to pull out whenever they want to harass someone but can't find a legitimate reason. You know this law will lead to false reporting, false arrests and ultimately-false convictions.

Good jorb, douches.
2012-10-25 04:30:24 AM
1 votes:

Genevieve Marie: blindpreacher: Genevieve Marie: blindpreacher: Links, citations, Win


blindpreacher just got legitimately raped via the internet.
2012-10-25 04:07:47 AM
1 votes:

Mr. Carpenter: bonobo73: "I'm pregnant again."
"Why? You know this eliminates your benefits"
"I was raped."
"Ok. Did you report the assault?"
"No, it was my pimp that raped me and if I tell the police it was my pimp I'll go to prison for prostitution and then when I get out he'll slit my throat and put my body in a dumpster and no one will so much as bat an eyelash.."
"But you want me to believe that you were raped."
"Yes."
"Even though you're providing no proof whatsoever."
"Yes."
"And even if the sex was consensual, it's in your best interests to lie about being raped to keep your benefits."
"Yep."
...

Welcome to the really real world asshole, where fathers rape their stepdaughters and husbands rape their wives. Where 14 year old girls have sex with strangers for food and drugs and some men would just as soon as kill you and your unborn child then face ever having to pay child support. The world is a scary farked up place and apparently you've been lucky enough to avoid the vast vast vast majority of it's terrors. So how about you go rest your head on your $5k bed set and let adults deal with he aftermath of what your ignorance breeds.

part of that includes giving women an anonymous support network so the men in their life don't gut them like fish and dump them in a lake.


Oh yeah, bold part is my real world addition to your little welfare queen fantasy.
2012-10-25 04:05:02 AM
1 votes:
Whats next? Two male witnesses required as like Sharia Law?

Sounds more like a porn shoot.
2012-10-25 04:03:46 AM
1 votes:

vrax: Oooh, a rape incentive program!


This was my first thought.

/Well, second technically, behind "Hmmm, Rape-publicans really like rape", of course.

Who decided it would be a good idea to pay an extra benefit to women who raise their God's PlanTM approved rape-babbies in the first place?
2012-10-25 04:00:52 AM
1 votes:
I'd foward this to the local blog everyone in my town reads, but...

I live in rube farking retards rural PA.

And they will just say something about obummer's communist conspirator huffington made it up to keep the welfare funding going to ALL the obama voters (because they know, KNOW, those are the only people that vote for him).

You can meet the nicest people going out for a beer and a pool game. You really can.
But don't mention politics unless you want to end the night killing after losing all faith in humanity.
2012-10-25 04:00:41 AM
1 votes:
The report it and you have to name your attacker part seems especially stupid- not all women know their rapist. Not only does it seem designed to be assholish and punitive to women, it also creates a financial incentive for a woman to name a specific man as her rapist. Now....I believe the vast majority of women wouldn't just pick some guy they really really hate, but you know there's going to be one or two vicious crackheads or meth addicts who do. This seems stupid on every single level.
2012-10-25 03:55:29 AM
1 votes:

blindpreacher: 1) The article doesn't mention birth control or abortions once. The only reason it's brought up in this thread is because it loosely fits the narrative that Republicans are united in taking away women's rights. The bill was co sponsored by a Democrat for crying out loud.


Birth control and abortion were brought up because the natural argument against "too many welfare babies" is "make it easier for there to be fewer babies". It's disingenuous to suggest that women should be denied the ability to reduce the output of children and also be denied assistance in supporting the children they were denied the ability to keep from having.

At some point, legislators have to say something other than "No" on everything that would benefit women.
2012-10-25 03:54:42 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: sticky2shoes: If you weren't raped, you had control. If you were raped, the law still allows you to get welfare.


Ah, and we are right back to the idea that poor women should just be abstinent unless they're in a committed relationship and are  wealthy enough to afford children or birth control.

Because that is totally realistic and an excellent basis for determining policy.

*facepalm*
You're the one who said "all the tools" to control reproduction have been taken away. One of those tools is--gasp--abstinence. If you don't want to use it, fine, but don't come knocking on my door demanding money to pay for your voluntary decisions.


