Who's likely to love changing the definition of rape?

[madamesilverspurs]

Remember this guy?






His name is Clayton W. "Claytie" Williams. He ran for Texas governor against Ann Richards, slandering her horribly in the process. He gained national notoriety for his comment about rape, that it was like bad weather, that "you just lay back and enjoy it."

Ann Richards was elected.
-

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Sorry, I don't remember him...

Who is he?

Lemmie guess.......he's a Republican!

:P

[brewens]

2. There was a joke I actually thought was funny at one time.

It was something like, there's no such thing as rape, because a woman can run faster with her dress pulled up, than a guy can with his pants pulled down.
I'm still waiting for one of those guys to use that one.

[arcane1]

3. I remember the comment but not the person

Though they are legion.

[sharesunited]

4. His profile here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clayton_Williams

That was a notoriously insensitive remark.

The current effort to eliminate any exceptions for taxpayer funded abortion is more about elevating fetal rights above a woman's dominion over her person consistent with Roe.

[Capnjack]

5. I read the bill....

..and didn't see where the legal definition of rape was being redefined like everyone is saying. That guy's remarks though are disgusting.

[dflprincess]

7. I'm inclinded to believe Mother Jones' article about the bill

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. (Smith's spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.)...

..."This bill takes us backwards to a time when just saying no wasn't enough to qualify as rape.""This bill takes us back to a time when just saying 'no' wasn't enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women's Law Center. Laurie Levenson, a former assistant US attorney and expert on criminal law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, notes that the new bill's authors are "using language that's not particularly clear, and some people are going to lose protection." Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes. "There are a lot of aspects of rape that are not included," Levenson says....

The article also mentions that the way this law is written it might be illegal for a woman to use money from her Health Savings Account to pay for an abortion. I don't quite get that but apparently, the twisted rational being that those accounts are funded by "pretax" dollars and if any money used for abortion should have been taxed first.

[Iris]

9. wait... so they want to tax money you spend on an abortion but they don't want tax money to pay for

abortions.

These freaks just never stop twisting things up, do they?

[dflprincess]

11. I don't think they actually plan to tax the money paid for an abortion

but they're saying you can't use pretax dollars you set aside in your Health Savings Account (an account set up to help pay medical bills) because by using money that was tax exempt you're using tax money for an abortion (which, last I heard, was still a legal medical procedure).

I don't really follow the logic on this one at all - but then I am not insane. I'm sure you're having trouble with this concept for the very same reason. :hi:

[Iris]

12. ha! ha! Yes! It's good to know I'm not insane!

[mwrguy]

6. Roman Polanski?

"It wasn't 'rape' rape." - Whoopi Goldberg

[niyad]

8. oh, I remember that bastard

[Zoeisright]

10. Rapists? Men who have been rejected?

And "Claytie" looks like he's had some rejection in his day.

[riderinthestorm]

13. Yup, I say just label them rapists. What other reason could there be to label incest

as consensual sex for example?

I say we launch a campaign that labels these guys as the perverts they are. This is the "Pro-Rape" bill, and anyone who supports it must be hiding some salacious aspect of their lives in order to back it. Why else would they be motivated to de-criminalize rape in this degree?