Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(MLive.com)   Despite the ability to "shut that whole thing down," Republicans propose women buy rape insurance   ( mlive.com) divider line
    More: Sick, Republicans, Whitmer, Michigan Legislature, Rick Snyder, Party leaders of the United States Senate  
•       •       •

4922 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Dec 2013 at 10:27 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



374 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-03 08:38:33 AM  
Thats one beautiful lady
 
2013-12-03 08:41:51 AM  
Are they trying to out outlandish each other now?
 
2013-12-03 08:44:06 AM  
This whole rape thing is great for raping women but what if I told you we could profit from it too?
 
2013-12-03 08:46:21 AM  

Fafai: what if I told you we could profit from it too?


Rape tax? Republicans get rape legislation, Democrats get a tax. it's a total win/win
 
2013-12-03 08:46:40 AM  
Proposing it is an amazing dick move.  Following one dick move with another doesn't make sense.

Perhaps proposing a law making it the responsibility of the rapist to pay for any and all costs would make more sense.  Said perp has no means to pay?  He's doing time and working until he's paid back the state for the costs they covered.  Of course, that sort of thing might amount to slave labor.  Making someone work for no or little pay is far, far worse than rape...because money.  Go ahead and rape money and see what happens to you.
 
2013-12-03 08:47:56 AM  
FTFA: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

Geeze lady, how else are you going to lower the rate of unplanned pregnancies, besides making people plan for them?

Seems like a smart strategy to me.
 
2013-12-03 08:54:33 AM  
Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.
 
2013-12-03 08:54:54 AM  
Outrageous!  Women should get their rape insurance for free from the Federal government.
 
2013-12-03 08:56:44 AM  

BravadoGT: Outrageous!  Women should get their rape insurance for free from the Federal government.


No that's just ridiculous. They just have to plan the rapes to coincide with Obama's mandatory annual abortions.
 
2013-12-03 08:59:49 AM  

Elegy: FTFA: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

Geeze lady, how else are you going to lower the rate of unplanned pregnancies, besides making people plan for them?

Seems like a smart strategy to me.


That's silly. Parenthood cannot be planned. It is simply God's will. And sometimes it is God's will that children be conceived by way of legitimate rape.
 
2013-12-03 09:02:49 AM  

Elegy: FTFA: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

Geeze lady, how else are you going to lower the rate of unplanned pregnancies, besides making people plan for them?

Seems like a smart strategy to me.


Other than having that insurance may turn a jury at a rape trial, especially if there are enough of your 'peers' that support this POS
 
2013-12-03 09:05:27 AM  
We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.
 
2013-12-03 09:15:49 AM  
mlpchan.netView Full Size
thumbnails.hulu.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 09:26:13 AM  
How about if you all come up with 'Republican' insurance? Next time the GOP are elected, the insurance companies have to pay out. Don't know what the premiums would be, but it might be worth it.

/dumb idea of the week
 
2013-12-03 09:32:42 AM  

gopher321: How about if you all come up with 'Republican' insurance? Next time the GOP are elected, the insurance companies have to pay out. Don't know what the premiums would be, but it might be worth it.

/dumb idea of the week


R-ape insurance?
 
2013-12-03 09:34:17 AM  
The Rapublican Party.
 
2013-12-03 09:43:03 AM  
If every woman were required to carry rape insurance I'm pretty sure my new pick up line would be "Just let it happen, you have insurance."
 
2013-12-03 09:44:22 AM  
Is it legitimate rape insurance or just rape insurance?

When will the GOP learn to just stay completely clear of any subject related to rape.
 
2013-12-03 09:44:31 AM  
deanwintersfans.files.wordpress.comView Full Size


Mayhem gets raped?
 
2013-12-03 09:46:26 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.


pimphop.comView Full Size


Is your body in good hands?
 
2013-12-03 09:46:59 AM  

I_C_Weener: [deanwintersfans.files.wordpress.com image 850x478]

Mayhem gets raped?


He shouldn't have been running around the neighborhood dressed like that, asking for it.
 
2013-12-03 09:48:25 AM  

I_C_Weener: Bareefer Obonghit: Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.

[pimphop.com image 850x531]

Is your body in good hands?


HA!
 
2013-12-03 09:48:53 AM  

cman: Thats one beautiful lady


Hope she bought her rape insurance.
 
2013-12-03 09:50:04 AM  
theinspirationroom.comView Full Size

We cover kitchen fires....and legitimate rape.

 
2013-12-03 09:50:40 AM  
Hoo boy. THIS is going to be a popular thread. 

/ home sick for the day anyway
// breaks out the popcorn
 
2013-12-03 09:52:46 AM  
i1.ytimg.comView Full Size


I knew fishnets were a bad idea in that neighborhood.....
 
2013-12-03 09:53:20 AM  
Well, that's a stretch. Abortion == rape now, apparently. Sounds to me like somebody's trying too hard.

/I guess... Does Michigan have one of those ultrasound requirements like we have in Texas?
 
2013-12-03 09:55:46 AM  

I_C_Weener: [theinspirationroom.com image 515x272]We cover kitchen fires....and legitimate rape.


ken_ashford.typepad.comView Full Size

So easy a caveman could do her.
 
2013-12-03 09:57:41 AM  
afcaforum.comView Full Size

Well, there's your problem.

 
2013-12-03 09:59:51 AM  
img.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 10:01:33 AM  
Here's the thing. If you're raped, it should be the rapists insurance paying for the abortion. Like the at-fault driver in a car accident. Maybe the republicans could compromise by including "uninsured rapist" coverage by default.
 
2013-12-03 10:02:08 AM  

serial_crusher: Well, that's a stretch. Abortion == rape now, apparently. Sounds to me like somebody's trying too hard.

/I guess... Does Michigan have one of those ultrasound requirements like we have in Texas?


For any woman under the age of consent, abortion is because of rape.  Very common situation for abortion.
 
2013-12-03 10:02:30 AM  

serial_crusher: Here's the thing. If you're raped, it should be the rapists insurance paying for the abortion. Like the at-fault driver in a car accident. Maybe the republicans could compromise by including "uninsured rapist" coverage by default.


New York is a "no fault" state.
 
2013-12-03 10:03:40 AM  
Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.
 
2013-12-03 10:05:16 AM  

I_C_Weener: Having now read the article


That's crazy talk. Are you new here?
 
2013-12-03 10:08:25 AM  

flucto: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article

That's crazy talk. Are you new here?


spokaneontherocks.comView Full Size

Did you know that just 15 minutes of reading articles on Fark before posting can save you a lot of misunderstandings?

 
2013-12-03 10:10:19 AM  

I_C_Weener: 15 minutes of reading articles on Fark before posting can save you a lot of misunderstandings?


Why would we want to avoid misunderstandings? What the hell would we defend to the death if we actually bothered to understand shiat? I thought you were meant to LEAD us not ruin stuff.
 
2013-12-03 10:11:15 AM  

I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.


It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.
 
2013-12-03 10:23:22 AM  

palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.


I didn't say it wasn't stupid.  I said it isn't rape insurance.
 
2013-12-03 10:23:49 AM  

flucto: I_C_Weener: 15 minutes of reading articles on Fark before posting can save you a lot of misunderstandings?

Why would we want to avoid misunderstandings? What the hell would we defend to the death if we actually bothered to understand shiat? I thought you were meant to LEAD us not ruin stuff.


Citation needed.

/better?
 
2013-12-03 10:26:35 AM  

mrshowrules: Is it legitimate rape insurance or just rape insurance?

When will the GOP learn to just stay completely clear of any subject related to rape.


It's rape rape insurance
 
2013-12-03 10:29:58 AM  

I_C_Weener: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

I didn't say it wasn't stupid.  I said it isn't rape insurance.


True.

However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance. 

It's a slightly hyperbolic term, but it only works because there's a large amount of truth behind it.
 
2013-12-03 10:31:03 AM  
Yet another Heritage Foundation idea that they will vehemently oppose in 15 years when President Cuomo tries to expand ACA.
 
2013-12-03 10:31:27 AM  

palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.


How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.
 
2013-12-03 10:31:43 AM  

whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.


I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.
 
2013-12-03 10:32:56 AM  
I just don't get it.  If I ran an insurance company (thankfully I don't have that kind of soul killing job where you have to choose profit or principles) I would be falling all over myself to offer abortion procedures to anyone who wanted them (even men, just to be safe).  If you force a woman you're covering to have an unwanted baby, that baby becomes a dependent...  basically, a liability to your bottom line.
 
2013-12-03 10:33:33 AM  

mainstreet62: We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.


We wiped out 50 million uncivilised savages to get this country. It might be time to do this again.
 
2013-12-03 10:33:36 AM  

serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.


True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.
 
2013-12-03 10:35:02 AM  

I_C_Weener: whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.

I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.


Your car isn't human, and doesn't get psychological damage from a flat tire. It doesn't sleep in terror of you if you drive it over a nail.

Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really. I say we see their point, rather than quibble over the semantics of it, and alter the plan accordingly.
 
2013-12-03 10:35:38 AM  

serial_crusher: Well, that's a stretch. Abortion == rape now, apparently. Sounds to me like somebody's trying too hard.


An abortion is a service rape victims might utilize to minimize the negative long-term impacts of rape that costs money.  Buying insurance that covers abortions in the case that women get raped could be accurately termed "rape insurance."  Removing abortions from insurance means women who are raped do not have coverage to help pay for an abortion.  They will indeed then need to purchase additional insurance.

Your analogy sucks.  Just like car insurance doesn't prevent accidents, you would never say "fixing your car == car accident."
 
2013-12-03 10:36:54 AM  
s16.postimg.orgView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 10:37:26 AM  

whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.


I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.
 
2013-12-03 10:37:33 AM  

MayoSlather: If every woman were required to carry rape insurance I'm pretty sure my new pick up line would be "Just let it happen, you have insurance."


A gentleman would offer to pay the deductible or co-pay at least.
 
2013-12-03 10:38:41 AM  

Tigger: mainstreet62: We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.

We wiped out 50 million uncivilised savages to get this country. It might be time to do this again.


Kardashian fans?
 
2013-12-03 10:38:58 AM  
"Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

You planned ahead so it's not unplanned.

"There's no such a thing as self help... if you did it yourself, you didn't need help. You did it yourself!"  -G. Carlin.
 
2013-12-03 10:39:32 AM  

lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.


Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.
 
2013-12-03 10:39:35 AM  

I_C_Weener: True. But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy. But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity. I don't understand their reasoning.


