Sensible Erection | Raped in the military, then again by the GOP

Friday, 15 June 2012

Raped in the military, then again by the GOP

quote [ House Republicans are poised to again deny abortion services to service members who were raped and then became rape-pregnant. Even if they are raped by an enemy combatant they can’t get emergency abortion services. ]

Any women out there still plan to vote Republican this fall? If so, you are voting for American POW's who get raped by their captors and get pregnant to be forced to bear those children. Not to mention American servicewomen who get raped by "our side."

[politics] [by sua_sponte@12:53amGMT] [+10 WTF]

Comments

afrasr said @ 12:58am GMT on 15th Jun

schatten00777 said @ 1:04am GMT on 15th Jun
That’s three percent (although you’ll have to work your way through some obfuscatory math to get to that number.)

Whaaaaat?

afrasr said @ 1:24am GMT on 15th Jun
Yet A large proportion of women will vote republican, because they want to "support the troops"

sanepride said @ 1:44am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Funny]
"A large proportion" perhaps, but not a majority. Recent polls give Obama an 18+ point lead among women overall.
But one thing that seems pretty likely- women who do vote for Romney will not be casting their votes to "support the troops". They will be voting largely on domestic, economic concerns. In fact, married women are more likely to vote on economic issues, while single women tend to vote on social issues. They're the ones who will obviously lean heavily towards Obama and the Dems.

afrasr said @ 1:54am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Funny]
Old women will vote for Mittens, and then cry about it when he takes away their medicare

sanepride said @ 2:20am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Funny]
My 93-year-old aunt would take exception to your broad generalization. She's a solid Obama voter.

afrasr said @ 2:57am GMT on 15th Jun
Your 93 yr old Aunt still has all her marbles then :D

*high five your Aunt*

Rest of her friends and demographic ? Yeah.. not so much

eggboy said @ 4:39am GMT on 15th Jun

spite48 said @ 7:09am GMT on 15th Jun
I love the other cop laughing in the background.

sanepride said @ 7:07pm GMT on 15th Jun
Depends where. My mom's in her 70's. She and all of her friends, solid blue (though to be honest, a lot of them would rather have seen Hillary in the white house.)

bruceski said @ 4:10am GMT on 15th Jun
My mom too. Not sure her age though, she's been "in her 30s" for as long as I can remember.

BlutStein1984 said @ 2:59am GMT on 15th Jun
I don't quite understand the thought process behind that though I know it happens. The US Foreign Policy doesn't really change a measurable degree at all whether we have Democrats or Republicans running the show. Both parties fully agree on continuing our reckless wars of adventure.

Might as well flip a coin when entering the voting booth, either way your neighbors kid is getting shipped off to war as soon as he is done with boot camp.

afrasr said @ 3:46am GMT on 15th Jun
Yes, because you see so many democrats pushing anti choice laws.

You have democrats going onto major, unfunded wars, with no clear objective, and an opened ended commitment.

You have democrats cutting funding for returned troops, and fucking them over via laws that let their houses get stolen by the banking bastards.

yes... they are all the same

Moleculor said @ 4:49am GMT on 15th Jun
For anyone who's not sure, that post is sarcasm.

cb361 said @ 1:30pm GMT on 15th Jun
That's what I thought, but what if you are being sarcastic when you call that post sarcasm?

Anti-fuites said @ 3:33pm GMT on 15th Jun
I don't even know anymore

graham said @ 1:36am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:2 Funny]
This is my dog:

She is the result of a vicious dog-raping.

It isn't all that bad, is it?

although she is angry and gassy all of the time...

sanepride said @ 1:47am GMT on 15th Jun
Not a fair comparison.
Remember the old adage- If you lock your dog and your wife in the trunk and come back in a couple of hours, which one will be happy to see you?

