Women have to PROVE they were raped

well either the woman wants to have a child or doesnt want to have one and yet fate ends up giving her one.

Again odds are against you that a woman is actively thinking hey ill get pregs and then go on the government dole. Sure you might find one stating such, there is always that one to go against conventional wisdom. You have that with any topic honestly.

again on with the stupid.

Wow..children come from fate alone? No pro-active choice like having sex without contraception being used might make babies being created a more likely event? No way to prevent a baby being created if I am not ready to have a child just yet?

Well, ladies and gents, shelf your BC because fate is gonna get ya all in the end.:eusa_whistle:

you must e stupid or something. Read highlighted section for enlightenment.

See when a woman wants to have a child, typically she is pro-active in having sex, etc.....

i see you are not working with a full deck, like Windbag, i guess i will have to treat you like a retard from now on and spell everything out for you. Not that i think you will understand anyways.
 
fate is how women get pregnant?

whats up with you people being so literal today that its blocking your brains?
Is it just that you literally have nothing and are attempting to make something out of nothing in order to feel relevant?
 
I have no problem with a rape having to be proven.....what next people on disability will have to prove they are disabled...liberals always said rape should allow abortions, but now they upset people are calling their bluff

If you dont want people off on technicalities dont vote democrat

As for evidence, educate people and let them know to report asap. Rape needs to be reported and they do need to get evidence

Snd who cares if its a husband or boyfriend....if its rape its wrong

It's harder to prove.....You don't get it.....if the perpetrator is found innocent....what does that mean for the woman? Guess she's fucked against her will.....again.

No, just because the guy got off doesnt mean she wasnt raped....it just means they didnt have enough evidence....but thats a seperate issue.
its not that hard to tell a rape victim from a fake unless your retard da in durham nc

Really? So you know exactly how the law was written? BTW.....his do you tell the difference between a rape victim and a fake? Enlighten me with your psychological prowess.
 
Pennsylvania Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped | ThinkProgress

or lose food stamps.

We need a section devoted to the War On Women. But, since there is none, I'm putting this article here.

Note that there was also a Dem on this little holier than thou posse -

Pennsylvania lawmakers — State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R) — don’t want their state’s welfare program to provide additional benefits for that newborn. If a woman gives birth to a child who was conceived from rape, she may seek an exception to this rule so that her welfare benefits aren’t slashed, but only if she can provide proof that she reported her sexual assault and her abuser’s identity to the police...

I don't even have to ask how the rw's here feel about this. They'll just love it, I'm sure. Force women to bear babies they can't care for but then, take away assistance.

I see no reason that We the people need to support women who stupidly choose to get pregnant that cannot afford to raise a child. The last thing this country needs is more idiots who have children strictly for increased Welfare benefits. Try some personal responsibility for once.
 
It's harder to prove.....You don't get it.....if the perpetrator is found innocent....what does that mean for the woman? Guess she's fucked against her will.....again.

No, just because the guy got off doesnt mean she wasnt raped....it just means they didnt have enough evidence....but thats a seperate issue.
its not that hard to tell a rape victim from a fake unless your retard da in durham nc

Really? So you know exactly how the law was written? BTW.....his do you tell the difference between a rape victim and a fake? Enlighten me with your psychological prowess.


So how is the law written?

How do you know someone has PTSD? How do you tell lots of things. How do you know if a spouse that just lost a wife didnt kill her?

Well we could just forget the whole rape exemption and it makes this moot, dosent it?
 
fate is how women get pregnant?

whats up with you people being so literal today that its blocking your brains?
Is it just that you literally have nothing and are attempting to make something out of nothing in order to feel relevant?


So clarify.....what does fate have to do with getting pregnant? ARe you saying if she's ovulating? Liberals need to be clear, they love the gray areas, just come out and say it, man
 
Pennsylvania Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped | ThinkProgress

or lose food stamps.

We need a section devoted to the War On Women. But, since there is none, I'm putting this article here.

Note that there was also a Dem on this little holier than thou posse -

Pennsylvania lawmakers — State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R) — don’t want their state’s welfare program to provide additional benefits for that newborn. If a woman gives birth to a child who was conceived from rape, she may seek an exception to this rule so that her welfare benefits aren’t slashed, but only if she can provide proof that she reported her sexual assault and her abuser’s identity to the police...