Tubal ligation is far more involved than a vasectomy.  It's a proper surgery whereas a vasectomy is pretty much a local anaesthetic/outpatient deal with little risk of serious complication.
 
2013-12-03 10:40:17 AM  

I_C_Weener: serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.

True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.


Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)
 
2013-12-03 10:40:38 AM  

gopher321: How about if you all come up with 'Republican' insurance? Next time the GOP are elected, the insurance companies have to pay out. Don't know what the premiums would be, but it might be worth it.

/dumb idea of the week


Not a dumb idea.  You could probably sell thousands of policies.  Here is an article about the real cost to immigrate to Canada.  Just base the payout on that.

http://correresmidestino.com/how-much-does-immigrating-to-canada-cos t/
 
2013-12-03 10:40:44 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.


cdn.uproxx.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 10:41:24 AM  

whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.



When you posted:

"Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really."

I assumed you were talking about rape and not pregnancy because you used the word rape and never used the word pregnancy.

WTF was I thinking?
 
2013-12-03 10:41:46 AM  

whistleridge: I_C_Weener: whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.

I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.

Your car isn't human, and doesn't get psychological damage from a flat tire. It doesn't sleep in terror of you if you drive it over a nail.

Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really. I say we see their point, rather than quibble over the semantics of it, and alter the plan accordingly.


It isn't semantics when you accuse a man or murder vs. self-defense.  Same thing here.  This isn't about rape coverage.  Its about abortion coverage...all abortion coverage.   Quit making me think you are hysterical when you want to focus on the evil buzz words thinking the audience won't pay attention to see its actually a bit more than just rape coverage.
 
2013-12-03 10:43:20 AM  
LOL, christianity
 
2013-12-03 10:43:56 AM  

mrshowrules: Not a dumb idea. You could probably sell thousands of policies. Here is an article about the real cost to immigrate to Canada. Just base the payout on that.


Just please, please... if you immigrate to Canada adjust your political spectrum.  Years of living in the US will probably have caused you to think that the Dems are left wing.  Our conservative party is pretty much what a "moderate" Democrat would be, except even they won't overtly attack socialized medicine.
 
2013-12-03 10:44:53 AM  

lennavan: whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.

When you posted:

"Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really."

I assumed you were talking about rape and not pregnancy because you used the word rape and never used the word pregnancy.

WTF was I thinking?


That my comment was in the context of the thread, which is in turn in the context of the article in question? Because otherwise, you weren't. 

If you're not here to talk about the ins and outs rape, pregnancy resulting from rape, aborting said pregnancy, and how/who pays for it, you're either trolling, or you're an idiot.
 
2013-12-03 10:44:54 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.


This can only lead to a proliferation of large black dildos and rape insurance fraud as people claim they lost some expensive jewelry up in there.
 
2013-12-03 10:46:02 AM  

I_C_Weener: Citation needed.


Wait, now cops can write you a ticket if you don't have rape insurance?
 
2013-12-03 10:47:08 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: LOL, christianity


Divine Rape.
 
2013-12-03 10:47:46 AM  

flucto: serial_crusher: Here's the thing. If you're raped, it should be the rapists insurance paying for the abortion. Like the at-fault driver in a car accident. Maybe the republicans could compromise by including "uninsured rapist" coverage by default.

New York is a "no fault" state.


And in MD, if you rear-end someone, you're automatically at fault. I like this plan (and am kind of surprised it's not done already - why should a victim's insurance pay for a rapist's damages? Side question: can a victim sue a her rapist in civil court, before suring or after the criminal trial?).

// of course, if you rear-end someone rapily, chances of pregnancy drop precipitously
// also, do we have additional coverage for other felonies perpetrated against us? Murder insurance? Assault insurance? Failure to file tax return insurance? Driving while black insurance? (Though that may actually be a thing - anyone compared auto insurance costs between racial groups?)
 
2013-12-03 10:47:55 AM  
Shouldn't this be a mandatory part of your Obamacare insurance? It is a health issue too right?  And to spread the risk around, men will have to buy it too like they have to have maternity insurance.  I mean, a man is far more likely to get raped than pregnant.
 
2013-12-03 10:47:58 AM  

Mercutio74: Our conservative party is pretty much what a "moderate" Democrat would be, except even they won't overtly attack socialized medicine.


Aren't your "moderate Democrats" currently doing their best to eviscerate science and education funding?
 
2013-12-03 10:49:00 AM  
I've got it! Let's have insurance providers cover women's contraception and strongly encourage people to use it. Then we don't have to worry so much about abortion being used outside of cases of rape or medical necessity. A simple, common sense solution that everyone can get on board with.
 
2013-12-03 10:49:02 AM  

I_C_Weener: It isn't semantics when you accuse a man or murder vs. self-defense.  Same thing here.  This isn't about rape coverage.  Its about abortion coverage...all abortion coverage.   Quit making me think you are hysterical when you want to focus on the evil buzz words thinking the audience won't pay attention to see its actually a bit more than just rape coverage.


Technically, it's 'about' how to pay for abortions in the instance of rape. But you're right; it's really 'about' all abortion coverage.

But why stop there? Let's be honest and go a few steps further. In that sense, it's REALLY 'about' control of women, which is in turn REALLY 'about' old rich white men being terrified that they might no longer have a monopoly on power in this country, so they're quite literally using every trick in the book to try and restrict the power of others so that they might retain said monopoly a little longer.

I can do slippery slopes too. Let's just stick to the topic at hand, hm?
 
2013-12-03 10:49:54 AM  

serial_crusher: I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.


Sort of an aside to this conversation, I suspect that the "children are automatically added to your health insurance until they're 26" part of the ACA regulations has pretty much every plan in the US covering most of the cost of abortions now.
 
2013-12-03 10:50:05 AM  
FTA: The nonprofit has scheduled a press conference for Tuesday morning at the Michigan Capitol that will feature "sexual assault victims and individuals conceived in rape" who represent Save the 1, a national group that argues against exceptions in abortion policies.

This makes absolutely no sense.  They are alive because their mothers chose to keep them, not because abortion wasn't an option, so making abortion illegal in the case of rape wouldn't have made a difference.  They credit their relative success with simply being born, but ignore the fact that they were born to a woman who made the choice to keep them.

If anything, this position is more in line with legalizing rape than outlawing abortion.  They can't say "I wouldn't be alive if my mother had been allowed to get an abortion", because they were allowed to get abortions, they just didn't.  They can only say "I wouldn't be alive if my mother had been allowed to say 'no'."
 
2013-12-03 10:51:32 AM  

odinsposse: I've got it! Let's have insurance providers cover women's contraception and strongly encourage people to use it. Then we don't have to worry so much about abortion being used outside of cases of rape or medical necessity. A simple, common sense solution that everyone can get on board with.


But...but...everybody knows contraception IS abortion.
 
2013-12-03 10:52:06 AM  
taylormarsh.comView Full Size


"From my cold, dead hands!"


You see, if you denigrate a human being--or in this case the uterus of a human being--then it's easier to for the government to control it, to own it.

If only the women-haters could get Disney Studios to put buck teeth and thick glasses on vaginas. That kind of propaganda worked against the Japanese in WWII. And we know women are just the Yellow Peril with tits.
 
2013-12-03 10:52:30 AM  
Jesus...I thought Missouri was farked up but at least our legistators are just lazy and do nothing.  They are not actively trying to piss off more than half the state voters.

Again, can someone explain how a woman, especially in Michigan now would ever vote for one of these guys again if they decide to pass this law?
 
2013-12-03 10:52:33 AM  
And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.
 
2013-12-03 10:53:09 AM  
Your company covered me... so go ahead and rape me.
i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 10:53:50 AM  

qorkfiend: Aren't your "moderate Democrats" currently doing their best to eviscerate science and education funding?


Mostly science and education as it relates to criticism of the gov't or affecting what the Cons might like to say or do publicly.  It's less ideological and more Machiavellian.

That being said, it was more of a law of averages thing.  For example, the Cons aren't openly anti-socialized medicine.  But they are pro-throw everyone in jail for anything.

/also, by "moderate Dem" I was thinking more in terms of the Blue Dogs.
//Also, to be fair, the Cons are getting worse as time goes on here.  They might start crossing the American aisle soon and become GOP clones, but that would take another majority gov't to complete that transformation
 
2013-12-03 10:54:48 AM  

Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.


I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.
 
2013-12-03 10:55:38 AM  

TheShavingofOccam123: If only the women-haters could get Disney Studios to put buck teeth and thick glasses on vaginas.


4Chan on the case.
 
2013-12-03 10:56:48 AM  
I thought Republicans called that a gun?

/ducks, runs like hades
 
2013-12-03 10:57:23 AM  

Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.


Only as a subset of the fact that  all basic care in a civilized nation should be covered by the state.  Basically if it's a procedure that more than a couple thousand people get in a year and it's non-elective, or it's rare but falls within reasonable cost limits, the state should cover it and pull the funding from taxes.

Having the state foot the bill only in the case of crimes committed is sort of an invitation to unscrupulous people to lie about being victims to get free stuff, and we've got enough of that kind of crap as it is in sexual assault cases already, thanks.
 
2013-12-03 10:59:16 AM  
It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

static5.businessinsider.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:00:22 AM  
bartcop.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:01:16 AM  

Mercutio74: I just don't get it.  If I ran an insurance company (thankfully I don't have that kind of soul killing job where you have to choose profit or principles) I would be falling all over myself to offer abortion procedures to anyone who wanted them (even men, just to be safe).  If you force a woman you're covering to have an unwanted baby, that baby becomes a dependent...  basically, a liability to your bottom line.


Hence the right-wing panic over insurance covering abortion.  It's all "Government stay out of business!" until business decisions result in something they don't like.
 
2013-12-03 11:01:16 AM  

whistleridge: I_C_Weener: It isn't semantics when you accuse a man or murder vs. self-defense.  Same thing here.  This isn't about rape coverage.  Its about abortion coverage...all abortion coverage.   Quit making me think you are hysterical when you want to focus on the evil buzz words thinking the audience won't pay attention to see its actually a bit more than just rape coverage.

Technically, it's 'about' how to pay for abortions in the instance of rape. But you're right; it's really 'about' all abortion coverage.

But why stop there? Let's be honest and go a few steps further. In that sense, it's REALLY 'about' control of women, which is in turn REALLY 'about' old rich white men being terrified that they might no longer have a monopoly on power in this country, so they're quite literally using every trick in the book to try and restrict the power of others so that they might retain said monopoly a little longer.

