Skip to main content

Another Republican Congressman talks about rape

First there was Todd Akin. Then there was Richard Mourdock. Now we have Arizona Representative Trent Franks taking it upon himself to discuss the matter of rape.

Franks proposed a measure which would ban abortions after 20 weeks during pregnancies. This measure is currently being considered by the House Judiciary Committee. In response, Democrats have proposed an amendment to the bill which would make exceptions for rape and incest.

Here's what Mr. Franks had to say about this proposed amendment:

"Before, when my friends on the left side of the aisle here tried to make rape and incest the subject - because, you know, the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low.

But when you make that exception, there's usually a requirement to report the rape within 48 hours. And in this case that's impossible because this is in the sixth month of gestation. And that's what completely negates and vitiates the purpose for such an amendment."

Right, because every woman who is raped isn't at all ashamed, embarrassed, or frightened about the incident, and due to this, 100% of women whom are raped report the matter within 48 hours of it happening. ...and every woman who is raped, and becomes pregnant via the rape, has an easy time deciding what to do with regard to the potential child, all the while quite possibly fearing for her life and battling depression.

I'm surprised that a Republican hasn't stood up by this point and proposed a bill which would fine any male Congressional Republican (or one running for Congress) whenever he publicly utters the word rape. Knowing them, though, the proceeds would likely go to an organization by the name of The Legitimate Rape Foundation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/12/gop-congressman-rate-of-pregnancies-from-rape-is-very-low/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"