I don't even have to ask how the rw's here feel about this. They'll just love it, I'm sure. Force women to bear babies they can't care for but then, take away assistance.

I'm sure you have been proven to be a lying moron already, but I'd like to repeat what was already said;

first paragraph; A Pennsylvania House bill seeks to limit the amount of TANF assistance that low-income women receive based on the amount of children they give birth to while covered under the program.

In other words, no more money for more kids, once you are on the system. eliminating people that have more kids just to get more money and bigger places to live.

You should cheer for this since fewer kids will be born into poverty.


skipping to proving you were raped;

well duh fucking duh
 
fate is how women get pregnant?

whats up with you people being so literal today that its blocking your brains?
Is it just that you literally have nothing and are attempting to make something out of nothing in order to feel relevant?


So clarify.....what does fate have to do with getting pregnant? ARe you saying if she's ovulating? Liberals need to be clear, they love the gray areas, just come out and say it, man

well, if it's Fate then...............

350x700px-LL-a5b51e04_26699__320x240_maury.jpeg
 
Pennsylvania Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped | ThinkProgress

or lose food stamps.

We need a section devoted to the War On Women. But, since there is none, I'm putting this article here.

Note that there was also a Dem on this little holier than thou posse -

Pennsylvania lawmakers — State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R) — don’t want their state’s welfare program to provide additional benefits for that newborn. If a woman gives birth to a child who was conceived from rape, she may seek an exception to this rule so that her welfare benefits aren’t slashed, but only if she can provide proof that she reported her sexual assault and her abuser’s identity to the police...

I don't even have to ask how the rw's here feel about this. They'll just love it, I'm sure. Force women to bear babies they can't care for but then, take away assistance.

I'm sure you have been proven to be a lying moron already, but I'd like to repeat what was already said;

first paragraph; A Pennsylvania House bill seeks to limit the amount of TANF assistance that low-income women receive based on the amount of children they give birth to while covered under the program.

In other words, no more money for more kids, once you are on the system. eliminating people that have more kids just to get more money and bigger places to live.

You should cheer for this since fewer kids will be born into poverty.


skipping to proving you were raped;

well duh fucking duh

this ^ should put an end to the OP
 
well either the woman wants to have a child or doesnt want to have one and yet fate ends up giving her one.

Again odds are against you that a woman is actively thinking hey ill get pregs and then go on the government dole. Sure you might find one stating such, there is always that one to go against conventional wisdom. You have that with any topic honestly.

again on with the stupid.

Wow..children come from fate alone? No pro-active choice like having sex without contraception being used might make babies being created a more likely event? No way to prevent a baby being created if I am not ready to have a child just yet?

Well, ladies and gents, shelf your BC because fate is gonna get ya all in the end.:eusa_whistle:

you must e stupid or something. Read highlighted section for enlightenment.

See when a woman wants to have a child, typically she is pro-active in having sex, etc.....

i see you are not working with a full deck, like Windbag, i guess i will have to treat you like a retard from now on and spell everything out for you. Not that i think you will understand anyways.

Just trying to work with the total nonsense you offered up. Fate or a lack of BC use is the greater reason for women having babies they cannot afford to support alone without my help? Let me introduce myself to you sir. I am the average American fed up taxpayer whose tax burden far exceeds what she would choose or expect it to be. I would like to discourage baby making as a productive means to procure government monies. This bill addresses this concern. Does that trouble you?
 
Pennsylvania Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped | ThinkProgress

or lose food stamps.

We need a section devoted to the War On Women. But, since there is none, I'm putting this article here.

Note that there was also a Dem on this little holier than thou posse -



I don't even have to ask how the rw's here feel about this. They'll just love it, I'm sure. Force women to bear babies they can't care for but then, take away assistance.

I'm sure you have been proven to be a lying moron already, but I'd like to repeat what was already said;

first paragraph; A Pennsylvania House bill seeks to limit the amount of TANF assistance that low-income women receive based on the amount of children they give birth to while covered under the program.

In other words, no more money for more kids, once you are on the system. eliminating people that have more kids just to get more money and bigger places to live.