I can do slippery slopes too. Let's just stick to the topic at hand, hm?


Right. Abortion coverage.
 
2013-12-03 11:01:34 AM  
The time has finally come to equip women with these, since the Republicans constantly have rape on their minds despite the fact that it is against the law.

i48.tinypic.comView Full Size


Any excess fluids are the woman's responsibility. I recommend windshield washer fluid and some Rain-X wipers.
 
2013-12-03 11:03:12 AM  

SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]


neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]


OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

4.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:03:53 AM  

SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]


neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]


HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
 
2013-12-03 11:03:55 AM  
dvdtalk.comView Full Size


Like a she-bear protecting her cubs, you can protect your uterus with an insurance policy from Mutual of Omaha....


Yes, I'm old.
 
2013-12-03 11:04:24 AM  

Fafai: This whole rape thing is great for raping women but what if I told you we could profit from it too?


cuz capitalism is the 'murican way!
 
2013-12-03 11:05:07 AM  

flucto: I_C_Weener: Citation needed.

Wait, now cops can write you a ticket if you don't have rape insurance?


Stop and frisk is already legal in New York! Who is to say they won't stop before checking the insurability of my package?
 
2013-12-03 11:05:44 AM  
i291.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:06:13 AM  

mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 650x475]


Lol. I never would have noticed if you hadn't said anything.

Um...at least she doesn't have a camel toe? In fact, she appears to have undergone Type III excision.
 
2013-12-03 11:07:04 AM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:07:26 AM  

Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.


I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?
 
2013-12-03 11:07:44 AM  

mrshowrules: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.


I'm against aborting under age women.
 
2013-12-03 11:08:37 AM  

serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)


IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.
 
2013-12-03 11:09:23 AM  
I love Republicans.  I can't think of ANY circumstance where mentioning rape in any context has turned out well for them.  Yet they consistently feel the need to do it every few months, apparently in some grand quest to be the first political party with absolutely zero female votes in an election.

//rape insurance?  seriously?
 
2013-12-03 11:10:50 AM  

balloot: //rape insurance?  seriously?


the only "rape insurance a woman needs is purposeful dis-memberment.
 
2013-12-03 11:10:59 AM  

Maud Dib: [www.dvdtalk.com image 400x300]

Like a she-bear protecting her cubs, you can protect your uterus with an insurance policy from Mutual of Omaha....
Yes, I'm old.


Hey I loved that show.
 
2013-12-03 11:11:45 AM  
So if a women is raped and doesn't get pregnant is she still covered? There are lots of expenses associated with rape even if she isn't pregnant. Does that mean she has to keep getting raped until she is pregnant so she can be covered. I'm so confused. Why don't we like women?
 
2013-12-03 11:11:58 AM  

I_C_Weener: mrshowrules: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.

I'm against aborting under age women.


But you're fine with aborting underage men?

Or are you just against the basic principles of grammar, in addition to stubbornly trying to make this thread be about what you want it to be about, rather than what it actually IS about?
 
2013-12-03 11:12:10 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: Mary couldn't wait for the insurance adjuster to come by sometime between 4 & 11 PM to evaluate the damage and decide if her womb was totaled.


That'll buff right out.
 
2013-12-03 11:12:16 AM  
I propose that Republicans, conservatives, and independents get themselves ball-kicking insurance, because at this point I am dead set to kick every one I see right in the jimmy sack.

/seriously, fark YOU fark YOU fark YOU
 
2013-12-03 11:14:18 AM  

Bareefer Obonghit: I_C_Weener: [deanwintersfans.files.wordpress.com image 850x478]

Mayhem gets raped?

He shouldn't have been running around the neighborhood dressed like that, asking for it.


I love you.
 
2013-12-03 11:15:29 AM  
Heh, I see how this is going to go if they pass this.

Step 2:  Call for boycotts against any insurance company that offers abortion coverage policies.
Step 3:  Require that the names of anyone with one of these policies be public information.
Step 4:  Outlaw the state and any state employees union from holding policies with any company that offers abortion coverage policies.
Step 5:  Outlaw any company that offers abortion coverage policies from offering any policies through the Obamacare exchanges.
 
2013-12-03 11:18:04 AM  

I_C_Weener: whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.

I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.


That's not a hair! It's a filamentous biomaterial protruding from your scalp via follicles!

You wouldn't call it follicle insurance would you!
 
2013-12-03 11:18:05 AM  
Rape Insurance


imfdb.orgView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:18:48 AM  
gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.netView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:18:52 AM  

whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.


Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic
 
2013-12-03 11:18:55 AM  

mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.
 
2013-12-03 11:19:07 AM  

yanoosh: So if a women is raped and doesn't get pregnant is she still covered? There are lots of expenses associated with rape even if she isn't pregnant. Does that mean she has to keep getting raped until she is pregnant so she can be covered. I'm so confused. Why don't we like women?


Even if she doesn't get pregnant, I think Republicans would support the insurance covering educational courses for the woman to ensure she knows how she brought on the rape and how she can be more wholesome and less provocative in the future.

Perhaps also cover some type of sexual seregate for the husband if applicable for the 2 to 5 days that his wife is in recovering and  rethinking her part in the whole thing.
 
2013-12-03 11:19:22 AM  

I_C_Weener: Stop and frisk is already legal in New York!


Stop and abort™ could be the next big Obama initiative.
 
2013-12-03 11:21:27 AM  

mrshowrules: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.


I do, and still think that everything should be done to help a victim recover as best as possible. If she wishes to have an abortion, so be it.  She should probably be given counselling first just incase she might regret that decision later.  That type of stuff should be figured out by mental health professionals, not me though.  Whatever it takes to give them the best chance at the best possible recovery.

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?


Well, first, you don't sound like an ass to me.  It is a legitimate point.  I (this is purely just me now) think the state is responsible for providing a generally safe environment for people to live in.  that would include protecting us from crime.  If you are the victim of a crime, you should be made whole.  If there is a crime of violence against your person, you should be made whole to the best extent possible, to include healthcare and counselling.

If it is a property crime, that should be handled with property insurance. But I don't think you could possibly consider rape a property crime.
 
2013-12-03 11:21:31 AM  
If a rape baby is a gift from God, shouldn't there be insurance for women who never get a chance to have this gift?
 
2013-12-03 11:22:53 AM  
I hope the GOP can survive an increase of women in "power" positions.

I've never really understood militant feminism - but after yesterday's really ugly annual check-up and the on-going hateful right-wing focus on women and reproductive health (combined with some posts here on FARK) I am beginning to get it.

Continuing attempts to make restrictive/absurd/expensive laws regarding women will result in more vocal, politically active women - and they will all be called ""feminazis"
 
2013-12-03 11:24:09 AM  

mrshowrules: If a rape baby is a gift from God, shouldn't there be insurance for women who never get a chance to have this gift?


God also gives you the flu and malaria and floods and earthquakes and sunburn and ingrown toenails...
 
2013-12-03 11:24:37 AM  

Warlordtrooper: Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic


I'm not sure a civil obligation gets you a seat at a table where basic human rights are being discussed.  That being said, I don't even think women should get a seat at a discussion where we're talking about forcing someone to do something with their bodies without an extremely good reason.  That should just, by default, be a decision one individual gets to make about their own body purely on the virtue that they're a human being and that we value human rights.
 
2013-12-03 11:25:44 AM  

mrshowrules: If a rape baby is a gift from God, shouldn't there be insurance for women who never get a chance to have this gift?


Would it be cheaper to pay them out or just have them casually date a former SF mayor?
 
2013-12-03 11:27:46 AM  

pueblonative: [gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net image 403x361]


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 11:28:33 AM  
I can at least understand the pro-life people who go out and shoot abortion doctors. They see the clinic as a house of horrors, wherein hundreds or thousands of babies are being murdered every year, and decide to be a hero and save some lives. In their own warped mind, they're doing something noble. The other ones, I don't understand all that much, and I think I hate them more because of how big of hypocrites they are about the whole thing.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest?
Congratulations, you're in favor of murdering only certain kinds of babies.

You're a pro-lifer who can't make abortion illegal, but instead protest outside clinics?
Congratulations, you yelled at a woman murdering her baby and did nothing to stop it.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.
 
2013-12-03 11:29:23 AM  

whistleridge: I_C_Weener: mrshowrules: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.

I'm against aborting under age women.

But you're fine with aborting underage men?

Or are you just against the basic principles of grammar, in addition to stubbornly trying to make this thread be about what you want it to be about, rather than what it actually IS about?


Have you met any underage men?
 
2013-12-03 11:29:28 AM  

Tigger: mainstreet62: We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.

We wiped out 50 million uncivilised savages to get this country. It might be time to do this again.



Come to Big Chief Bear's American Flag Blanket EmporiumTM, buy blankets for the whole family.  Free blankets on Thanksgiving and Columbus Day!
 
2013-12-03 11:31:34 AM  

Warlordtrooper: whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.

Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic


It is if they're the rapist. Committing a violent crime is nature's way of saying "I don't get a voice in this anymore"
 
2013-12-03 11:32:03 AM  

utharda: Tigger: mainstreet62: We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.

We wiped out 50 million uncivilised savages to get this country. It might be time to do this again.


Come to Big Chief Bear's American Flag Blanket EmporiumTM, buy blankets for the whole family.  Free blankets on Thanksgiving and Columbus Day!


Love it.

These lunatics are already convinced that we're going to put them in FEMA camps and kill them.

I say we just do it anyway and thank them for the idea.
 
2013-12-03 11:32:05 AM  
That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.
 
2013-12-03 11:34:11 AM  
Is the government making them buy rape insurance, telling them, "if you like your rapist, you can keep your rapist"?
 
2013-12-03 11:34:39 AM  

skullkrusher: I don't have a vagina.


*unfavorite*
 
2013-12-03 11:35:16 AM  
Dear GOP:

Is it really that difficult to *NOT* mention rape for just one day? It never does you any favors.

Hedly Lamarr isn't recruiting today.
 
2013-12-03 11:35:29 AM  

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.


Consistency across the board still doesn't make them anything more than busybodies.
 
2013-12-03 11:36:54 AM  
Surface Tension & neversubmit win 4 life.
 
2013-12-03 11:37:51 AM  

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?


They should cover you for an assault. They should cover it if you get drunk and fall down the stairs. See how single payer would make all of this so much easier?
 
2013-12-03 11:40:05 AM  

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?


