Posted on 10/23/2012 7:22:09 PM PDT by Bratch
“Let’s assume that the number you state 1.3 million rapes in the U.S. per year is correct. IT’s NOT, it includes what they refer to a ‘intimate partner rape’ IE date rape, or ‘just the tip to see how it feels’ or I have a headache, but it is easier to go ahead and give in than to fight it.”
Non-consensual is non-consensual. Just because you know the person very well or are even married to the person does not mean that rape can’t occur. I have no idea where to even go with this discussion if you premise your entire reasoning on this topic with that type of premise. That’s pretty insane talk.
That makes the instances of rape, VERY, VERY, VERY HARD to nail down (so to speak). Particularly since MANY, MANY, MANY instances of what is now called ‘date rape’, which is often ‘making bad decisions with a boy friend or male friend', are never reported, supposedly.
Regardless, I have not had that occur, with myself either while married or otherwise. the fact is that there are many fewer instances of rape resulting in pregnancy than what the bogus, non peer reviewed study you linked to says there are.
As for abortion as a necessity, outside of ectopic pregnancies, there are almost NO medically necessary abortions in order to save the life of the mother.
As for taking you to the woodshed for the BOGUS ridiculous idea that pregnancy from rape is THREE TIMES more likely than pregnancy by consensual sex, I have NO guilt by showing your gullibility and poor logical skills.
Just because the radical pro abortion Leftist FemiNazi’s say it, doesn't make it so. We call them liars, because that is what they do. They lie! Then they commission studies often at taxpayer expense, to reinforce their lies.
As for ‘just the tip, you know, to see how it feels’ That is a line from ‘Wedding Crashers’ A damn funny movie.
Here is a ‘video tie in’ for the ‘wedding crashers’ a Crash course so to speak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zMvB4si3M8&feature=endscreen&NR=1
I think it’s a great answer.
Whatever the subject is the candidate should take control of the conversation, don’t let the lib reporter dictate things with questions intended to be harmful.
Thanks.
Nothing annoys me more than Republicans who say stuff that turns off voters electing really bad Dems (like Reid) when at the same time they don't convince anyone to agree with them either. Its like shooting themselves in the head. Principles mean little when you convince others to be against them.
Mourdock holds to what is his generally un-popular principle (rape+abortion) which itself is not bad and I tried to defend him but his explanation of it in the debate was ill conceived and allowed Dems to make him look like a woman dissing nutcase caveman.
If the rape caused pregnancy is a 'gift from God' (I think he said 'God's plan') then simple logic says that the rape was a gift. So maybe two Obama terms would be a 'gift from God' because voters will hate Dems after eight years. This is just stupid talk. Don't speculate on what God is up to when running for office.
Once again I deliver to you exhibit A Sharon Angle. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. Sue Louden could have sent Reid into early retirement.
I like having the word “wisdom” associated with something I’ve said I can tell you that. ;)
:)
The amazing part of this is that I am NO Romney fan at all yet I cant let stupidity go by unchallenged, especially when it elects Dems.
DDDFD, playing Devil's advocate: But as a US senator, would you vote to confirm a SCOTUS justice nominee who would uphold federal laws which did not allow for abortions in case of rape or incest?
Google the following two papers on rape/pregnancy statistics. These are just two of many that are quite peer-reviewed:
Wilcox et al (2001)
Holmes et al (1996)
And the rambling about trying to dig out the nuances of consent, date rape, “it’s not reported so it’s not rape”, etc...I can’t seem to make sense of it. I think we are living in two different centuries with regard to the dignity of women. You should join the 21st century in that respect or at least move up to the 20th century regarding the protection of women.
Thanks, You know I really like that :)
SOL for Senate :
“ Chris, I thought I made this clear. I believe that abortion laws belong with the states the same with health care, murder marriage even drug laws. I want justices that believe that, and yes it would mean both the over-turned Roe decision AND overturning the Federal ban on partial-birth abortions in all cases not just rape. My position on Federal power doesn't change with the occupant of the White House unlike many hypocrites in Washington. That is the type of justice who I would vote for. “
“But I was wondering. Does your man Obama send that thrill up your leg when he hangs out on Latenight, the View and Comedy Central? Is that the best you can do?”
BOOM!
The first link you quoted was leftist twaddle and bogus, I am sure these studies are more of the same. Besides, I don't care enough to continue your education.
Thanks, You know I really like that :)
SOL for Senate : “ Chris, I thought I made this clear. I believe that abortion laws belong with the states the same with health care, murder marriage even drug laws. I want justices that believe that, and yes it would mean both the over-turned Roe decision AND overturning the Federal ban on partial-birth abortions in all cases not just rape. My position on Federal power doesn't change with the occupant of the White House unlike many hypocrites in Washington. That is the type of justice who I would vote for. “
I understand the motivation of other pro-lifers who want the federal govt. to save us from abortion. "Fight abortion on every level!" After all, Federal courts changed everything via Roe v Wade, Doe v Bolton, etc.
But in order to fight abortion, the federal govt. has to have power over the states. It's a Faustian bargain, i. e. pro-lifers (Faust) would be making a deal with Mephisopheles.
And when you give more power to Mephistopheles, you get not only more federal usurpation of states' rights, but more control of our states from outside the US:
State Dept: Texas can’t arrest international election observers
And I would leave the Federal partial ban on abortion in effect until Roe vs Wade was gone. No point in unilaterally disarming. That is counter-productive.
Republicans were able to pass the Federal partial ban on abortion because it was ‘low hanging fruit’ just as Dems have the rape/abortion issue as low hanging fruit.
When that law was challenged Scalia and Thomas ruled with the majority to up-hold it, but they wrote a separate concurrence that they would have considered over-ruling it if it was challenged as not being authorized by the commerce clause.
But Dems wont challenge it using that argument even though abortion is their golden calf. .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.