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

Forums - Politics Discussion - US Senate candidate: Pregnancy from rape can be ‘something that God intended to happen’

Kasz216 on 24 October 2012
Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
As for what he said....

it's basic "God sometimes lets bad things happen for a reason" logic.

That's a weak, flimsy excuse to sell an anti-humanist and anti-women agenda. It's painfully transparent, and that's why he needs to get hammered on it, hard.

except it isn't.

It's quite literally something MOST americans believe based on basic spirtuality taken to it's logical extreme....

and again...

glass houses.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 24 October 2012
Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
 

We've had the back-and-forth over this one as well, and the fetish-appeal of Queen's Blade is irrelevant to the argument, which is about the role of the pro-life argument as the promotion of an anti-feminist agenda (the making of women into sex objects being a different part of the problem)

Lack of influence indeed. Because despite the media i consume, i'm out there working against it. I would figure the semester working for an anti-sex-trafficking coalition outbalances three seasons of Queen's Blade (that i never paid for anyway)

And again, to bring this back to a theological perspective, predestination either holds, or it doesn't. It can't hold only partway.

I linked to TVtropes for a reason.

  • High On Catnip: Done to Elina by Nyx to comedic effect when she surprises her with catnip powder, after learning Elina was susceptible to it. The accompanying flashback even reveals that her sisters used to use it to keep her under control. Sadly for Nyx, it backfires when Elina rapes Nyx, while under its influence!


Having comedic rape in a show that's about the sexualization of women... i'd say  that's reinforcing rape culture... wouldn't you?

If you just forgot this happens.   Well that sorta proves my point doesn't it.

 

As for outbalancing... this guy is a senator.  How much do you know about his legislation.  You worked on an anti-rapae coalition for a whole one semester.  How do you know he hasn't done things to stop rape?  You just threw that accusation out there without even taking a look at his legislative history... even though for all you know he may have created entire anti-sex traficing coalitions and enforcement groups.

At best, your accusation under your own terms is completely unwarranted and unresearched.

 

 

Though no... there is no such thing as "outbalancing."  when it comes to sexism or society... nor would that.

Anti-sex trafficking coalitions resolve a specific problem caused by rape culture it does nothing to combat rape culture.   Supporting media (even just by piraitng it, which does show an interest) promote rape culture... which leads to these things systemtically.

If you were looking to "outbalance" you would speak agaisnt queensblade and other such manga that trivilize rape or use it in a sexualizing way... (as waaaay to many do.)

Whatever's cited there, i haven't seen it yet. Possibly part of the manga, which i haven't read. I do remember there being some controversy in the fandom about them portraying actual rape at one point, so it's possible that was it...

The guy isn't a senator, btw. He's the right-wing nutcase who unseated the old Republican senator from Indiana, Richard Lugar, in the primaries for being "too moderate." As far as Wikipedia can tell me, he's been a Christian missionary to Bolivia, which makes it all the stranger that he suddenly advocates all of these anti-human-dignity positions once he's running for Senate.

With an addendum here that the group i worked for was specifically working to figure out how to reduce demand for prostitution, so yes, it was working on a cultural front.


Well now that you DO know... I'm guessing you are going to stop supporting the series?  Afterall it is a far bigger promoter of rape culture.

Weird though... the article I read said he was a senator.  Either way... that just hurts your point further, as now he literally has no more influence then you do... and as you mentioend.  He was a Missionary.

As for your taskforce.  What power do they have to inact any changes they decide on.  Compaired to say... your actual consumption of rape culture media.

If you were to take an honest look at the media and things you consume.  I think you'd find yourself quite guilty.

And self recognition of rape culture is the most important step to fixing rape culture.

Just how self recognition of unconsious racism is the most important step to fixing racism.

 

This is a bit of a hot button issue to me, because stuff like rape culture, racism and the like are things that EVERYBODY are victims too... and holier then now condemenation only further created a divide rather then bring actual change and improvement.



Allfreedom99 on 24 October 2012
Mr Khan said:
Allfreedom99 said:

If your implying he is just trying to push an agenda that intently means to diminish women I highly doubt. Many peole hold Pro-Life views in the U.S. today. His belief is that life begins at conception so therefore in his mind aborting is murder of a life. I doubt he is only trying to play on Christian beliefs that he doesn't hold and at the same time push an agenda from a belief of bringing women back to a "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen" mentality.