How about rapist insurance.  Every individual of legal age has to purchase rape insurance in the event that they rape somebody, there will be a payout to the person raped for expenses?  And so as not to offend the free market Repubs, we'll allow price discrimination. j
 
2013-12-03 11:40:11 AM  

maxheck: Dear GOP:

Is it really that difficult to *NOT* mention rape for just one day? It never does you any favors.

Hedly Lamarr isn't recruiting today.


Female Dem talking about rape here
 
2013-12-03 11:40:32 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: Is the government making them buy rape insurance, telling them, "if you like your rapist, you can keep your rapist"?


I guess this joke was inevitable.  LOL anyways.
 
2013-12-03 11:40:45 AM  

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: I can at least understand the pro-life people who go out and shoot abortion doctors. They see the clinic as a house of horrors, wherein hundreds or thousands of babies are being murdered every year, and decide to be a hero and save some lives. In their own warped mind, they're doing something noble. The other ones, I don't understand all that much, and I think I hate them more because of how big of hypocrites they are about the whole thing.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest?
Congratulations, you're in favor of murdering only certain kinds of babies.

You're a pro-lifer who can't make abortion illegal, but instead protest outside clinics?
Congratulations, you yelled at a woman murdering her baby and did nothing to stop it.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.


they aren't much different than the Musims who would rape a woman, then stone her for "adultery"
GOP will rape them, then slut-shame them, and deny them birth control.
 
2013-12-03 11:40:50 AM  
How's that Rape Foot taste, 'Pubs?  You guys sure do like stuffing it in your mouth.
 
2013-12-03 11:42:09 AM  
"Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

The whole purpose of insurance is to cover for unplanned events that have a possible (though unlikely) chance of happening. It's not illogical. It's just you don't understand the definitions of the things you argue about.

Same reason why some people, including cops, carry weapons. They know they won't use them 99.99% of the time but that 0.01% when they do use them, it'll be very important. It's not that they plan on shooting someone. It's insurance.
 
2013-12-03 11:42:36 AM  

skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.


There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.
 
2013-12-03 11:43:39 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.

Consistency across the board still doesn't make them anything more than busybodies.


The only pro-lifer I've ever met who wasn't an asshole about it is my old buddy Jeff. Jeff is a Catholic who thinks that women should have easy access to free birth control, because the best way to prevent abortions is to make sure women don't get pregnant in the first place. He also thinks that ALL abortions are wrong because if abortion is murder, it's ALWAYS murder. That being said, he knows that banning abortion won't prevent abortion, it'll just make abortions unsafe. So he thinks that abortion should remain legal because legalized abortion saves women's lives. So he's actually pro-life in that he wants to support ALL life, not just unborn fetuses. He also thinks we should have single payer insurance that automatically covers everyone in the US, because he's actually pro-life.
 
2013-12-03 11:44:17 AM  

I_C_Weener: serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.

True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.


It is a significantly more expensive invasive and dangerous procedure.
 
2013-12-03 11:45:13 AM  

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?


Actually, many states do have a fund to compensate victims of violent crime.  It is usually underfunded and it takes a long time to receive any money.   Obviously, proof of the crime must be provided and that can be a difficult hurdle especially for traumatized victims.
 
2013-12-03 11:46:46 AM  

Mrbogey: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

The whole purpose of insurance is to cover for unplanned events that have a possible (though unlikely) chance of happening. It's not illogical. It's just you don't understand the definitions of the things you argue about.

Same reason why some people, including cops, carry weapons. They know they won't use them 99.99% of the time but that 0.01% when they do use them, it'll be very important. It's not that they plan on shooting someone. It's insurance.


I think this woman is in the tank for the GOP
 
2013-12-03 11:47:23 AM  
You know, both sides are, in fact, bad, despite how that overly simplistic argument gets rightfully shot down here on Fark.

Democrats and Republicans both have a long-standing history of being utterly, insanely wrong on matters of economy, the military, social justice, foreign policy, domestic policy - you name it.

BUT

There is only one party that has an appallingly glib, morally confused, utterly repugnant stance on what is arguably the ugliest act one human can perform on another.

http://www.dayswithoutagoprapemention.com/

The comments in the above link are not isolated incidents.  They are not taken out of context.  They are a clear, consistent pattern of dangerously hateful rhetoric.

1 in 3 women are victims of sexual abuse.  No matter who you are, you know victims of sexual abuse.  Many of the women in your life, whom you love and care about, have had to endure an unspeakably heinous invasion of their body and by extension, their minds, souls, and lives, and the lives of their loved ones.

And anyone that is flippant, confused, or ambivalent to this awful act and its consequences, I would assess as ignorant and callous to a sociopathic degree.

Democrats suck, there's no denying that.  But I vote for them because the alternative is, quite literally, the Pro Rape Party.
 
2013-12-03 11:48:00 AM  

mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.


True. False. Dunno but sounds bullshiat.
 
2013-12-03 11:48:20 AM  

mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.


It's actually less than 18%. However it is overwhelmingly poor women who get abortions, and from a mathematical point of view, every aborted impoverished fetus is one less mouth we taxpayers have to feed and clothe.
 
2013-12-03 11:48:58 AM  

Tricky Chicken: I (this is purely just me now) think the state is responsible for providing a generally safe environment for people to live in.  that would include protecting us from crime.  If you are the victim of a crime, you should be made whole.  If there is a crime of violence against your person, you should be made whole to the best extent possible, to include healthcare and counselling.

If it is a property crime, that should be handled with property insurance. But I don't think you could possibly consider rape a property crime.


Well, I also certainly wouldn't consider rape a property crime. If the government is going to make everyone whole when they are the victim of a crime then why stop at crimes against my person? Why shouldn't I be made whole if I come home from work and my house has been robbed and vandalized. Why should I be forced into bankruptcy just because I hadn't purchased insurance on my home or property? If property crimes can be handled with property insurance why not expect that crimes resulting in bodily injury be handled with health insurance? I just don't see why there would be a distinction. If we started doing one it would only be a matter of time before we were also doing the other. I think we should let people's personal insurance handle both, but if we're going to do one then we might as well go all in.
 
2013-12-03 11:49:29 AM  

parasol: I hope the GOP can survive an increase of women in "power" positions.

I've never really understood militant feminism - but after yesterday's really ugly annual check-up and the on-going hateful right-wing focus on women and reproductive health (combined with some posts here on FARK) I am beginning to get it.

Continuing attempts to make restrictive/absurd/expensive laws regarding women will result in more vocal, politically active women - and they will all be called ""feminazis"


Congratulations.
 
2013-12-03 11:49:31 AM  

Snatch Bandergrip: You know, both sides are, in fact, bad, despite how that overly simplistic argument gets rightfully shot down here on Fark.

Democrats and Republicans both have a long-standing history of being utterly, insanely wrong on matters of economy, the military, social justice, foreign policy, domestic policy - you name it.

BUT

There is only one party that has an appallingly glib, morally confused, utterly repugnant stance on what is arguably the ugliest act one human can perform on another.

http://www.dayswithoutagoprapemention.com/

The comments in the above link are not isolated incidents.  They are not taken out of context.  They are a clear, consistent pattern of dangerously hateful rhetoric.

1 in 3 women are victims of sexual abuse.  No matter who you are, you know victims of sexual abuse.  Many of the women in your life, whom you love and care about, have had to endure an unspeakably heinous invasion of their body and by extension, their minds, souls, and lives, and the lives of their loved ones.

And anyone that is flippant, confused, or ambivalent to this awful act and its consequences, I would assess as ignorant and callous to a sociopathic degree.

Democrats suck, there's no denying that.  But I vote for them because the alternative is, quite literally, the Pro Rape Party.


Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.
 
2013-12-03 11:49:33 AM  

vudukungfu: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: I can at least understand the pro-life people who go out and shoot abortion doctors. They see the clinic as a house of horrors, wherein hundreds or thousands of babies are being murdered every year, and decide to be a hero and save some lives. In their own warped mind, they're doing something noble. The other ones, I don't understand all that much, and I think I hate them more because of how big of hypocrites they are about the whole thing.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest?
Congratulations, you're in favor of murdering only certain kinds of babies.

You're a pro-lifer who can't make abortion illegal, but instead protest outside clinics?
Congratulations, you yelled at a woman murdering her baby and did nothing to stop it.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.

they aren't much different than the Musims who would rape a woman, then stone her for "adultery"
GOP will rape them, then slut-shame them, and deny them birth control.


and then cut off SNAP to the child once born?
 
2013-12-03 11:49:54 AM  

Mrbogey: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

The whole purpose of insurance is to cover for unplanned events that have a possible (though unlikely) chance of happening. It's not illogical. It's just you don't understand the definitions of the things you argue about.

Same reason why some people, including cops, carry weapons. They know they won't use them 99.99% of the time but that 0.01% when they do use them, it'll be very important. It's not that they plan on shooting someone. It's insurance.


There is one tiny flaw in your premise
The GOP has been actively working to deny women birth control. This has been the "insurance to cover for unplanned events" women have used for quite some time (let us say the 70's for Fark sake)

Am I to assume that, lacking insurance coverage for birth control, women will take out "rape insurance" to cover terminations that are increasingly difficult in red states to obtain?

That reminds me of hurricane insurance as offered by Citizen's in Florida. You pay for it, and when the worst happens and you make a claim, somehow (gasp) you find your options are "deal with it by yourself"

If you can't prove it was really rape they can always deny your claim.
 
2013-12-03 11:51:08 AM  
Is being in prison considered a preexisting condition when determining rape insurance premiums?
 
2013-12-03 11:51:37 AM  

Mercutio74: Warlordtrooper: Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic

I'm not sure a civil obligation gets you a seat at a table where basic human rights are being discussed.  That being said, I don't even think women should get a seat at a discussion where we're talking about forcing someone to do something with their bodies without an extremely good reason.  That should just, by default, be a decision one individual gets to make about their own body purely on the virtue that they're a human being and that we value human rights.


Exactly this.  Why a women should have any more say in another woman's pregnancy than a man always seems ridiculous to me.
 
2013-12-03 11:51:46 AM  

sdd2000: vudukungfu: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: I can at least understand the pro-life people who go out and shoot abortion doctors. They see the clinic as a house of horrors, wherein hundreds or thousands of babies are being murdered every year, and decide to be a hero and save some lives. In their own warped mind, they're doing something noble. The other ones, I don't understand all that much, and I think I hate them more because of how big of hypocrites they are about the whole thing.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest?
Congratulations, you're in favor of murdering only certain kinds of babies.

You're a pro-lifer who can't make abortion illegal, but instead protest outside clinics?
Congratulations, you yelled at a woman murdering her baby and did nothing to stop it.

