Notice: All Boston.com forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at Boston.com.

Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    Republican lawmakers in New Mexico want to make rape victims felons if they do not carry their pregnancies to term, because they're "tampering with evidence" that can be used at a sexual assault trial.

    Ya can't make up shiite this stupid.

     

     

     

    A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial.

    House Bill 206, introduced by state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for "tampering with evidence."

    “Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.

    Third-degree felonies in New Mexico carry a sentence of up to three years in prison.

    Pat Davis of ProgressNow New Mexico, a progressive nonprofit opposing the bill, called it "blatantly unconstitutional" on Thursday.

    “The bill turns victims of rape and incest into felons and forces them to become incubators of evidence for the state,” he said. “According to Republican philosophy, victims who are ‘legitimately raped’ will now have to carry the fetus to term in order to prove their case.“

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    Does this also count for "legitimate rapes"...?  Get Todd Akin on the horn....

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    dupe

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink2. Show WhichOnesPink2's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) = Utterly clueless

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    Wow.  Just wow....  Ignorance and intolerance at its highest level.  

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    " with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.



    I'd like to think that no jury would ever buy that a woman got an abortion to protect her rapist rather than to.....well....  not have the product of rape as her child.

     

    But then again, the juries would be drawn from the same people who elected the vile scum that support such a bill.




    The reality of law doesn't seem to discourage these idiots in their jihad against women.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    The moonbats are on their morally superior "high horses" again ...they really want to  believe that some NM legislator wanted to punish a rape victim and put the victim in jail.Thereby  proving yet again  to themselves how superior they are, and how  conservatives wage a "war on women"...

    "On Thursday, Brown issued a statement that she said clarifies the intent behind her bill. In it, she said she plans to submit a substitute draft soon. Her statement reads:

    "It has been speculated that this legislation is intended to criminalize rape victims. This is a misinterpretation of the intent of the legislation.

    'House Bill 206 was never intended to punish or criminalize rape victims,' said Rep. Brown. 'Its intent is solely to deter rape and cases of incest. The rapist—not the victim—would be charged with tampering of evidence. I am submitting a substitute draft to make the intent of the legislation abundantly clear..."

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to NO MO O's comment:

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

     

    Wow.  Just wow....  Ignorance and intolerance at its highest level.  

     




    Respectfully.. that dubious honor goes to people who generalize all others by a few.

     

    Know anyone like that ?



    I didn't say all conservatives are idiots like this one.  I try to avoid the generalization trap.  I think you are projecting your worldview on me.  I bet you think this is a cool idea and only wished you had thought of it first.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from GreginMeffa. Show GreginMeffa's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    She can clarify till the cows come home.  Her little law violates Roe, and is heartless and stupid.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    The moonbats are on their morally superior "high horses" again ...they really want to  believe that some NM legislator wanted to punish a rape victim and put the victim in jail.Thereby  proving yet again  to themselves how superior they are, and how  conservatives wage a "war on women"...

    "On Thursday, Brown issued a statement that she said clarifies the intent behind her bill. In it, she said she plans to submit a substitute draft soon. Her statement reads:

    "It has been speculated that this legislation is intended to criminalize rape victims. This is a misinterpretation of the intent of the legislation.

    'House Bill 206 was never intended to punish or criminalize rape victims,' said Rep. Brown. 'Its intent is solely to deter rape and cases of incest. The rapist—not the victim—would be charged with tampering of evidence. I am submitting a substitute draft to make the intent of the legislation abundantly clear..."



    Then she is just plain stupid.  You can't charge someone with tampering with evidence if they have no control of the evidence.  But I think she is covering her tracks and changing her tack from crazy stupid to just plain stupid.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from GreginMeffa. Show GreginMeffa's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    Then she is just plain stupid.

    ------------------

    Ding!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain.

    And Twain said this before the liberal blogosphere existed....

    The point is, the rape victim could not be charged with tampering with evidence. So all the hyperbole and posturing about intending to put a rape victim in jail  is worthless.. so the legislator explains what the bill is about..and the attack machine claims she is "backtracking"

    This is a common scenario , where a draft bill is spun by the liberal attack machine as something it isnt...see "ultrasound bill, Virginia, 2012"

    If a rape victim was coerced to have an abortion by the rapist, then the rapist could be charged with tampering with evidence. Cannot see how that violates Roe v Wade.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from GreginMeffa. Show GreginMeffa's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    If a rape victim was coerced to have an abortion by the rapist, then the rapist could be charged with tampering with evidence

    --------------------------------------------------------

    If that is the case, then this entire thread is complete bullsht, and I fell for it.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    "Republican lawmakers in New Mexico want to make rape victims felons"

    "A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday"


    Clearly you don't understand the concept of "plural."