He phrased his statements in a very inarticulate way. But basically Rape is wrong and punishment should be given to the perpetrator, but if a life is created then it should not be terminated, because he considers it a human being with the right to life.

The proof is in the pudding. He's pro-Ryan Plan (which various Christian organizations have condemned, btw), has challenged the constitutionality of Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid, and i'd be willing to bet he's pro death-penalty.

You're either for life or you aren't.

I see that as a Dichotomy. You can't just say that if someone is against Terminating a life in the womb MUST be against terminating a life for a criminal act.

On the belief that Life begins at conception the belief is that the human being in the womb is innocent. The human being did nothing criminal or wrong. That is different from a individual who has commited hienous murders in the 1st degree and is shown to be a serious risk to society for further crimes. Some argue, "then lock them up for life". That is where the choice of using tax payer money to feed, clothe, and take care of a serial killer is advantageous or to give the full punishment of death for his crime. Each state decides that.

For a pro-life individual the differences are: one (being the unborn child) is an innocent life with the right to life and has committed no crimes. The other is convicted of murderous crimes, is a risk to further murderous crimes and is not innocent before society.

That is the difference in the Pro-Life individuals point of view. One is guilty. One is not.




Nsanity on 24 October 2012

It goons like this that give Religion a bad name.



NinjaguyDan on 24 October 2012

Fictional beings have NO place in government!



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK

Around the Network
Max King of the Wild on 24 October 2012

Saying god has no right being in politics is the dumbest shit I've ever heard. That would be like saying justice, morality, vitue have no place in politics. Religion is a contributing factor in how people view what is right and wrong (Though certainly not the only one). You can claim its made up by humans but then so is everything else that I listed. You know what else is made up of men? Politics. Therefore that shouldn't be involved at all either. We should live in a completely lawless society.



Max King of the Wild on 24 October 2012

Now, if you were to state that a persons shouldn't force their religion onto other people and make them practice it like the monarchs in the 16th century then I'd agree. But I absolutly do not agree with policies shouldn't be made based off of religion... because thats just silly. Religion gives people a sense of morals... non religious people would obtain it a different way that is just as equally flawed.



Mr Khan on 24 October 2012
Max King of the Wild said:
Now, if you were to state that a persons shouldn't force their religion onto other people and make them practice it like the monarchs in the 16th century then I'd agree. But I absolutly do not agree with policies shouldn't be made based off of religion... because thats just silly. Religion gives people a sense of morals... non religious people would obtain it a different way that is just as equally flawed.

We're saying the religious shouldn't use their authority to stump for political purposes, or latch their faith onto one specific policy and say "this here, this is what God wants."



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Max King of the Wild on 24 October 2012
Mr Khan said:
Max King of the Wild said:
Now, if you were to state that a persons shouldn't force their religion onto other people and make them practice it like the monarchs in the 16th century then I'd agree. But I absolutly do not agree with policies shouldn't be made based off of religion... because thats just silly. Religion gives people a sense of morals... non religious people would obtain it a different way that is just as equally flawed.

We're saying the religious shouldn't use their authority to stump for political purposes, or latch their faith onto one specific policy and say "this here, this is what God wants."



Then take out "this is what god wants" and put in "this is what I want because I believe it is the correct way of viewing this situation" same exact thing.



Kasz216 on 24 October 2012
Mr Khan said:
Max King of the Wild said:
Now, if you were to state that a persons shouldn't force their religion onto other people and make them practice it like the monarchs in the 16th century then I'd agree. But I absolutly do not agree with policies shouldn't be made based off of religion... because thats just silly. Religion gives people a sense of morals... non religious people would obtain it a different way that is just as equally flawed.

We're saying the religious shouldn't use their authority to stump for political purposes, or latch their faith onto one specific policy and say "this here, this is what God wants."

What makes a religious authority different from a union authority, or CEO, or School district leader.

If thier faith says one specific policy is the way it should be... why shouldn't they say that?