By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Rapists can now sue victims seeking abortions

dahuman on 04 February 2017

I'm just going to also add, which is something I've shared before here that, if my brother/sister wasn't aborted, I wouldn't exist cause my mom would have tied the knot after 2 kids. So abortion FTW! Rest of you who disagree can **** right off since I'm here instead of somebody else lol.



Around the Network
fatslob-:O on 04 February 2017

I have no idea why people are pointing to Trump for this when this is Arkansas state legislature passing the bill in their own state of Arkansas ...



Yerm on 04 February 2017
eva01beserk said:
Yerm said:
this is the worst country in the world...

then moove to africa or iraq.

Yeah because I totally just have the money to do that. Its also not like I have any responsibilities at all. and why would I specifically go there? I would go somewhere like Canada or the UK



monocle_layton on 04 February 2017
fluky-nintendy said:
ShadowSoldier said:

What the acutal FUCK are you talking about? That's some false hateful bile you're spreading, like what correlation does islam even have with this Bullshit?

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/rape-adultery.aspx

If there were no witnesses, the rape will count as adultery most likely or the rapist doesn't confess the crime. >And it happens in islamic countries, same countries sjws think the government shouldnt close borders and bring em all in instead.

Please don't go off topic. Sick and tired of seeing islam/refugees be shoe horned into every damn topic 



Lafiel on 04 February 2017
fatslob-:O said:
I have no idea why people are pointing to Trump for this when this is Arkansas state legislature passing the bill in their own state of Arkansas ...

maybe because this would get swatted away in todays supreme court, but Trump wants to stack it with staunch pro-lifers if any more judges retire during his presidency

then similar legislation might even be installed country wide (because the GOP are only for "states rights", if it's the rights they support themselves)



Around the Network
bdbdbd on 04 February 2017
VGPolyglot said:
fluky-nintendy said:
It's horrendous. But isn't it possible int he middle east for women that got rapped to be stoned to death if she doesn't have at least 3 male witnesses. Sjw's must be applauding this since they love islam so much.

It's not that we love Islam, it's that we think that people shouldn't be targeted because they're Muslim, and that religion plays a smaller part in their decisions than most people think.

But you seem to think everyone else should be targeted because someone else is a muslim, and also, if a muslim commits a crime, it's usually the fault of the victim, when it comes to SJW's.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

VGPolyglot on 04 February 2017
bdbdbd said:
VGPolyglot said:

It's not that we love Islam, it's that we think that people shouldn't be targeted because they're Muslim, and that religion plays a smaller part in their decisions than most people think.

But you seem to think everyone else should be targeted because someone else is a muslim, and also, if a muslim commits a crime, it's usually the fault of the victim, when it comes to SJW's.

What? When did I say that everyone else should be targeted? And when did I say that it was the fault of the victim? Actually, most of the time we have to defend the victims when they're women and when a Muslim isn't involved, because it can be played out two different ways:

 

1. The rapist is not a Muslim, so a lot of people may resort to blaming the woman for what she wore or for not being careful enough

2. The rapist is a Muslim, and a lot of people's racism trump their sexism, so they will correctly defend the victim, but not because they really care about the victim, but because it can push their agenda fearmongering against Muslims.



TheLastStarFighter on 04 February 2017
bunchanumbers said:
TheLastStarFighter said:

You're wishing for an innocent person to be raped. That's disgusting. 

I'm wishing for irony.

We're not idiots. And you are not a good person.



Lafiel on 04 February 2017
TheLastStarFighter said:
bunchanumbers said:

I'm wishing for irony.

We're not idiots. And you are not a good person.

so political correct, can't take some locker room talk. sad!



Player2 on 04 February 2017
Acevil said:
Pineapple said:

The title seems to be completely false. I had a look at the bill, and I can't find anything in in that indicates that the father of the child can sue the mother. It reads to me that the mother cannot be sued.

"

(c The following individuals are excluded from liability under this1 subchapter:

(1) A woman who receives or attempts to receive a dismemberment abortion; "

 

I can't actually see any proof that a rapist can press charges either.In the list of people who can press charges, the man has to be married to the pregnant woman, and thus is not a rapist in the traditional sense

"(b)(1) A cause of action for civil damages against a person who has 28 purposely violated this subchapter may be maintained by:

(...)
B) The father of the unborn child, if the father is 32 married to the woman at the time the dismemberment abortion was performed (...)

 

I might be missing something, but neither part of the title appears to be true.


 

Here's the bill by the way

 

https://www.billtrack50.com/BillDetail/755370

It is poorly worded, A husband who can rape his wife can sue. (Which is still bad, but yes, the above is worse)

I can do better. If I've read it correctly, a father who raped his underage daughter can sue because neither rape nor incest are good enough abortion reasons in the eyes of the masterminds behind this bill:

(...)

(C) If the woman who received a dismemberment abortion in 35 violation of this subchapter is a minor or has died as a result of the 36 dismemberment abortion, the parents or legal guardians of the woman who 1 received a dismemberment abortion in violation of this subchapter. 2

(...)