Question about "stand your ground" versus "legitimate rape."

[Orrex]

My understanding is that, to the Republican mindset, it's only "legitimate rape" if there's actual force involved. Not threat of force, not psychological coercion, etc., but actual violent force.

How can they reconcile this with their defense of "stand your ground" laws that allow the killing of a person solely on the basis of a perceived threat?

I mean, aside from the obvious answer that they're seeking to subjugate women, how can they argue that a perceived threat is sufficient justification for the use of preemptive deadly force, but a perceived threat is not sufficient to identify an attack as a "legitimate rape?"

[TreasonousBastard]

1. One involves sex, which is always a bad thing...

and the other involves shooting, which is a good thing.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. And there you have it.

[Orrex]

3. We have a winnah!

Sad but true.