Dioxin said @ 3:20am GMT on 15th Jun
My wife. Dogmeat can only sustain you for so long in there.

eggboy said @ 4:36am GMT on 15th Jun

GordonGuano said @ 3:12pm GMT on 15th Jun
If they're old enough to crawl, they're in the right position.

mechanical contrivance said @ 11:04pm GMT on 15th Jun
Consensual rape is best rape!

cb361 said @ 12:15pm GMT on 15th Jun [Score:4 Funny]
Yes, but you still shouldn't have raped the dog.

graham said @ 4:27pm GMT on 15th Jun
O_O

papango said @ 1:53am GMT on 15th Jun
This is part of something that really puzzles me. I've always thought that a right-wing party would be more likely to give special benefits to the troops. I can't figure why the Republicans just seem to heap the abuse and poor treatment on.

afrasr said @ 1:56am GMT on 15th Jun
Republicans only give a shit about the troops when they are fighting the proxy resource war for them.

Even then, it's the barest minimum of a shit.

Once they leave the army, limbless, and mentally destroyed, they don't give a fuck.

Instead they cut all their medical and support benefits, and tell them to suck it up, and pull them selves up by their boot straps.. or re enlist

papango said @ 1:59am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
Yeah, but why? Most other right-wing parties around the world boost service people with benefits and good care. They (soldiers, etc) tend to be right leaning, so a little extra boost and you have voters for life. What the Republicans are doing seems designed to alienate a group that should form part of their core support.

underdog said @ 2:09am GMT on 15th Jun
Good question. Being ex-military I agree with what you say, but the same thing is happening in Australia with the left leaning gubmint insofar as they are supposed to be in support of the unions. What has happened since the lefties got into power is that the unions have been de-fanged and, through changes in the law, now barely have the power to negotiate for the workers who are traditionally Labor's voters.
Same question: Why would they do that?

afrasr said @ 2:13am GMT on 15th Jun
Well as enlisted personal, and ex enlisted make up a smaller voter base that the tea party, chicken shits who are crying for smaller government, and also pushing for the US to go to war with Iran.

It's simple numbers. They appeal to the bigger voter block.

Labour in Australia is now a center right party, so they are happy fucking over unions, if it gets them more votes in conservative western Sydney, where most of the lower house seats are.

underdog said @ 2:23am GMT on 15th Jun
But afrasr, surely you're not saying that politicians would gleefully abandon the policies that got them voted into power in the first place just to remain in power? That would be akin to accusing them of being dishonest, shallow and cynical.

afrasr said @ 2:25am GMT on 15th Jun
I know it's a lot to take in... but yes...

I know this info is hard.

It'll be ok man.

underdog said @ 2:38am GMT on 15th Jun
Oh well...At least we still have heroes like Lance Armstrong to look up to.

afrasr said @ 2:58am GMT on 15th Jun
Yeah.... I have some news you aren't going to like..

Best to sit down...

underdog said @ 3:25am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]

afrasr said @ 3:47am GMT on 15th Jun
Oh, and just so you know..

Emma stone, Christina Hendricks... not natural red heads..

underdog said @ 4:01am GMT on 15th Jun
What about Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy and Travolta's heterosexuality?

Naruki said @ 4:09am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:-1 WTF]
None of them are redheads either, except maybe Travolta's heterosexuality.

underdog said @ 4:20am GMT on 15th Jun
Shame, I always like to ~~fap to~~ imagine Nicole Kidman as the tooth fairy.

afrasr said @ 4:44am GMT on 15th Jun
Travolta is straight... until he gets a massage from a hotel masseuse... then they use their masseuse powers to make him gay'er than a Vegas magician

chold_numa said @ 12:27am GMT on 16th Jun
Union membership is declining in Australia and elsewhere. The Labor Party is not able to win with union support alone and needs contributions from other donors, many of whom are business owners.

On the other hand, voters who are not business owners for most part are voting for the Conservatives for what I would say are sentimental and unsound reasons. If Tony Abbott could have his way in a day, women would be barefoot and pregnant, tertiary education would be only for the rich, and migrants would be turfed out of the country I imagine.

