Log in

No account? Create an account
Recent Entries Friends Archive Profile Tags Emma Love's Stories
So, after work today, I come home and turn the PC on, and what to my wondering eye doth appear? THIS SHIT!

I don't even know what ticks me off worse here. The fact that once again the "hands off our healthcare" people are once again trying to put their hands on someone else's healthcare, or that this ignores the fact that not all rape is violent, or the fact that this totally ignores adult victims who are intellectually disabled. There's just so much to be ragey about over this new bit of tomfoolery.

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

More from the article:
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.)

So, I spent the weekend pissed off (about something of lessor import), and now it looks like I may be spending much of this bright new week pissed off.

Basically, "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.

*sigh* And some people thought the Republicans For Rape website was parody (and some thought it was a bad parody at that), but turns out that site didn't even know the half of it.

I guess I should disclaimer a bit.

I have no problem with someone being anti-abortion, but I do take issue when someone tries to use government to force their beliefs on me (or anyone), especially considering that abortion is a legal procedure in the United States of America. And as a legal procedure there should be instances where the government can and will support a persons right to do this instead of trying to infringe more on more on PERSONAL rights. This is basically one of those "it ain't broke, so why yous trying to fix it" type things, in my opinion, but obviously there is some YMMV.

However, more and more I just can't understand how any woman in America can actually vote for any of these turds. Seriously, there are some Republican policies that I do support, but as a woman (unless the party changes) I will never be able to bring myself to vote Republican (or for a Republican) again.

I mean how far back do we have to go before we can start moving forward again? Seriously.
And I'm not just talking womens rights, all you have to do is look at a certain (recent) Arizona legislation to see that we're actually moving backwards across the board here.
love the icon.
also? I so agree with this post. The GOP and their war against women is insane! All at once, too! Politicians always think they can get away with real crazy sh*t right after they're sworn in and they're riding that electoral high.