Jump to content

What in the fuck is wrong with congress


unfunnyryan

Recommended Posts

This.

 

100%

 

I have personally heard a girl pressure another to call drunk sex "rape" because the FRIEND is mad at the other girl for having drunk sex! I went APE shit and threatened to do whatever I could should this false accusation ever get off the ground - that shit is grounds for years in prison!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

100%

 

I have personally heard a girl pressure another to call drunk sex "rape" because the FRIEND is mad at the other girl for having drunk sex! I went APE shit and threatened to do whatever I could should this false accusation ever get off the ground - that shit is grounds for years in prison!

 

I have an 'uncle' (extended family situation, not by blood) who is a registered sex offender as a direct result of such a situation. He was a massage therapist who had sex with a client. The client decided that in an effort to make a big paycheck she would claim he raped her so that she could sue the resort he worked at. He spent time in prison bc of this and is a registered sex offender. She got a nice settlement from the resort to avoid court. You all know what comes with that baggage he's received. I was raised around him. Hes an amazing man. I'd leave any of my three daughters in his care without giving second thought. There is no way he did it and she is a monster for doing what shes done to him for her monetary gain. Her life here is temporary, hell is eternal so I feel good knowing she will get hers.

 

Having sex with anyone against their will or putting them into a situation where they cannot make a rational decision bc they've drugged is an abomination. Having sex with someone without the mental capacity to know right from wrong is an abomination. Be it bc of mental development or bc they are too young to understand (statutory rape isnt 'forced'). You can rationalize it in your mind however you like but its pretty clear to me. She has the right to say no and you don't have the right to take that from her. If she doesnt know that she should say no you dont have the right. Passing a bill that defines rape only when it was 'forced' opens up the door for every db with some ghb in his pocket to have a great time. GHB isnt called the date rape drug bc its recreational. Its been used for that enough times that its gotten this name in our society.

 

Any woman with any kind of moral fiber realizes when she f'd up and had to much to drink and slept with some ahole. She doesn't call him the next day. Hell how many of you have jumped on grenades when you were bombed? Did they rape you? Anyone with any kind of morals wouldn't claim rape from this. To call every chick who's claimed date rape a lying whore who just changed her mind is pretty f'd up. Passing that bill that says "well you shouldn't have put yourself into that situation so now you have to deal with the emotional baggage it bc wasn't 'real' rape" is just unbelievable to me. Putting that language into a bill to try to directly reduce state/federal spending on abortion is one of the most f'd up things I've read in a long time. Make it personal bc if that passes it very possibly could become so, ask yourself this. If it was someone you loved, sister/cousin/child...whomever, would it be ok for someone else to drug them in order to have their way with them? If you answered no how can you tell someone else's sister/cousin/child 'you've gotta take one for the team bc the real issue here is abortion spending and we have to get this bill passed'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reread the link you posted. The bill was originally proposed with specific language in it that was challenged and had to be removed (see below). Redefinition language was around 'forced' rape and things that would be excluded as a result. Attempting to exclude those would result in less things being covered by taxpayer funding. I obviously wasnt saying this was about false accusations, others stated and posted pictures making women who claim rape out to be liars. Some may have been in jest but I think its pretty f'd up.

 

"Smith sought to prevent the following situations from consideration: Women who say no but do not physically fight off the perpetrator, women who are drugged or verbally threatened and raped, and minors impregnated by adults.

 

Smith promised to remove the language and while it is not technically in the bill, Mother Jones reports that House Republicans used “a sly legislative maneuver” to insert a “backdoor reintroduction” of redefinition language. Essentially, if the bill is challenged in court, judges will look at the congressional committee report to determine intent. The committee report for H.R. 3 says the bill will “not allow the Federal Government to subsidize abortions in cases of statutory rape” — thus excluding statutory rape-related abortions from Medicaid coverage."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...