You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.

they aren't much different than the Musims who would rape a woman, then stone her for "adultery"
GOP will rape them, then slut-shame them, and deny them birth control.

and then cut off SNAP to the child once born?


Food grubbing parasite doesn't need SNAP til the umbilical cord is cut. Or the placenta dries up but if you've waited that long, ewwwww
 
2013-12-03 11:52:58 AM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Is being in prison considered a preexisting condition when determining rape insurance premiums?



No. But being Catholic...
 
2013-12-03 11:54:31 AM  

mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 650x475]


Glad I wasnt the only one thinking that.
 
2013-12-03 11:54:34 AM  

SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]


Bareefer Obonghit: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA


Awesome!
 
2013-12-03 11:54:50 AM  

parasol: The GOP has been actively working to deny women birth control. This has been the "insurance to cover for unplanned events" women have used for quite some time (let us say the 70's for Fark sake)


Exactly.

We have "rape insurance." It's called birth control pills and Plan B. But the GOP has been trying to restrict access to birth control and Plan B, because reasons. So they remove a woman's ability to easily get pregnancy prevention medicine and then the GOP turns around and makes it even more difficult to get an abortion. It's not about preventing abortion. If it was, the GOP would be handing out birth control pills like candy. It's really about controlling women.

We won't let you get birth control.
We won't let you get an abortion.
And we sure as hell won't help you pay for that kid you accidentally made.
 
2013-12-03 11:54:53 AM  

pueblonative: How about rapist insurance.  Every individual of legal age has to purchase rape insurance in the event that they rape somebody, there will be a payout to the person raped for expenses?  And so as not to offend the free market Repubs, we'll allow price discrimination. j


I like that idea.   For every decade that you manage to live your life w/o raping someone you get a discount.  Let's employ free market solutions.
 
2013-12-03 11:55:37 AM  

Graffito: runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?

Actually, many states do have a fund to compensate victims of violent crime.  It is usually underfunded and it takes a long time to receive any money.   Obviously, proof of the crime must be provided and that can be a difficult hurdle especially for traumatized victims.


What do they do when both parties are at fault for an assault?  Lets say you and I are in a bar drinking heavily.  We get into an argument about how euclidian geometry changes the shot angles when you move from a six foot pool table to an eight foot pool table.  The situation escalates, and we come to blows.  Now since I am clearly a lover and not a fighter, I get soundly thrashed and now require medical attention.

Now clearly I participated in the situation and I am equally to blame. I don't think a state should cover my expenses in that situation.

Just to be clear, none of this applies to rape...

But if the state pays for all the medical expenses related to rape, would there be an incentive for a woman that finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy to claim date rape after the fact to get an abortion?  I haven't noodled my way through that one.  But in a single payer system that wouldn't be an issue.
 
2013-12-03 11:56:19 AM  
OK, I know this little thought experiment has been done to death (pun) over and over, but let's try it one more time:

To all "Pro-life GOP" out there:

A woman attempts to get birth control.  Is denied because of religious reasons.  She gets raped.  Gets pregnant.  If she carries the baby to term, she will die, and most likely the baby will, too.  If she aborts the baby, the baby will die. The woman wants to have a large family when she gets married, so to let her die is to let all her potential children die, too.  (life begins before conception, right?)

So which carries more weight and allows you to convince yourself that you're still 'pro-life'?

(Too distracted to think of a way to work a gun into this scenario, because pro-lifers are equally conflicted about that point, too)
 
2013-12-03 11:56:32 AM  

Needlessly Complicated: mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.


Yeah, no kidding.
 
2013-12-03 11:58:10 AM  

skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.


I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?
 
2013-12-03 11:58:44 AM  
skullkrusher:

Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

Isn't it awful how often these Democrats bring up rape?
 
2013-12-03 12:01:11 PM  

A Cave Geek: OK, I know this little thought experiment has been done to death (pun) over and over, but let's try it one more time:

To all "Pro-life GOP" out there:

A woman attempts to get birth control.  Is denied because of religious reasons.  She gets raped. She buys a gun in case it happens again. Gets pregnant.  If she carries the baby to term, she will die, and most likely the baby will, too.  If she aborts the baby, the baby will die. The woman wants to have a large family and will have to hunt game in order to feed them when she gets married, so to let her die is to let all her potential gun-owning-but-for-hunting-only children die, too.  (life begins before conception, right?)

So which carries more weight and allows you to convince yourself that you're still 'pro-life'?

(Too distracted to think of a way to work a gun into this scenario, because pro-lifers are equally conflicted about that point, too)



That work for you? ;)
 
2013-12-03 12:01:23 PM  

whistleridge: mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 650x475]

Lol. I never would have noticed if you hadn't said anything.

Um...at least she doesn't have a camel toe? In fact, she appears to have undergone Type III excision.


Or more likely has a trimmed panty liner who's outline was photoshopped out in post production.  Don't want to show any contours there - that would be smut and you can't have that in an ad.  Same with body hair - shaved shaved shaved is the rule.  In any commercial photo, assume it's 'shopped extensively.  Also assume the "package" being held by men's underwear in ads is a "tastefully" positioned foam tube.  But no ball hang.  That's nasty.  The only way you achieve the men's underwear ad "look" is by wearing a slightly undersized speedo of the appropriate color and creating the contours with a "mock cock".
 
2013-12-03 12:02:18 PM  

whistleridge: I_C_Weener: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

I didn't say it wasn't stupid.  I said it isn't rape insurance.

True.

However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance. 

It's a slightly hyperbolic term, but it only works because there's a large amount of truth behind it.


It is not hyperbolic. It is spelling out one of the things that the insurance would be covering and, in the absence of public services the bill would create, it is quite accurate. insurance would be the solution to pregnancies that result from sexual assault. it would even shift the pregnancy away from a health issue and away from a criminal issue and into the territory of insurable accidents. The pregnancy would become a tort and if insurers could cover it, that means the woman is paying for the coverage and therefore basically taking on partial responsibility for the damage done by rape itself.
 
2013-12-03 12:03:44 PM  
I say we make everyone take a physiological and a physical exam every year and break out their strength and weaknesses into comparable charts and graphs.  Then compare them to the rest of the population to determine whom should or should pay more in insurance, what their career should be, who they should marry, and determine if any restrictions to rights and privileges are needed.

Then control and manipulate an "uprising" that will never be.  This will be used as a sort of blow off valve for the minority unhappy x factor.

/There.  Utopia solved.
 
2013-12-03 12:04:09 PM  

MadHatter500: Or more likely has a trimmed panty liner who's outline was photoshopped out in post production. Don't want to show any contours there - that would be smut and you can't have that in an ad. Same with body hair - shaved shaved shaved is the rule. In any commercial photo, assume it's 'shopped extensively. Also assume the "package" being held by men's underwear in ads is a "tastefully" positioned foam tube. But no ball hang. That's nasty. The only way you achieve the men's underwear ad "look" is by wearing a slightly undersized speedo of the appropriate color and creating the contours with a "mock cock".


Fark now has a "genitalia stylist" ad expert.  I think might just about have every specialty in the world among our membership now.
 
2013-12-03 12:04:22 PM  

Mike Chewbacca: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

It's actually less than 18%. However it is overwhelmingly poor women who get abortions, and from a mathematical point of view, every aborted impoverished fetus is one less mouth we taxpayers have to feed and clothe.


That is total abortions.  What about elective abortions?

I wouldn't look at any abortions related to protecting the health of the mother.   Those should not be considered as abortions which can be avoided.
 
2013-12-03 12:05:08 PM  

Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?


By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.
 
2013-12-03 12:05:13 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: whistleridge: I_C_Weener: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

I didn't say it wasn't stupid.  I said it isn't rape insurance.

True.

However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance. 

It's a slightly hyperbolic term, but it only works because there's a large amount of truth behind it.

It is not hyperbolic. It is spelling out one of the things that the insurance would be covering and, in the absence of public services the bill would create, it is quite accurate. insurance would be the solution to pregnancies that result from sexual assault. it would even shift the pregnancy away from a health issue and away from a criminal issue and into the territory of insurable accidents. The pregnancy would become a tort and if insurers could cover it, that means the woman is paying for the coverage and therefore basically taking on partial responsibility for the damage done by rape itself.


Abortion coverage is apparently already a matter for insurance. The bill is just severing it from standard plans.
 
2013-12-03 12:05:13 PM  

Mercutio74: Fark now has a "genitalia stylist" ad expert.  I think might just about have every specialty in the world among our membership now.


"How to Vajazzle for unexpected company"
 
2013-12-03 12:05:52 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.



Yowza.
t.fod4.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 12:06:23 PM  

I_C_Weener: serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.

True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.


Vasectomy is a minimally invasive procedure with short recovery times.  Done on an outpatient basis.  Ie. it's damn cheap to do.  Getting one's tubes tied is a bit more complex and costly.  One needs an understanding of accountancy to comprehend insurance.  Medical knowledge only gets in the way.
 
2013-12-03 12:07:00 PM  

Tigger: skullkrusher:

Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

Isn't it awful how often these Democrats bring up rape?


Seriously. Got rape on the branes, 24/7
 
2013-12-03 12:07:27 PM  

parasol: That reminds me of hurricane insurance as offered by Citizen's in Florida. You pay for it, and when the worst happens and you make a claim, somehow (gasp) you find your options are "deal with it by yourself"

If you can't prove it was really rape they can always deny your claim.


So, rape is an act of God?
 
2013-12-03 12:07:40 PM  

Mercutio74: MadHatter500: Or more likely has a trimmed panty liner who's outline was photoshopped out in post production. Don't want to show any contours there - that would be smut and you can't have that in an ad. Same with body hair - shaved shaved shaved is the rule. In any commercial photo, assume it's 'shopped extensively. Also assume the "package" being held by men's underwear in ads is a "tastefully" positioned foam tube. But no ball hang. That's nasty. The only way you achieve the men's underwear ad "look" is by wearing a slightly undersized speedo of the appropriate color and creating the contours with a "mock cock".

Fark now has a "genitalia stylist" ad expert.  I think might just about have every specialty in the world among our membership now.


We could found an island nation and fend off economic ruin long enough to collapse into civil war.
 
2013-12-03 12:07:47 PM  

skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

True. False. Dunno but sounds bullshiat.


How is statutory rape not rape?

I'm not sure about the stats but I am talking about a percentage of elective abortions, not including abortions protecting the health of the mother.
 
2013-12-03 12:07:52 PM  

Tricky Chicken: Graffito: runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?