Yea, somehow I doubt these women are actually knocking on your door to demand your help. A very miniscule portion of your tax dollars goes to help the poorest people in this country eke out a basic standard of living.

If you really have a problem with that, I don't know what to tell you. You're ostensibly a grown up. Paying taxes is part of the deal, and making sure kids get fed is one of the more reasonable ways tax dollars are used. 
2012-10-25 03:49:49 AM
1 votes:

blindpreacher: Genevieve Marie: Ah, and we are right back to the idea that poor women should just be abstinent unless they're in a committed relationship and are  wealthy enough to afford children or birth control.

Because that is totally realistic and an excellent basis for determining policy.

*facepalm*

I agree with you that birth control and access to abortions should be made as available as possible to all women in this country.

I even can see the point that it's counter productive to cut women off from welfare increases when they have more children while already on the government tit. It's a similar argument to why it's counter productive to drug test all welfare recipients.

But what is I find so disingenuous is:

1) The article doesn't mention birth control or abortions once. The only reason it's brought up in this thread is because it loosely fits the narrative that Republicans are united in taking away women's rights. The bill was co sponsored by a Democrat for crying out loud.

2) The mention of 'rape' is emotionally charged, but if one reads the language it's actually meant as an exception to allow a woman to continue to receive an increase in government benefits. If you want to rag on the concept behind what comes down to a bill meant to hold welfare recipients responsible for their actions instead of taxpayers being on the hook for them, then fine, but the portion where it grants an exception to this is not the part to do it. The only reason that part is a big deal in this thread is because of four charged letters.


1) You have to live alone in a cave to ignore what Republicans are doing to restrict women's rights. You can't ignore that.

2) Poor people already have it bad off. Trying to make it worse for them is pure malice.
2012-10-25 03:49:13 AM
1 votes:

blindpreacher: 1) The article doesn't mention birth control or abortions once. The only reason it's brought up in this thread is because it loosely fits the narrative that Republicans are united in taking away women's rights. The bill was co sponsored by a Democrat for crying out loud.


Do you really need it spelled out that when legislators work to close clinics and restrict abortion rights and then turn around and try to make sure that women who have children can't get basic assistance, they're putting poor women in an impossible situation?

 
2012-10-25 03:48:22 AM
1 votes:

Genevieve Marie: It's almost like these guys are all anti-choice and yet pro-punishing poor women for having babies!


They prefer "pro-life"

...oddly enough 
2012-10-25 03:45:20 AM
1 votes:
Oh dammit. On my link for Swanger, I accidentally copied Princess Madeleine's engagement announcement instead. (Which by the way, was far more interesting than this thread)

Here's her voting record: http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/60129/rosemarie-swanger/2/ab o rtion-issues#.UIjuAxiVg7A 
2012-10-25 03:44:00 AM
1 votes:

blindpreacher: Genevieve Marie: blindpreacher: No where in the article is it mentioned the bill is trying to limit access to birth control or abortions. You're trying to fit the article to your own narrative.


Yea, you're either being willfully obtuse or you've only just now awakened from a Rip Van Winkleesque sleep and you've missed the last two or three years of legislation on contraceptive access and abortion rights.

In the Pennsylvania House by the same four Republicans and one Democrat that are sponsoring this bill?


I am exceedingly irked that I had to turn away from a fun thread to be your research assistant but here you go, the record of the six people that sponsored this bill:

RoseMarie Swanger: http://www.kungahuset.se/kungafamiljen/aktuellahandelser/aktuellt2012 o ktoberdecember/prinsessanmadeleineochherrchristopheroneillforlovade.5. 292a62ce13848168ac52a4e.html?state=showFolder&skip=2&sv.url=12.292a62c e13848168ac52a54&folderId=19.292a62ce13848168ac52a5a 

Summary: Voted against allowing insurance to cover abortions and voted for building codes on abortion clinics that were designed to force closures.