     

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain.

    And Twain said this before the liberal blogosphere existed....

    The point is, the rape victim could not be charged with tampering with evidence. So all the hyperbole and posturing about intending to put a rape victim in jail  is worthless.. so the legislator explains what the bill is about..and the attack machine claims she is "backtracking"

    This is a common scenario , where a draft bill is spun by the liberal attack machine as something it isnt...see "ultrasound bill, Virginia, 2012"

    If a rape victim was coerced to have an abortion by the rapist, then the rapist could be charged with tampering with evidence. Cannot see how that violates Roe v Wade.



    Seriously?  The rapist sticks around to coerce an abortion to cover his tracks... You think there is such a scenario as a likely possibility?  Likely enough so you need a new law about it?  And in any event, the guy would be looking at a rape charge which is far more serious that any tampering charge could be. Again, just a stupid idea all the way around. I hear coconuts clattering as conservatives run away from this one.  Except you apparently.  Bitter ender...

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    "Seriously? The rapist sticks around to coerce an abortion to cover his tracks... You think there is such a scenario as a likely possibility? Likely enough so you need a new law about it?"

    No, dont think it is a likely possibility. Would be interested why this state lawmaker drafted this bill, was it based on a real instance...

    The point is, as the lead attack dog angryman said "Ya can't make up shiite this stupid."

    Yet the HuffPost liberal media machine did make it up, didnt they??

    You wont hear any backtracking from HuffPost, however, just claims that the  lawmaker is 'backtracking' and 'covering her tracks" ...and the liberal attack machine moves on to the next target.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    I hear coconuts clattering as conservatives run away from this one.  Except you apparently.  Bitter ender...

     

    And yet you seemingly support the over-the top rhetoric the this is part the "wingnuts incessant war on women." If you're looking for bomb throwers Reubin, go look in a mirror.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    "Seriously? The rapist sticks around to coerce an abortion to cover his tracks... You think there is such a scenario as a likely possibility? Likely enough so you need a new law about it?"

    No, dont think it is a likely possibility. Would be interested why this state lawmaker drafted this bill, was it based on a real instance...

    The point is, as the lead attack dog angryman said "Ya can't make up shiite this stupid."

    Yet the HuffPost liberal media machine did make it up, didnt they??

    You wont hear any backtracking from HuffPost, however, just claims that the  lawmaker is 'backtracking' and 'covering her tracks" ...and the liberal attack machine moves on to the next target.




    Heh, heh, heh....all is right with the nose-to-buttocks crowd because the wingnut who introduced the bill suddenly backtracks and says "That's not what I meant."

    Freakin Hilarious!!!

    If any of you wingnuts bothered to read the bill you would see that the victim and the rapist could be charged with a crime. Heck, it sounds broad enough that even the doctor could be charged.

    B. Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.

     


    It's another example of the whacko wingnut's not caring who gets hurt in their jihad against a legal medical procedure.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    "War on Women"?  Maybe not.

    "War on Abortion"?  Definitely.

    And for the opponents, this war has only one conceivable outcome: criminalization of abortions in the U.S.

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    I'll buy the "War on Abortion" Matty if you'll willing to go with "War on Human Fetuses." Alternatively, if you go by legislation that Obama has supported in the past we could also go wtih "War on Living Babies That Have Just Survived an Abortion." That has a certain ring to it.

    That is, of course, if you want to stick with this "War on" rhetoric.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    bump  

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    I hear coconuts clattering as conservatives run away from this one.  Except you apparently.  Bitter ender...

     

     

    And yet you seemingly support the over-the top rhetoric the this is part the "wingnuts incessant war on women." If you're looking for bomb throwers Reubin, go look in a mirror.



    Monty Python references are over the top?  I thought it was cute.  Go look in the mirror yourself you take things way too seriously.  Bombs away!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Now this is a new twist, and a new low, in the wingnuts incessant war on women.

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    I'll buy the "War on Abortion" Matty if you'll willing to go with "War on Human Fetuses." Alternatively, if you go by legislation that Obama has supported in the past we could also go wtih "War on Living Babies That Have Just Survived an Abortion." That has a certain ring to it.

    That is, of course, if you want to stick with this "War on" rhetoric.



    Nasty boy.  Throwing bombs around.

     
Sections
Shortcuts