If he was convicted of the rape, and sentenced, then when he has completed his sentence, he does have a case -- by the same logic we all use here on FreeRepublic that a felon who has completed his sentence should regain his right to bear firearms and vote. We all do not require that an ex-felon never regain his right to defend himself later in life.
Similarly, then (and this is a very difficult thing to say, because rape is such a heinous crime), this rapist is still the biological father, and biological fathers have rights that are forcefully defended here on FreeRepublic. He's paying child support. Rapist or not, after he has completed his sentence, he is still the father of the child. Are we saying we want to deny his rights as a father AFTER he's completed his sentence?
That's a tough one. As the father of a daughter, my personal sympathies are totally with the girl. But I have a hard time saying that the father will never get to see his child, or that the child will never get to know her father.
OTOH, it sounds like he only got 16 years of probation, no jail time, and he's asking for father's rights prior to the 16 years being completed. That's not right, IMO. That weak sentence complicates things a lot.
I am sure that is the argument the attorney for the rapist would use. But you are gorgetting one thing, the woman who was raped. What about how it victimizes her every time she has to even talk to the rapists? Is that not a form of mental abuse that she has a right to be free from?
The probation sentence is a farce and and a total injustice.
Let him pay support for those 16 years and stay out of trouble, and maybe then he can bring a case.
this is why bammy is president....muddled unclear thinking and excuse making for abominations....
as a freeper, I defend common sense and morality....if there's grey areas, well that's life.... a sperm donor is NOT a father...
Frankly, if the dude was concerned with his right to be able to defend himself he shouldn't have done the crime.
Sometimes life is tough ~ as it should be to those who are criminally inclined.
Some. Not all. IMHO the second amendment is a right, the voting franchise is a privilege, and the idea of child visitation rights for a convicted rapist is an abomination.
A father’s rights should be supported. I don’t think a person who became a father by rape should be included in that group. Not even close.
Being rapist changes it all.
And there are only a few Freepers crazy enough to want to restore felons’ RKBA right out of prison. I’m not one of them.
So no way should this subhuman have access to the child or be allowed near his victim.
It would only be 'similar,' if we forced the felon's victim to sell him the firearm or be in contact with the armed dirtbag. As for the child resulting from the rapist's crime, he/she should be considered the proceeds of his crime. Since when are criminals entitled to the proceeds of their crimes?
When the limitations placed by "sex offender" laws, even restricts a rapist's freedom to interact with other woman/children, why should he be allowed to interact with the women victim and child resulting from his crime?
Finally, felons have never had the right to vote until demented liberal logic gave it to them. Are you on FR to support extending demented liberal logic even futher?