Thomas Caltagirone: http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/9097/thomas-caltagirone/2/ab o rtion-issues#.UIjsWxiVg7A 

Summary: same as Swanger

Gillen: http://votesmart.org/candidate/119604/mark-gillen?categoryId=2#.UIjst x iVg7A 

Summary: Funnily enough! Same record as the other two

Gillespie: http://votesmart.org/candidate/46909/keith-gillespie?categoryId=2#.UI j s5hiVg7A 

Summary: OMG! SAME VOTES AS ALL THE OTHERS! I THINK I AM GOING TO HAVE A HEART ATTACK AND DIE FROM THE SURPRISE

Harris: http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/46957/c-adam-harris/2/aborti o n-issues#.UIjtIRiVg7A 

Summary: Motherfarker. Same goddamned record. It's almost like these guys are all anti-choice and yet pro-punishing poor women for having babies! SHOCKED I TELL YOU, SHOCKED

Tobash: http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/119600/mike-tobash/2/abortio n -issues#.UIjtdhiVg7A

Summary: You're a bad person and should feel bad about yourself for making me research very, very obvious truths. 
2012-10-25 03:43:41 AM
1 votes:
Where is the bill requiring a woman who gets pregnant while already claiming the EITC for one or more existing children to prove she reported the rape or incest that caused her current pregnancy before she is allowed another EITC deduction?

These welfare queens popping out another kid every year just to get another $3,500 of MY tax dollars must be stopped! I'm looking at you Mrs. Duggar!
2012-10-25 03:25:30 AM
1 votes:

blindpreacher: Feh, did any of you morons even read the article?

The Pennsylvania House is trying to pass a bill that if a woman is already on TANF she can't get an increase in benefits if she conceives and gives birth again. And what really is wrong with that? If you're on government assistance already why should you get more taxpayer money by having another kid? Shouldn't a woman be expected to control her reproductive situation? So with that, this bill has an exception saying that if a woman can show she was raped and decides to have the child then she will be granted an exception.

Meaning, she's being held responsible for her own actions, but if she gets pregnant outside of her control(yes, rape, as horrible as that is) she'll be granted an exception and receive more government assistance for the child. The whole rape exception is the government acknowledging that if a woman is raped, gets pregnant, and doesn't want to abort the baby, the government(meaning you, me, the taxpayer) will provide for the baby. It's an exception made out of compassion, you dolts.

And by the way, there was a Democrat who sponsored the bill.

But hey, don't actually put any effort into reading and thinking, that might actually cause a a new synapse to form between two nuerons in that thick skull of yours. Much easier to get pissed, turn to your own preconceived notions about the other team, and rage on fark.


Yes, we all understand the article. Fully. It's offensive. It's about time for another "Lucky Ducky" cartoon about the people who defend this shiat.
2012-10-25 03:23:09 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Unless you just think that there is no such thing as a welfare queen, which is outright delusional.



There is no such thing as a welfare queen. That implies that welfare provides a very high standard of living, which is a blantant mischaracterization. Also, welfare benefits in this country are not permanent and have time restrictions imposed, unless someone is disabled and unable to work.

So yes, I think it's quite delusional to think there are people living on easy street because of government benefits.
2012-10-25 03:22:24 AM
1 votes:
Feh, did any of you morons even read the article?

The Pennsylvania House is trying to pass a bill that if a woman is already on TANF she can't get an increase in benefits if she conceives and gives birth again. And what really is wrong with that? If you're on government assistance already why should you get more taxpayer money by having another kid? Shouldn't a woman be expected to control her reproductive situation? So with that, this bill has an exception saying that if a woman can show she was raped and decides to have the child then she will be granted an exception.

Meaning, she's being held responsible for her own actions, but if she gets pregnant outside of her control(yes, rape, as horrible as that is) she'll be granted an exception and receive more government assistance for the child. The whole rape exception is the government acknowledging that if a woman is raped, gets pregnant, and doesn't want to abort the baby, the government(meaning you, me, the taxpayer) will provide for the baby. It's an exception made out of compassion, you dolts.

And by the way, there was a Democrat who sponsored the bill.