Omegaphobic said @ 6:38am GMT on 16th Jun
Fucking tell me about it. The common person is a FUCKING RETARD FUCK. Voting AGAINST Labour because 'they don't like how they've been acting' without giving a single fucking brain-cycle to contemplating what the Coalition policies are ACTUALLY going to do to the country. I get fucking choked with anger when I even think about it. I want to hit people and tell them what fucking moronic FUCKS they are.

happiest_sadist said @ 7:57am GMT on 16th Jun
I also want you to do this. After all, I can't be everywhere.

chold_numa said @ 11:56pm GMT on 16th Jun
I think the prime example is the carbon tax. The Labor policy is well thought out and sane, includes a tax break for the most affected by tripling the tax free threshold and eases industries into paying it. The Coalition policy is pick winners who coincidentally appear to be in rural areas where National Party voters are sitting.

Frankly, I want the sane technocrats in charge and not the lunatics. We need more diverse media ownership at some point. Like yesterday for preference.

epease said @ 3:15am GMT on 15th Jun
Kent State

sanepride said @ 2:22am GMT on 15th Jun
Anti-abortion pretty much trumps everything with these guys.

incpenners said @ 3:51am GMT on 15th Jun
God, how I love to send your posts to my friends.

sua_sponte said @ 3:54am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:2 Funny]
You get posts from God? Does he talk to you, too?

eggboy said @ 4:49am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:2 Informative]
Right here, god on abortion:
Numbers 5:11-5:31

The priests of the LORD shall feed a woman poison that causes miscarriage if her husband suspects her of unfaithfulness.
And my favorite: “‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it. ”
...
The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.

sanepride said @ 5:05am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Funny]
Really? I'm flattered penners. I pretty much just disregard your comments.

papango said @ 10:04am GMT on 15th Jun
Now, now. I'm sure that penners is just crafting his comment where he explains the other angle (the angle we're obviously missing in our rush to paint anti-choice campaigners as ideologues who can't get their minds out of other people's wombs). If we all just wait quietly I'm sure he will come back and tell us how this makes sense.

pleaides said @ 1:34pm GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
Or he'll mod you +1funny.

cptkirk said @ 3:14am GMT on 15th Jun
The military is forcing women to carry pregnancies to term?

coffeejoejava said @ 10:41am GMT on 15th Jun
Yes, there are CONSERVATIVE /LIBERTARIAN folks among the SE'ers.

And being a retired Arine Corps officer, I can tell you the military does not force women to carry a child to term. Military hospitals are not allowed to perform abortions unless there is a threat to the woman's life.

Women who are pregnant can go out in town and have the procedure done.

The TRUE reason women carry their child to term is that once they tell that they are pregnant, single or not, they re taken off deployment lists for about a year and a half and given some bullshit clerical job for about 4 hours a day. And if they are single and living in the barracks, they are immediately given additional money so that they can get their own place in town, or if they are stationed overseas (Japan, England, Germany etc) they are given on base family housing.

papango said @ 9:21pm GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
You really think a women will carry her rapists child to term for rent money and 18 months behind a desk? Seriously? I think this ends your involvement in this conversation.

mechanical contrivance said @ 11:07pm GMT on 15th Jun
It's not unheard of for people to do irrational things.

papango said @ 11:56pm GMT on 15th Jun
You can take it from someone whose had a termination that what is on offer here would not have changed my mind. Would it change yours? Would you raise a child based on what is on offer?

mechanical contrivance said @ 12:51am GMT on 16th Jun
No, but that doesn't mean there aren't people who would.

coffeejoejava said @ 2:29am GMT on 16th Jun [Score:-1 Unworthy Self Link]
What i am telling you idiot is that military hospitals do not perform abortions....plain and simple. I did not say anything about rape, and even in that case, military hospitals will not conduct an abortion.

What I offered about pregnant military members does not hold true for all women wearing the uniform. But unfortunately, during my 23 years in the Marine Corps, I saw plenty of women who abused the system for everything it was worth. I could tell you about one Sergeant that would turn your stomach.

Naruki said @ 3:17am GMT on 16th Jun
Wait, you were an Arine, AND a Marine? Now who's the idiot, huh?

Seriously, you are claiming that women do not want to be taken off active duty and given less demanding work plus other benefits, so instead they... go into battle with a growing bulge, raging hormones, sickness, etc., etc.?

