This is EXACTLY what Republicans mean when they say they're HARD on Rapists! After a Rapist Rapes your daughter it's illegal for her to get an Abortion and if she does her Rapist gets a bunch of money from her!
how ironic, if a man rapes a woman she's forced to have the baby and he goes to jail. but if a man rapes HIS woman (wife, daughter, sister), she'd forced to have the baby but he needs to die.
they don't care because this doesn't involve them.
Force him to have a baby. He'll change his tune as its ripping his urethra. I hope this awaits each of these bastards if hell were spiritual instead of physically on this Earth.
Frankly, he should be forced to watch the still birth of his own child from 10cm away, at breakfast time, every day for the rest of his life, while some sanctimonious asshole tells him and his wife it's all part of God's plan.
It seems more honest than touting exceptions as some sort of compromise. Have you ever thought of what a rape exception (or other exceptions) looks like in practice? They just don't happen. How many abortion providers are willing to test the law? How many pregnant people are able to get a police report necessary to be exempted? How many abortion providers are even practicing in states with rape exceptions to their otherwise strict abortion laws?
Arguing about what exceptions should or should not be on the books is a distraction. It's only service is to placate the general public into accepting barbaric abortion bans.
It's also the most logically consistent. I respect these shitstains infinitely more then Republican politicians who support exceptions.
Respect is doing a lot of work there, but really it comes to down to fact that at least they ACTUALLY believe abortion is murder.
All those other GOP politicians who support exceptions are just groveling maggots.
What? You believe it's okay to murder babies in certain circumstances? Get fucked.
If you're going to destroy the lives of countless women, at least do it because you have an actual deeply held conviction, and not simply that you want to win a primary.
Look, if our species was somehow struggling with birth rates and was on the verge of extinction, I might agree… but taking away someone’s bodily autonomy? No, that’s a step taken way too far over the line.
What happens to the rapist, then? Can he get partial custody of the child? Can he use that as an excuse to keep meeting or at least indirectly interacting with his rape victim?
What a great healing agent, to force women to be repeatedly reminded of that time when they were raped.
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered,
29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
That's pure evil, but one part stands out, not as the worst part, but somehow still stands out.
"and they are discovered." What's that got to do with anything? If this is from the religious point of view, then surely God knows what he did, so why would it matter if they're discovered. If it's from a legal point of view, then of course you can only redress crimes that are discovered, so there's no need to include that phrase.
So, including that phrase doesn't seem to have any relevance or benefit. Conversely, including a phrase like that does imply that if they're not discovered, then God doesn't care whether anything happens to the man. The girl has been violated and lost her virginity. But since they weren't discovered, there's no penalty, even from God.
The other thing this makes me think about is, "If the penalty for breaking a law is simply a fine, then the law really only applies to poor people." So, a person who can afford fifty shekels of silver can just pick any maiden he wants to marry, as long as she's not pledged to be married, even if he's old and gross. All he has to do is something terrible and then get "discovered." This section simply seems to legalize rape for rich people.
Because if they are not discovered then it's just her word against his so there's no proof so he's free to go rape someone else. Honestly, I think that's really what that means.
A child that will be a living, breathing reminder of their attack for the rest of their life is also a cruel thing to force upon them. But this is masochismsadism.
Hate to be THAT person, but it's sadism if you are referring to the guy who said it. Misogyny often breeds both though, so I can imagine the confusion.