But hey, don't actually put any effort into reading and thinking, that might actually cause a a new synapse to form between two nuerons in that thick skull of yours. Much easier to get pissed, turn to your own preconceived notions about the other team, and rage on fark.
2012-10-25 03:18:18 AM
1 votes:

ThrobblefootSpectre: ExperianScaresCthulhu: i don't see the problem with reporting rape if you have been raped.
instead of making it a punishment, make it a 'reward' or 'normal'.

if you're going to accuse someone of raping you, that's serious business.
it's just not right that rape is the only crime where someone's word
is supposed to be 'good enough'. .. and there is no defense for the falsely accused.

you want to claim rape, do the right thing: press charges.
or shut the fk up.


It is a very emotionally charged subject, and it's difficult to take any sort of objective practical position without being labeled a nazi baby killer rapist cannibal. But, in some circumstances I can see the point of this. I can't, for example, make an insurance claim for a robbery, if I never reported a robbery to the police and can't prove anything was taken.


It's money to feed the children of desperately poor women. You people will come up with any justification so you don't have to shell out a few pennies for people who aren't you/your family that you like.

Also, pretty much every guy that opens his mouth and says "women should have to prove they were raped or they should shut up" has no women in his life who think he's worth opening up too about anything bad that has happened to them - they know you have no sympathy.
2012-10-25 03:17:50 AM
1 votes:

SanchezSucio: I love all this Hate Mongering by "tolerant open minded liberals" talking about what hate mongers all Republicans are.


If you Publicans don't want to be called evil, then stop promoting evil policies.

You want to defund the welfare queens? So do I. The likes of Halliburton, Northrup Grumman and Monsanto can get bootstrappy and make their own damn profits. Rmoney, OTOH, has already started beating the war drums against Iran. It's one of the few things he hasn't flip-flopped on.
2012-10-25 03:14:52 AM
1 votes:

dramboxf: Just to be specific, and you can quote me:

Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.

Without fail.


Anti-f**king is gender neutral. Or rather, would or should affect either gender. The anti-abortion platform has been, and will always be, the anti-women-enjoying-sex-for-the-sake-of-sex platform.
2012-10-25 03:10:57 AM
1 votes:

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Parmenius: What ever happened to the Fark(tm) proposal to start referring to the GOP as the "White Male Christian Nationalist Party"?

Too long... Maybe the National Social Party.


They're hardly social. Maybe they should be called the National Anti-Social Independent Party.

/I did NASI that
2012-10-25 03:06:35 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Irrelevant question, but the answer is no since you're curious.


It is relevant, considering the confirmation bias in your earlier post.

"Welfare Queens', shows you WANT to believe the worst. Everyone having kids before they can "afford" them is irresponsible.

The average cost of a child is about a million dollars to 18 years old. You think everyone who has a kid without having a million bucks on hand is "irresponsible", or do you plan to equivocate?

You are clearly angry, lack empathy, and (I'm guessing) consider yourself a "Libertarian" or some other BS that allows you to justify (to yourself) being such a close minded, shiatty human being.
2012-10-25 03:04:24 AM
1 votes:
i don't see the problem with reporting rape if you have been raped.
instead of making it a punishment, make it a 'reward' or 'normal'.

if you're going to accuse someone of raping you, that's serious business.
it's just not right that rape is the only crime where someone's word
is supposed to be 'good enough'. .. and there is no defense for the falsely accused.

you want to claim rape, do the right thing: press charges.
or shut the fk up.
2012-10-25 03:01:54 AM
1 votes:
This provision accomplishes nothing. There's not a deadline on when a woman can file rape charges. So, if a woman with a (for example) six month old child (product of rape or not) files for assistance and is told she has one kid too many, she can simply call the cops and report that she was raped fifteen months ago (whether that's the case or not) and has no idea who attacked her. She gets her police report, she gets her assistance, nothing changes except the woman, already in a desperate state, had to bear the added insult of being treated like a second class citizen.

This does not encourage women to report rapes, though it could be argued it encourages the filing of false claims. It makes it harder to get assistance. I can't stand the mentality that making a child suffer is a productive way to punish that child's parent (which is what happens when "x" number of children get assistance but "x+1" is too many). I understand preventing abuse of the system is a desirable goal, but treating people with a sense of humanity should also be a desirable goal.