Actually, many states do have a fund to compensate victims of violent crime.  It is usually underfunded and it takes a long time to receive any money.   Obviously, proof of the crime must be provided and that can be a difficult hurdle especially for traumatized victims.

What do they do when both parties are at fault for an assault?  Lets say you and I are in a bar drinking heavily.  We get into an argument about how euclidian geometry changes the shot angles when you move from a six foot pool table to an eight foot pool table.  The situation escalates, and we come to blows.  Now since I am clearly a lover and not a fighter, I get soundly thrashed and now require medical attention.

Now clearly I participated in the situation and I am equally to blame. I don't think a state should cover my expenses in that situation.

Just to be clear, none of this applies to rape...

But if the state pays for all the medical expenses related to rape, would there be an incentive for a woman that finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy to claim date rape after the fact to get an abortion?  I haven't noodled my way through that one.  But in a single payer system that wouldn't be an issue.


You are asking questions that I don't know the answer to.  I live in Ohio and I knew someone who the victim of a horrible sexual assault and stabbing.  She was trying to get some money from the vic comp fund to help her with rent because she couldn't work (as a waitress) when she was recovering from her wounds.   I can't even begin to describe the mental anguish that she was in so some relief from the threat of being evicted would have helped a lot.
She only received a small amount of money (a couple thousand) and it was years later.  We're not talking about medical expenses, but money to help out with all things like therapy, rent, cab fare - kind of like an AFLAC policy for crime victims.
 
2013-12-03 12:08:54 PM  
Wow. There really is something pathological to the Republicans, isn't there? They really just can't stop talking about women's reproductive systems.

/Rs might have had a chance in 2014 with people forgetting about the shutdown, but they just can't keep their mouths shut!
 
2013-12-03 12:09:51 PM  

skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.


again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.
 
2013-12-03 12:10:31 PM  

Peki: Wow. There really is something pathological to the Republicans, isn't there? They really just can't stop talking about women's reproductive systems.

/Rs might have had a chance in 2014 with people forgetting about the shutdown, but they just can't keep their mouths shut!


Onward Christian soldiers.
 
2013-12-03 12:10:54 PM  
So the ACA putting mandates on insurance companies shouldn't bother the GOP.  After all, this is exactly what they are doing here.
 
2013-12-03 12:11:09 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.


I was more aghast at the weird proportions created by looking at the 2 images as one.

Flo is cute. The bottom half obviously has a killer body. I'd take both home.
 
2013-12-03 12:12:07 PM  

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: I (this is purely just me now) think the state is responsible for providing a generally safe environment for people to live in.  that would include protecting us from crime.  If you are the victim of a crime, you should be made whole.  If there is a crime of violence against your person, you should be made whole to the best extent possible, to include healthcare and counselling.

If it is a property crime, that should be handled with property insurance. But I don't think you could possibly consider rape a property crime.

Well, I also certainly wouldn't consider rape a property crime. If the government is going to make everyone whole when they are the victim of a crime then why stop at crimes against my person? Why shouldn't I be made whole if I come home from work and my house has been robbed and vandalized. Why should I be forced into bankruptcy just because I hadn't purchased insurance on my home or property? If property crimes can be handled with property insurance why not expect that crimes resulting in bodily injury be handled with health insurance? I just don't see why there would be a distinction. If we started doing one it would only be a matter of time before we were also doing the other. I think we should let people's personal insurance handle both, but if we're going to do one then we might as well go all in.


I can see that the state has some responsibility to protect you from property crime as well.  But I personally see a huge difference between a property crime and any crime against your person.  But I have funny concepts of ownership and posession.  Your body is entirely yours, and anything I do to affect it should require your consent.  If I touch you, or hinder your movement, or threaten your health or psyche, these are all immediate impacts to my person.  If you were to right now knock my house down, I would not even be aware of it for hours.  Now lets say that before the end of the day my boss sends me on a business trip to North Korea.  While there I fall for a woman and renounce my citizenship and stay there.  I may well never know that you knocked my house down and will never feel that a crime was comitted. Likewise, you could hack into my 401K and drain all my assets.  If I pass away tomorrow, your crime would be just a number on a spreadsheet.  In fact, if your house is on fire and your family is inside and I have a fire extinguisher, I think your need trumps my property rights.

I can be made whole for just about any crime against my property, and therefore I should take the responsibility to insure those items that I hold valuable.  I cannot have insurance against a crime against my person because if injured, I cannot be made truely whole.  I do however rely upon the assurances of the state that they will do all they can to prevent crimes against my person.
 
2013-12-03 12:12:08 PM  

Pinner: parasol: That reminds me of hurricane insurance as offered by Citizen's in Florida. You pay for it, and when the worst happens and you make a claim, somehow (gasp) you find your options are "deal with it by yourself"

If you can't prove it was really rape they can always deny your claim.

So, rape is an act of God?


No - and denial of insurance coverage is certainly the work of man
 
2013-12-03 12:13:19 PM  
skullkrusher:

maxheck: Dear GOP:

Is it really that difficult to *NOT* mention rape for just one day? It never does you any favors.

Hedly Lamarr isn't recruiting today.

Female Dem talking about rape here


I'm just gonna guess here, and perhaps this is an unwarranted assumption, much like assuming the Tea Party votes Republican. But she's talking about legislation proposed by "Right to Life of Michigan."
 
2013-12-03 12:13:55 PM  
Bottom line for the GOP:  The more they talk, the less electable they are.  You want the GOP to go down in 2014?  Keep them talking.
 
2013-12-03 12:14:16 PM  
Dear policyholder,

We regret to inform you that your recent claim filed under your rape insurance policy (#█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ ) has been deemed ineligible for coverage, after review of the case by our expert team of adjusters.

Per the terms of your policy, you may opt to submit a disputation of this judgement to a third party mediator of our choosing.  The terms of the mediated arbitration are binding and final, and are subject to the laws of the state of appropriate jurisdiction.

Statistical analysis of claims for rape insurance indicate that over 50% are deemed ineligible for a claim, for a variety of reasons. We suggest that you contact your broker to discuss improving your coverage by adding a slut insurance policy.  Information on slut insurance is also available on our website, www.█ █ █ █ █ █ █ .com.
 
2013-12-03 12:14:51 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: It is not hyperbolic. It is spelling out one of the things that the insurance would be covering and, in the absence of public services the bill would create, it is quite accurate.


It's also a reasonable line of attack.  Michigan attempted to pass this same bill long ago and even their ridiculously right leaning governor Rick Snyder vetoed it saying not allowing rape victims to keep coverage goes too far.  Republicans had the opportunity to simply write a bill to allow an exception for rape victims and Rick Snyder would have presumably signed it.  They didn't, they're trying to override his veto.

 That's why it's fully reasonable to attack Republicans on the rape issue.  They were specifically told to make accommodations for rape victims and they specifically chose not to.
 
2013-12-03 12:15:25 PM  

Ned Stark: We could found an island nation and fend off economic ruin long enough to collapse into civil war.


Judging by this tab alone, we'd begin in a state of civil war... and for some reason, we'd all love it.
 
2013-12-03 12:17:23 PM  
There already IS rape insurance:

planbonestep.comView Full Size


Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not already there.

And stop trying to shove the whole of government up some woman's vajaja.  It doesn't fit.
 
2013-12-03 12:18:00 PM  

Peki: Wow. There really is something pathological to the Republicans, isn't there? They really just can't stop talking about women's reproductive systems.


You're the real rapist for pointing that out.

See, this stupid libtard Demorat is attacking the most offensive aspect of the Republican bill, that even abortions due to rape shouldn't be covered. But since most abortions aren't due to rape, that makes her the real rapist, and you, and me, and all of us who decry Republican attitudes on rape.

/ rape rape rape rape rape
// any woman who votes Republican is out of her f*cking mind
 
2013-12-03 12:18:32 PM  

Parthenogenetic: Dear policyholder,

We regret to inform you that your recent claim filed under your rape insurance policy (#█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ ) has been deemed ineligible for coverage, after review of the case by our expert team of adjusters.

Per the terms of your policy, you may opt to submit a disputation of this judgement to a third party mediator of our choosing.  The terms of the mediated arbitration are binding and final, and are subject to the laws of the state of appropriate jurisdiction.

Statistical analysis of claims for rape insurance indicate that over 50% are deemed ineligible for a claim, for a variety of reasons. We suggest that you contact your broker to discuss improving your coverage by adding a slut insurance policy.  Information on slut insurance is also available on our website, www.█ █ █ █ █ █ █ .com.


I smiled, I nodded, my eyes got teary
four-and-a-half stars

....don't forget denial as "we are unable to offer this service, please see a specialist"
 
2013-12-03 12:18:36 PM  

Pinner: parasol: That reminds me of hurricane insurance as offered by Citizen's in Florida. You pay for it, and when the worst happens and you make a claim, somehow (gasp) you find your options are "deal with it by yourself"

If you can't prove it was really rape they can always deny your claim.

So, rape is an act of God?


That is what Santorum and a few others have said that exact statement.
 
2013-12-03 12:19:14 PM  

Parthenogenetic: Dear policyholder,

We regret to inform you that your recent claim filed under your rape insurance policy (#█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ ) has been deemed ineligible for coverage, after review of the case by our expert team of adjusters.

Per the terms of your policy, you may opt to submit a disputation of this judgement to a third party mediator of our choosing.  The terms of the mediated arbitration are binding and final, and are subject to the laws of the state of appropriate jurisdiction.

Statistical analysis of claims for rape insurance indicate that over 50% are deemed ineligible for a claim, for a variety of reasons. We suggest that you contact your broker to discuss improving your coverage by adding a slut insurance policy.  Information on slut insurance is also available on our website, www.█ █ █ █ █ █ █ .com.


Oy. I just thought of all the hassle a private company would put a woman through investigating a rape claim. The cops are bad enough, but they have laws they have to abide by. But a private corp, only caring about its bottom line? *shudder* I've been raped and it was bad enough just trying to go to the cops. . .
 
2013-12-03 12:19:15 PM  
bartcop.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 12:19:44 PM  

Graffito: Tricky Chicken: Graffito: runin800m: Tricky Chicken:

You are asking questions that I don't know the answer to.  I live in Ohio and I knew someone who the victim of a horrible sexual assault and stabbing.  She was trying to get some money from the vic comp fund to help her with rent because she couldn't work (as a waitress) when she was recovering from her wounds.