And all kidding aside, who is the idiot? Hint, he can't spell Marine consistently.

papango said @ 4:23am GMT on 16th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
This conversation is about rape victims. And as you say, even then military hospitals will not perform them. But it's okay, because a woman raped in Baghdad can just go into town and get one. So every-thing's fine. And I bet there is a whole heap of other injuries soldiers receive in the line of duty that military hospitals don't cover, you'll have more experience in this so why don't you give us some examples?

coffeejoejava said @ 12:52am GMT on 17th Jun
IF a female military member got pregnant in a combat zone, and the command found out, they would be on the first plane out of the combat zone. Pregnant females are not allowed on deployment....PERIOD.

When I was a Sergeant, there was a female sergeant that had been sitting at he same desk for over 4 years (normal rotation is 2-3 years). She was supposed to transfer to Japan but "convieniently" got pregnant, orders cancelled. The child was born and she kept it for 6 months, divorced the Dad and gave it up for adoption. She again came up for orders to Japan. She married the biggest POS in the Corps, got pregnant and, one day before her hubby was to deploy, seperated from her husband giving up all rights to her child. This, of course, also kept her hubby from deploying.
During her time off for baby leave (3 months) she had gotten a car at 23% interest (fucked up credit) and spent an additional 3K on rims and a stereo. As soon as her hubby missed the ship leaving, his pay was stopped....missing a movement in the Corps is a SERIOUS offence.

Long story short, she was busted to Corporal, her hubby was drummed out of the Corps, and as soon as she was able, she got out...with a 4F reenlistment code. 4F means "Not in a million years would we take this person back". It also fucks you over for a federal job.

6 months later. Her car is repossessed, her hubby leaves her, and baby two is given up for adoption.

papango said @ 1:33am GMT on 17th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
You got cut off before you could tell us about the other injuries a POW might sustain that the military doesn't cover. Presumably there are other injuries where command just ships the person out and they deal with it themselves elsewhere? There must be.

So, you have one tale of a woman abusing the system (who wasn't actually a rape victim, so is not exactly what we're talking about), who eventually got what was coming to her and this is evidence that every women is therefore abusing the system and are slutty slut sluts who should just shut up about their rights. It's not very convincing to be honest.

sanepride said @ 4:57am GMT on 16th Jun [Score:1]
Let's hear about that sergeant. People around here have pretty strong stomachs.

papango said @ 5:35am GMT on 16th Jun
I've corresponded with sex offenders (as part of my job, so I had to maintain professional standards) about why it doesn't matter if they were 'seduced' by their eight year old step daughter, it's still illegal. I think I can handle whatever this Sergeant was up to.

coffeejoejava said @ 12:53am GMT on 17th Jun
She was frankly one of the skankiest women I have ever met. Nasty.

papango said @ 1:33am GMT on 17th Jun
And everybody knows that skanks aren't allowed rights.

sanepride said @ 4:00am GMT on 17th Jun
...and no doubt you've met some really skanky ones.

KropperPrime said @ 3:37am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Funny]
I wonder if there are any republican SEers...

afrasr said @ 3:43am GMT on 15th Jun
There are a few

bruceski said @ 4:12am GMT on 15th Jun
Are we counting folks who identify as Republican even if they're unhappy with the current location of that party, or just the hardcore mouthpieces?

GordonGuano said @ 4:27am GMT on 15th Jun
Clone Dwight Eisenhower and I'd vote for him. Hell, Nixon and Goldwater would be branded hippies today.

Lacuna said @ 2:50pm GMT on 15th Jun [Score:2 Insightful]
What I can't get over is where the GOP gets off. They talk so much about being anti-big government. Shrink the government! The government can't tell me what to do!

And then in the same breath they turn around and start pushing laws through that restrict the rights and choices of half the population. With government money.

Where is the disconnect, there? You don't want the government to interfere in your life, but it's fine if it's messing around with a woman's life? Especially a woman in the service? Just goes to show that old white men still don't get that women are people, too.

theolypse said @ 12:18am GMT on 16th Jun
There's no disconnect. You assume sincerity without reason to.

afrasr said @ 4:44am GMT on 16th Jun
Republicans don't see women as people.

They seem as disposable wombs, to produce the next generation of soldiers to fight their proxy wars