Hey, wanna reduce the number of "welfare queens" in the country? Stop cutting the farking education budget. Stop restricting contraception and abortion. Stop treating women like they're all slutty whores.
2012-10-25 03:00:14 AM
1 votes:

I sound fat: Not that this would drive me away on its own, but the cumulative not giving a crap about people who arent them....

I am DONE with the republican party. Ive been telling myself Im going to vote for Gary Johnson, but I am still basically a republican, but the social side of the republican party is just not something I am comfortable associating with.


This law is even more libertarian (low taxes, no using power of the government to force people to donate money to poor people) than traditionally Republican (subsidizing childrearing because "be fruitful and multiply", discourage abortion, etc.)
2012-10-25 02:56:00 AM
1 votes:

I sound fat: Not that this would drive me away on its own, but the cumulative not giving a crap about people who arent them....

I am DONE with the republican party. Ive been telling myself Im going to vote for Gary Johnson, but I am still basically a republican, but the social side of the republican party is just not something I am comfortable associating with.


You think Libertarians give a shiat about other people??!?!
2012-10-25 02:53:31 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: mediablitz: sticky2shoes: What a dumb comment.

Yes, your comment certainly is.

"Pro-life", are ya?

Huh? How is a law that encourages people to get more abortions by cutting off welfare "pro-life"?


I'm asking YOU if you consider yourself "pro-life".

Simple question
2012-10-25 02:46:54 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: Alphax: 'Demanding that taxpayers give her free money'. That's loaded language.


Yes it is. This virulent hatred for the people in this country who are the most marginalized is reallly depressing. I'm really tired of people acting like poverty is indcative of some great moral failing and the corollary, that wealth is proof of moral superiority and responsibility.

Not having a baby from consensual sex when you can't afford to raise a child IS proof of responsibility.


Whether or not someone can afford to raise a child is something that can change without notice in the space of a DAY. Just the way the wealthy like it.
2012-10-25 02:42:34 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: Alphax: OW! I just bruised my forehead.


Right there with you.

Very logical responses...not surprising coming from people who can't even tell that the headline of the article is a blatant lie that contradicts the actual law in question.


englishedithelp.files.wordpress.com
2012-10-25 02:36:03 AM
1 votes:

sticky2shoes: Genevieve Marie: Talondel: It doesn't even say that. It says they have to submit a signed, notarized statement indicating that she reported it to the authorities. A law that encourages the reporting of rape to the proper authorities? The horror. Truly PA republicans are monsters.

You're kidding right? You really think a rape vicitm's first thought upon being raped is going to be "Oh, I've just been raped! Clearly I need to go to the police right now because if I don't and I get pregnant and can't afford to raise a child, a year or so from now I'm going to be totally screwed."

Because I'm pretty sure for most people, it's more like numbness, rage, grief, horror, anger and the general beginnings of PTSD.

You made up the part where she has to report it immediately. The law only says that she has to report it before demanding that taxpayers give her free money.


'Demanding that taxpayers give her free money'. That's loaded language. And makes it sound bad that we're helping the least among us. How unchristian of you.
2012-10-25 02:32:49 AM
1 votes:
Oooh, a rape incentive program!
2012-10-25 02:30:31 AM
1 votes:

Alphax: OW! I just bruised my forehead.



Right there with you.
2012-10-25 02:30:12 AM
1 votes:
It's Catch-22 Yossarian. You can't have an abortion unless you were raped, but if you were legitimately raped, you don't NEED an abortion because your body will protect itself from the sperm, so you can't have an abortion.
2012-10-25 02:28:36 AM
1 votes:

andino: It kind of makes you wonder how many of these Republican politicians are rapists themselves. Not necessarily recently, but more likely when they were in high school or college. They may have committed their crimes years ago, but they still are, and always will be, rapists.

How else can you explain their sympathy--and even affinity--for rapists?