 I can't even begin to describe the mental anguish that she was in so some relief from the threat of being evicted would have helped a lot.
She only received a small amount of money (a couple thousand) and it was years later.  We're not talking about medical expenses, but money to help out with all things like therapy, rent, cab fare - kind of like an AFLAC policy for crime victims.


In a case like this, I (this is just me now) would have to accept that rent and the other stuff are direct results of her attack, and should count toward making her whole. And yes, I think tax money should be used to cover all this.  I think it is far more important than an extra missile or filling a pot hole.  Because we as a society owed her a safe place to live, and we as a society failed.
 
2013-12-03 12:19:51 PM  

mrshowrules: skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

True. False. Dunno but sounds bullshiat.

How is statutory rape not rape?

I'm not sure about the stats but I am talking about a percentage of elective abortions, not including abortions protecting the health of the mother.


Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape
 
2013-12-03 12:21:20 PM  
you know the old saying... You rape what you sew...

cltampa.comView Full Size
 
2013-12-03 12:21:56 PM  

mrshowrules:
For any woman under the age of consent, abortion is because of rape.


Isn't that a pretty big exageration? If it isn't, I feel really bad for American teens.
 
2013-12-03 12:23:26 PM  

parasol: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.


It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases. Ergo calling it "rape insurance" is to use a loaded emotional term which doesn't accurately reflect what it is. A stupid law argued against by a stupid person.
 
2013-12-03 12:23:40 PM  

skullkrusher: I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.


And to be honest, I am not sure how the attempts of Right to Life of Michigan to prevent abortion from being subsidized by the ACA is anything but an attempt to punish sexually active women and, in admittedly rarer cases, to punish women who have sex forced upon them.

If it's an issue of cost rather than morality: I don't have the hard numbers, I confess, but I'd wager that subsidizing abortion is probably pretty inexpensive when we're subsidizing health care related to cancer, obesity, and other highly common health issues.


Just because I will never endure a rape pregnancy does not mean I feel stepped upon for helping support for those that do.
 
2013-12-03 12:24:04 PM  

skullkrusher: Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape


I'm not an expert, but are there not generally exceptions that make a statutory rape law a bit more sensible?  For example, allowing an age difference of 3 years... so that it would be legal for a 16 year old and an 18 year old to have sex... but not a 16 year old and a 40 year old.
 
2013-12-03 12:24:10 PM  

cman: Thats one beautiful lady


Wow, that is entirely inappropriate and creepy. What the fuk does it matter what she looks like?
 
2013-12-03 12:27:01 PM  
I see my question was answered before I even asked. Never mind.
 
2013-12-03 12:27:33 PM  

I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.


Well, the thing is, pregnancy is a fairly unique situation--it  can happen unwillingly to a woman, and that means either people would have to buy in case of rape--and according to the CDC, one in five women  are raped--or run the risk of being crippled by a medical bill if that happened. While this is a misogynistic bill overall, I can see why the rape thing was the first to cause a reaction.
 
2013-12-03 12:27:57 PM  

balloot: I love Republicans.  I can't think of ANY circumstance where mentioning rape in any context has turned out well for them.  Yet they consistently feel the need to do it every few months, apparently in some grand quest to be the first political party with absolutely zero female votes in an election.



It amazes me how many women still vote for them, it is pretty sad.
 
2013-12-03 12:27:58 PM  

formerfloozy: cman: Thats one beautiful lady

Wow, that is entirely inappropriate and creepy. What the fuk does it matter what she looks like?


Let it go. Cman is on a quest to say colossally stupid things on a daily basis.  He sprinkles in a few reasonable comments now and again to throw of the mods.
 
2013-12-03 12:28:12 PM  

formerfloozy: cman: Thats one beautiful lady

Wow, that is entirely inappropriate and creepy. What the fuk does it matter what she looks like?


guys comment on women's looks, welcome to earf.
 
2013-12-03 12:29:04 PM  

Mercutio74: skullkrusher: Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape

I'm not an expert, but are there not generally exceptions that make a statutory rape law a bit more sensible?  For example, allowing an age difference of 3 years... so that it would be legal for a 16 year old and an 18 year old to have sex... but not a 16 year old and a 40 year old.


Varies by state afaik. Age of consent is 17 in NY. 7 if the parties are related in KY
 
2013-12-03 12:29:30 PM  

Headso: you know the old saying... You rape what you sew...

[cltampa.com image 528x333]


dafuk?
 
2013-12-03 12:30:13 PM  

Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

And to be honest, I am not sure how the attempts of Right to Life of Michigan to prevent abortion from being subsidized by the ACA is anything but an attempt to punish sexually active women and, in admittedly rarer cases, to punish women who have sex forced upon them.

If it's an issue of cost rather than morality: I don't have the hard numbers, I confess, but I'd wager that subsidizing abortion is probably pretty inexpensive when we're subsidizing health care related to cancer, obesity, and other highly common health issues.


Just because I will never endure a rape pregnancy does not mean I feel stepped upon for helping support for those that do.


All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?
 
2013-12-03 12:30:40 PM  

skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.

It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases. Ergo calling it "rape insurance" is to use a loaded emotional term which doesn't accurately reflect what it is. A stupid law argued against by a stupid person.


so the premise is women need to pay an additional insurance cost to cover a procedure that the GOP is actively working to deny access to

please don't call me stupid - i've been at the "avoiding rape/paying for reproductive choices" far too long
 
2013-12-03 12:32:14 PM  

I_C_Weener: serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.

True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.


As I recall, it is more complicated and more dangerous procedure. They would rather have an IUD or something installed.

Insurance companies do like offering birth control and abortion services. They are good for the the plan holder (more options, potentially reduced premiums), the insurance company (less costly, more attractive plans due to options, and can reduce premiums), and society (less unwanted children, particularly in poor families that rely on government support). That is why these guys want to pass a law to stop them.
 
2013-12-03 12:32:27 PM  

Mercutio74: skullkrusher: Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape

I'm not an expert, but are there not generally exceptions that make a statutory rape law a bit more sensible?  For example, allowing an age difference of 3 years... so that it would be legal for a 16 year old and an 18 year old to have sex... but not a 16 year old and a 40 year old.


There are major legal differences from state to state on it... because you know, "states' rights." And even in states where the rules are hard-17 or hard-18, judges have occasionally been known to throw out charges of statutory rape (usually filed by parents) when both parties claim mutual consent.

Underage pregnancy in the case of consensual sex between 16- or 17-year-olds probably shouldn't be counted in the same data set as raped adult females... but unless the law specifies otherwise, it is. That's what makes the data so difficult to analyze.

Of course, including underage pregnancy also opens up the sexual education argument... but the GOP doesn't want to talk about that.
 
2013-12-03 12:32:53 PM  

Snatch Bandergrip: Just because I will never endure a rape pregnancy


This is the 21st century.  Anything can happen.
 
2013-12-03 12:33:17 PM  

Aidan: serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)

IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.


That is definitely the case. My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal. It still makes me salty just thinking about it.
 
2013-12-03 12:33:23 PM  

parasol: skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.

It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases. Ergo calling it "rape insurance" is to use a loaded emotional term which doesn't accurately reflect what it is. A stupid law argued against by a stupid person.

so the premise is women need to pay an additional insurance cost to cover a procedure that the GOP is actively working to deny access to

please don't call me stupid - i've been at the "avoiding rape/paying for reproductive choices" far too long


I was talking about the legislator in the article
 
2013-12-03 12:34:46 PM  

give me doughnuts: Needlessly Complicated: mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.


Yowza.
[t.fod4.com image 480x270]


I would totally let her give me a big discount on my insurance rates, ifyouknowwhatimean...
 
2013-12-03 12:35:12 PM  

skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.


When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.
 
2013-12-03 12:35:57 PM  

I_C_Weener: [www.afcaforum.com image 300x225]Well, there's your problem.


MOMMY!!  MOMMY!!

That's my favorite one.  The look he gives the camera is priceless.
 
2013-12-03 12:36:25 PM  

formerfloozy: Aidan: serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)

IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.

That is definitely the case. My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal. It still makes me salty just thinking about it.


I got a vasectomy at 32 and the doc wouldn't do it unless my wife signed a paper saying she was OK with it.

/best present I ever gave myself
 
2013-12-03 12:36:37 PM  

skullkrusher: All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?


I can concede that labeling unplanned pregnancy insurance as rape insurance is hyperbolic.

But given Republican ambivalence to rape, and an unsettling drive to control and regulate women's reproductive health, can one really be judged for drawing that conclusion?
 
2013-12-03 12:36:42 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: It is not hyperbolic. It is spelling out one of the things that the insurance would be covering and, in the absence of public services the bill would create, it is quite accurate. insurance would be the solution to pregnancies that result from sexual assault. it would even shift the pregnancy away from a health issue and away from a criminal issue and into the territory of insurable accidents. The pregnancy would become a tort and if insurers could cover it, that means the woman is paying for the coverage and therefore basically taking on partial responsibility for the damage done by rape itself.


It's slightly  hyperbolic in the sense that it's not quite as literally 'if women want protection from rape, they should get insurance like anything else' stupid as the term 'rape insurance' might be read to imply.

However, other than that, you're quite right.
 
2013-12-03 12:37:02 PM  

skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.

It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases. Ergo calling it "rape insurance" is to use a loaded emotional term which doesn't accurately reflect what it is. A stupid law argued against by a stupid person.

so the premise is women need to pay an additional insurance cost to cover a procedure that the GOP is actively working to deny access to

please don't call me stupid - i've been at the "avoiding rape/paying for reproductive choices" far too long

I was talking about the legislator in the article


yes - i got that - my apologies
you post well and i'm having a really rotten day

mea culpa
 
2013-12-03 12:37:15 PM  

thamike: skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.

When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.


Splitting hairs?
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-12-03 12:39:46 PM  
Current head of the GOP

images2.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size
 
Ab3
2013-12-03 12:40:11 PM  
if I had a choice between voting for a Republican or a Sontaran I would take the Sontaran every time.
 
2013-12-03 12:40:29 PM  

skullkrusher: thamike: skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.

When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.

Splitting hairs?


Is that a pubic hair joke?
 
2013-12-03 12:40:34 PM  
RepubliCare
 
2013-12-03 12:40:57 PM  

Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?

I can concede that labeling unplanned pregnancy insurance as rape insurance is hyperbolic.

But given Republican ambivalence to rape, and an unsettling drive to control and regulate women's reproductive health, can one really be judged for drawing that conclusion?


Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity. The law is absurd on its face, it is contrary to everything the GOP pretends to stand for in terms of small government and business regulation and places an unnecessary burden on private commerce. I know! let's call it rape insurance to help deflect from the fact that the law is a piece of shiat!
 
2013-12-03 12:42:28 PM  

parasol: skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: parasol: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.

again?
women already have/had unplanned pregnancy insurance
which the GOP has long tried to deny access to

women don't need rape insurance at additional cost - they need birth control - including the morning after pill - which would further reduce that "tiny fraction" you mentioned above.

It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases. Ergo calling it "rape insurance" is to use a loaded emotional term which doesn't accurately reflect what it is. A stupid law argued against by a stupid person.

so the premise is women need to pay an additional insurance cost to cover a procedure that the GOP is actively working to deny access to

please don't call me stupid - i've been at the "avoiding rape/paying for reproductive choices" far too long

I was talking about the legislator in the article

yes - i got that - my apologies
you post well and i'm having a really rotten day

mea culpa


Hope it gets better dude/ette
 
2013-12-03 12:42:31 PM  

skullkrusher: thamike: skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.

When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.

Splitting hairs?


Do you insist on carrying this charade of pretending to lack the ability to infer broader meaning from hyperbolic terms further?  I'll understand if you're doing it for the sake of splitting hairs in a meta-debate about Responsibility in Descriptive Terms.
 
2013-12-03 12:43:23 PM  

Dansker: skullkrusher: thamike: skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.

When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.

Splitting hairs?

Is that a pubic hair joke?


No, that's "spitting hairs"
 
2013-12-03 12:43:28 PM  

Mercutio74: I just don't get it.  If I ran an insurance company (thankfully I don't have that kind of soul killing job where you have to choose profit or principles) I would be falling all over myself to offer abortion procedures to anyone who wanted them (even men, just to be safe).  If you force a woman you're covering to have an unwanted baby, that baby becomes a dependent...  basically, a liability to your bottom line.



This legislation is like forbidding an auto insurance company from covering brake repairs in hopes that it encourages people to drive less frequently.

Nothing good can come from it for the insured or the insurers.
 
2013-12-03 12:43:35 PM  
What I don't understand and what really ticks me off, is how can this tiny sliver of the Michigan population have this much influence.

I understand if you have enough signatures that the legislature would have to take a look at your suggestion and/or consider it, but to make it so that it also bypasses the governor completely is just insane.

That's less than 3% of our population and somehow that's enough to say its the people's will?
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-12-03 12:43:38 PM  

Ab3: if I had a choice between voting for a Republican or a Sontaran I would take the Sontaran every time.


static2.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size


Today... These weird American's known as RE-publicans and their fascination with the vaginial system....
 
2013-12-03 12:43:47 PM  

skullkrusher: Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity.


Are you calling rape Democratic stupidity?
 
2013-12-03 12:44:23 PM  

skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?

I can concede that labeling unplanned pregnancy insurance as rape insurance is hyperbolic.

But given Republican ambivalence to rape, and an unsettling drive to control and regulate women's reproductive health, can one really be judged for drawing that conclusion?

Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity. The law is absurd on its face, it is contrary to everything the GOP pretends to stand for in terms of small government and business regulation and places an unnecessary burden on private commerce. I know! let's call it rape insurance to help deflect from the fact that the law is a piece of shiat!


And by the time you are done explaining why the law is idiotic everyone you are talking to has tuned you out, calling it rape insurance gets people's attention. "conservatives" are always very concerned about democrats not taking the high road for some reason.
 
2013-12-03 12:44:56 PM  
The idea behind health insurance was not pick and choose procedures.
 
2013-12-03 12:45:20 PM  

Pinner: parasol: That reminds me of hurricane insurance as offered by Citizen's in Florida. You pay for it, and when the worst happens and you make a claim, somehow (gasp) you find your options are "deal with it by yourself"

If you can't prove it was really rape they can always deny your claim.

So, rape is an act of God?


Is your name Mary?
 
2013-12-03 12:46:11 PM  

Headso: "conservatives" are always very concerned about democrats not taking the high road for some reason.


It's a Stop Hitting Yourself Mobius Strip of Sh*theadedness.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-12-03 12:47:04 PM  

monoski: The idea behind health insurance was not pick and choose procedures.


...except when the GOP doesn't agree with them.

It's like their laissez faire economic stance that they so strongly believe in... until the market turns and it's against them, then they want regulations regulations regulations.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-12-03 12:49:22 PM  

thamike: skullkrusher: Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity.

Are you calling rape Democratic stupidity?


I love what passes for reasoning today.  Wanting to regulate insurance companies that have the ability to inflict millions of dollars of harm on individuals is Democratic stupidity?

There is one reason only to believe that, and that is that you believe corporations should be able to do whatever they want at any time to any one.
 
2013-12-03 12:51:16 PM  

skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

True. False. Dunno but sounds bullshiat.

How is statutory rape not rape?

I'm not sure about the stats but I am talking about a percentage of elective abortions, not including abortions protecting the health of the mother.

Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape


That's true.  Just the fact that rape has to part of an abortion discussion to me is stupid.  A woman should be able to get an abortion if she wants an abortion.
 
2013-12-03 12:51:28 PM  

I_Am_Weasel: Perhaps proposing a law making it the responsibility of the rapist to pay for any and all costs would make more sense.


And for the 97% or rapes that do not result in a conviction?
 
d23 [BareFark]
2013-12-03 12:52:14 PM  

flondrix: I_Am_Weasel: Perhaps proposing a law making it the responsibility of the rapist to pay for any and all costs would make more sense.

And for the 97% or rapes that do not result in a conviction?


Didn't you see what she was wearing?
 
2013-12-03 12:53:11 PM  

thamike: skullkrusher: thamike: skullkrusher: It's not "rape insurance". It's unplanned pregnancy insurance of which rape causes a tiny fraction of cases.

When everything is retarded, splitting hairs is important.

Splitting hairs?

Do you insist on carrying this charade of pretending to lack the ability to infer broader meaning from hyperbolic terms further?  I'll understand if you're doing it for the sake of splitting hairs in a meta-debate about Responsibility in Descriptive Terms.


"Forcing women to decide whether they want to buy 'rape insurance' and even compelling parents to make the unfathomable decision about whether to buy it for their daughters is truly despicable,"

"Unfathomable decision"? That doesn't sound like "hyperbole" describing unplanned pregnancy insurance which covers abortion. That sounds like she's talking about rape insurance. Thanks for weighing in though.
 
2013-12-03 12:53:58 PM  

d23: Current head of the GOP

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 417x393]


I like that. We need that to catch on. The Republicans are Ferengi.

/farking Rules of Acquisition shouldn't include females. . .
 
2013-12-03 12:54:14 PM  

skullkrusher: Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape


It is in some states.
 
2013-12-03 12:54:20 PM  

d23: thamike: skullkrusher: Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity.

Are you calling rape Democratic stupidity?

I love what passes for reasoning today.  Wanting to regulate insurance companies that have the ability to inflict millions of dollars of harm on individuals is Democratic stupidity?

There is one reason only to believe that, and that is that you believe corporations should be able to do whatever they want at any time to any one.


I love what passes for reading comprehension these days.
 
2013-12-03 12:56:24 PM  

flondrix: skullkrusher: Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape

It is in some states.


It isn't in Michigan however.
 
2013-12-03 12:56:34 PM  

Headso: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?

I can concede that labeling unplanned pregnancy insurance as rape insurance is hyperbolic.

But given Republican ambivalence to rape, and an unsettling drive to control and regulate women's reproductive health, can one really be judged for drawing that conclusion?

Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity. The law is absurd on its face, it is contrary to everything the GOP pretends to stand for in terms of small government and business regulation and places an unnecessary burden on private commerce. I know! let's call it rape insurance to help deflect from the fact that the law is a piece of shiat!

And by the time you are done explaining why the law is idiotic everyone you are talking to has tuned you out, calling it rape insurance gets people's attention. "conservatives" are always very concerned about democrats not taking the high road for some reason.


"Liberals" are never concerned about their own stupidity... Unless they're squawking about how they condemn the stupid. Drive them out. Marginalize! When they're not breathlessly defending it, of course.
 
2013-12-03 12:56:49 PM  

Headso: And by the time you are done explaining why the law is idiotic everyone you are talking to has tuned you out, calling it rape insurance gets people's attention. "conservatives" are always very concerned about democrats not taking the high road for some reason.


Then explain to me why and how 'unplanned pregnancy insurance' is different from normal 'neonatal care' insurance.

While you're at it, explain to me why women only should be forced to get this kind of coverage, and why men shouldn't be forced to also get 'rape accusation' insurance.
 
2013-12-03 12:58:00 PM  

skullkrusher: d23: thamike: skullkrusher: Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity.

Are you calling rape Democratic stupidity?

I love what passes for reasoning today.  Wanting to regulate insurance companies that have the ability to inflict millions of dollars of harm on individuals is Democratic stupidity?

There is one reason only to believe that, and that is that you believe corporations should be able to do whatever they want at any time to any one.

I love what passes for reading comprehension these days.


Right? What the f*ck was that about?
 
2013-12-03 12:58:01 PM  

mrshowrules: Mike Chewbacca: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

It's actually less than 18%. However it is overwhelmingly poor women who get abortions, and from a mathematical point of view, every aborted impoverished fetus is one less mouth we taxpayers have to feed and clothe.

That is total abortions.  What about elective abortions?

I wouldn't look at any abortions related to protecting the health of the mother.   Those should not be considered as abortions which can be avoided.


Only a small percentage of abortions are done to protect the health of the mother. Also, only ~2% of all abortions are performed at more than 20 weeks' gestational age. It's a really tiny number, in the low thousands. Minors only account for 7% of all abortions.
 
2013-12-03 12:59:02 PM  

mrshowrules: skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

True. False. Dunno but sounds bullshiat.

How is statutory rape not rape?

I'm not sure about the stats but I am talking about a percentage of elective abortions, not including abortions protecting the health of the mother.

Well, aside from the ridiculousness of considering consensual sex between a 18 year old and a 17 year old as falling into the same category as violent sexual assault, not all pregnant underaged teens were victims of statutory rape. Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape

That's true.  Just the fact that rape has to part of an abortion discussion to me is stupid.  A woman should be able to get an abortion if she wants an abortion.


Sure. Stupid law proposed by GOP is stupid. I guess we wouldn't have much of a thread if some people weren't trying to pretend the response wasn't bullshiat. Drew loves him some cheer leading ninnies
 
2013-12-03 12:59:49 PM