You should cheer for this since fewer kids will be born into poverty.


skipping to proving you were raped;

well duh fucking duh

this ^ should put an end to the OP

seems it did

:lol:
 
121026_POL_AbuRichard.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg


This week, Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock became the latest in a string of Republicans to say really, really stupid things about women while campaigning for office in 2012. In a debate with Democratic opponent Joe Donnelly, Mourdock sought to explain his abortion stance by saying that “even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen.” Prior to that, Pennsylvania Senate candidate Tom Smith compared rape to having a baby out of wedlock, saying if you “put yourself in a father’s situation” it’s a similar kind of thing. And we all remember Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin telling an interviewer “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

What do all these men have in common aside from the fact that they are GOP standard-bearers for the U.S. Senate? To one degree or another, they are Christian fundamentalists.

The sheer number of these types of quotes that we’ve seen in 2012 got us wondering: Who says more antiquated things about women and families, Christian fundamentalists or Islamic fundamentalists? Here are nine stupid, backward, and often misogynistic quotes from nine different Islamic fundamentalist and Christian social conservative leaders. See if you can spot which one is which.

follow the link and take the quiz

Richard Mourdock rape scandal: spot the difference between the Christian social conservatives and the Islamic fundamentalists. - Slate Magazine
 
121026_POL_AbuRichard.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg


This week, Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock became the latest in a string of Republicans to say really, really stupid things about women while campaigning for office in 2012. In a debate with Democratic opponent Joe Donnelly, Mourdock sought to explain his abortion stance by saying that “even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen.” Prior to that, Pennsylvania Senate candidate Tom Smith compared rape to having a baby out of wedlock, saying if you “put yourself in a father’s situation” it’s a similar kind of thing. And we all remember Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin telling an interviewer “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

What do all these men have in common aside from the fact that they are GOP standard-bearers for the U.S. Senate? To one degree or another, they are Christian fundamentalists.

The sheer number of these types of quotes that we’ve seen in 2012 got us wondering: Who says more antiquated things about women and families, Christian fundamentalists or Islamic fundamentalists? Here are nine stupid, backward, and often misogynistic quotes from nine different Islamic fundamentalist and Christian social conservative leaders. See if you can spot which one is which.

follow the link and take the quiz

Richard Mourdock rape scandal: spot the difference between the Christian social conservatives and the Islamic fundamentalists. - Slate Magazine

try sticking to the topic idiot.
 
Pennsylvania Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped | ThinkProgress

or lose food stamps.

We need a section devoted to the War On Women. But, since there is none, I'm putting this article here.

Note that there was also a Dem on this little holier than thou posse -

Pennsylvania lawmakers — State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R) — don’t want their state’s welfare program to provide additional benefits for that newborn. If a woman gives birth to a child who was conceived from rape, she may seek an exception to this rule so that her welfare benefits aren’t slashed, but only if she can provide proof that she reported her sexual assault and her abuser’s identity to the police...

I don't even have to ask how the rw's here feel about this. They'll just love it, I'm sure. Force women to bear babies they can't care for but then, take away assistance.

Well when you have those "exception for rape" provisions, doesn't it make sense that at least the women accuse someone of raping her? She doesn't have to "prove" (i.e. get a conviction) she was raped, all she has to do is file the police report.

Or I guess you are one of those people that thinks a woman shouldn't report to the police when she is raped?

Otherwise the women will just say they got raped just to get another welfare check.
 
regressive policies towards women IS the topic, asswipe

546849_524840847544699_893483379_n.jpg


And the op from that thread:

As many of you know, the Bish used to be a greedy, angry, right winger. He ignored the less fortunate but made sure to deduct as much from his taxes for charitable contributions as possible, even though he gave nothing. I was in favor of war, but of course would never have considered serving. Gay rights? I didn't give a shit either way? The list goes on and on. And then my first child was bo
rn, and then another and another in what seemed like rapid fire.

What kind of world did I want them to live in? Did I want a world where my daughter was a second class citizen? Did I want my hatred to infect them; did I want them to judge others as I judged? I didn't happen overnight. It wasn't sudden. But eventually I left all of that behind and am proud to be a progressive and this year my eldest will cast his very first vote ever, joining me and his mother in supporting the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama.
 

Forum List

Back
Top