What a dumb comment. The law is AGAINST rapists. It gives rape victims a financial incentive to report their rape to the police, which allows the rape to be investigated, so the rapist can get caught and be stopped from raping more women. Rape is already underreported, so they're putting a financial benefit behind speaking out, and at the same time, preserving limited tax resources to help rape victims instead of welfare queens who get pregnant irresponsibly and expect everyone else to pay for their decisions.
2012-10-25 02:24:24 AM
1 votes:

GAT_00: Fark It: If the GOP really cared about clamping down on welfare or at least getting more out of it they'd require that welfare recipients who are not employed volunteer at least 20 hours a week.

So your solution to reducing welfare is to make volunteering a job? You realize you can't call it volunteering if you're required to do it right? Then it's a job that you aren't being paid for.


Ooh, I know a word for being forced to do a job you aren't paid for. That's a great thing to associate with racially-charged issues like welfare.

I'll bet that's something Republicans want to bring back. How ironic that one of them ended it. Today's Republicans would have despised Lincoln.
2012-10-25 02:23:03 AM
1 votes:
Seriously, the ONLY reason to write a bill like this is malice towards poor women.
2012-10-25 02:22:40 AM
1 votes:

Talondel: LadyHawke: Well, to be fair, it says they have to prove they reported they were raped, not prove they were raped.

It doesn't even say that. It says they have to submit a signed, notarized statement indicating that she reported it to the authorities. A law that encourages the reporting of rape to the proper authorities? The horror. Truly PA republicans are monsters.

Oh, and I like how Huff Po goes from "prove they were raped" in the headline to "prove that she reported her assault" in the article, and then three paragraphs in reveal that both the headline and the opening sentence were lies. Your blog sucks.dramboxf: Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.

This isn't anti-abortion legislation. It's anti 'get pregnant while poor and on welfare' legislation, which contains an exception for women who were victims of rape or incest and reported it (or are willing to submit a signed notarized statement that they reported it).

MorrisBird: They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims.

They may well be doing that in other places, but this isn't one of them. This is waging a war on 'welfare moms' that contains an exception for rape victims.

There's plenty not to like about this bill, but so far Huff Po and the vast majority of the people posting in this thread are too farking stupid to figure out what it actually is.


As much as I hate the right wing if people read TFA it's a non issue that has nothing to do with proving rape and everything to do with making people on public aid act like responsible adults I wish I could find something wrong with the bill just because it was introduced by republicans but it looks like the blind squrril found a nutt for the first time in 10 years
2012-10-25 02:22:08 AM
1 votes:
Heh, subby said "inserted". Heh.
2012-10-25 02:14:30 AM
1 votes:
Wait, why are they bothering with this shiat? There ARE NO RAPE BABIES. Aren't these the same buttholes that believe a woman can't get pregnant if she's raped?

/Illegitimate legislation is illegitimate.
2012-10-25 02:11:37 AM
1 votes:

0Icky0: I'm waiting for the bills that make your prove your miscarriages were natural.
You know they are coming. In fact, they will HAVE to come if Roe v Wade is ever overturned.


Creepy but possible.
2012-10-25 02:11:10 AM
1 votes:
I'm glad all of this crazy shiat is coming out now, before the election. Faux News viewers will never hear about it, but the rest of the country sure as fark will.
2012-10-25 02:09:45 AM
1 votes:
I'm waiting for the bills that make your prove your miscarriages were natural.
You know they are coming. In fact, they will HAVE to come if Roe v Wade is ever overturned.
2012-10-25 02:08:44 AM
1 votes:
ok honestly - I'm confused. So it's ok for a woman to claim - in welfare benefits - that she was raped...without having actually filed a charge with anyone? The woman isn't required to prove anything other than that she filed a report - the burden of proof of the actual crime isn't on her. Normally I'd be all "ah, another stupid anti-human (both genders, lets be real here) repub law..." but...really? Misleading rewording of headline much, subby? What exactly is /wrong/ about what they're doing here?
2012-10-25 02:08:31 AM
1 votes:

Fark Me To Tears: MorrisBird: What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.

No. Actually they're gaining votes by going after all the ignorant bigots out there with crap like this. They know -- well, most of them know -- that this kind of logic is cynical and messed-up, but they also know it works.


Exactly, and, in many ways for me, that's the most disgusting part of it all, it's not that they all actually believe this f**kery that they're spouting, it's that they're simply playing the game to win the votes, preying on the "ignant" extremists who still view women as the purveyors of all sin and thus sacrificing innocent people upon the altar for their gorram votes. I wish some of the victims would just flood into their office, demanding to speak to them face to face and not leave until those slimy bastards had to actually defend their causes to real people, not just speeches given to a crowd of supporters and surrounded by twenty bodyguards and police.

/rant
//yeah, it'll never happen, accountability being nonexistent in politics
2012-10-25 02:07:35 AM
1 votes:

LadyHawke: Well, to be fair, it says they have to prove they reported they were raped, not prove they were raped.


It doesn't even say that. It says they have to submit a signed, notarized statement indicating that she reported it to the authorities. A law that encourages the reporting of rape to the proper authorities? The horror. Truly PA republicans are monsters.

Oh, and I like how Huff Po goes from "prove they were raped" in the headline to "prove that she reported her assault" in the article, and then three paragraphs in reveal that both the headline and the opening sentence were lies. Your blog sucks.

dramboxf: Anti-abortion legislation is always, and without fail, anti-f**king legislation.


This isn't anti-abortion legislation. It's anti 'get pregnant while poor and on welfare' legislation, which contains an exception for women who were victims of rape or incest and reported it (or are willing to submit a signed notarized statement that they reported it).

MorrisBird: They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims.


They may well be doing that in other places, but this isn't one of them. This is waging a war on 'welfare moms' that contains an exception for rape victims.

There's plenty not to like about this bill, but so far Huff Po and the vast majority of the people posting in this thread are too farking stupid to figure out what it actually is.
2012-10-25 02:07:12 AM
1 votes:

andino: How else can you explain their sympathy--and even affinity--for rapists?


80% of serial killers are Republicans.
2012-10-25 12:32:13 AM
1 votes:

Weaver95: And people wondered why I switched to Democrat....

keep this up and i'm going to have to actually run for office.


Dibs on being your chief of staff.
2012-10-25 12:21:23 AM
1 votes:
Drafted by Pennsylvania lawmakers - State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R).
2012-10-25 12:03:22 AM
1 votes:

LadyHawke: Well, to be fair, it says they have to prove they reported they were raped, not prove they were raped.



Well, in any case, they're gonna' fill a lot of that vacant prison space.


/Create jobs
2012-10-25 12:01:38 AM
1 votes:
FTA: "According to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network, 54 percent of rapes and sexual assaults are not reported to the police."


And those are just the ones that are reported as not being reported.
2012-10-24 11:50:37 PM
1 votes:
Rich, white people seem to enjoy the rape culture. I guess they either call them family reunions or slumming.
2012-10-24 10:12:44 PM
1 votes:

Parmenius: What ever happened to the Fark(tm) proposal to start referring to the GOP as the "White Male Christian Nationalist Party"?


Too long... Maybe the National Social Party.
2012-10-24 09:12:07 PM
1 votes:

Nadie_AZ: A bill in the Pennsylvania House proposing the reduction of welfare benefits for low-income women contains a provision requiring a woman who became pregnant from rape to prove that she reported her assault.

As ThinkProgress reported, the measure, proposed by five Republican state lawmakers, seeks to eliminate an increase in benefits if a child is conceived while a woman is covered under the Temporary Assistance To Needy Family program. A woman can seek an exception to this if the child is conceived as a result of rape. However, she must prove that she reported the incident to the authorities and gave the police her assaulter's identity

Jesus Christ, you heartless bastards.

Ok, this is clearly a unified thing the GOP is pushing. But why? Simply because 'abortion bad, even in case of rape, oh rape is bad, well let's change that'?


Because WELFARE QUEENS

/these are puerile, sexually repressed control freaks we're dealing with here
2012-10-24 09:01:57 PM
1 votes:
For the record, I do not support this bill or those who sponsored it.
 
Displayed 160 of 160 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report