420
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
420 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19082 readers
3499 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I predict the same shenanigans for exceptions for rape. "You were raped? Ok let's wait for the conviction. It took too long and now you can't get an abortion? Teehee."
Fuck, it can even be a struggle for a woman to even be believed that she was raped. Especially in right leaning counties/cities/states. And also fight for an exception? I do wonder have any women been given a medical exception?
I have yet to hear about any medical exemptions, this was the first which was then discarded.
This rejection will have a chilling affect on the willingness of others to try for an exemption as well.
Even worse, it sounds like it wasn’t entirely settled, just delayed until after it makes no difference
It’s ver y easy to get an exception - I understand you were raised. Let’s schedule a court date 12 weeks from now to see if you’re under the six week limit
The idea that a woman has to prove to legal satisfaction that she was raped in order to get an abortion is so fucking sickening. There shouldn't be the same standard for a raped woman to get an abortion than there is to convict her rapist.
While I think its sickening, they need some way to at least prove it happened to legal satisfaction. Not the same standard I agree.
If all you had to do was claim rape and invent an imaginary situation the police would never figure out (e.g masked rapist in a no camera area of town when no one was around) then every woman could just claim rape to get an abortion.
Filing a false police report probably has consequences but worse than having an unwanted child?
Although I'm not saying a conviction is needed here, but some sort of medical agreement that rape was likely, however they determine that now with rape kits.
This whole thing is maddening though. They should be able to get an abortion if they want one end of story.
Edit: for anyone who wants to or has downvoted me here, please do tell me how we can ban abortions and have an exception for rape, but not have a way of verifying a rape without allowing 100% of woman to claim rape for 100% of abortions. This shitty situation is reality, and you can't just disagree and say they should be allowed an abortion because they want one. That's not a valid answer to our current situation as shitty as it is.
The answer here is simple: I reject the premise of the question. Banning abortion but having an exception for rape is morally disingenuous. You can't say "abortion is murder some of the time."
If that's your stance that's fair, I made an assumption that the downvotes were from people upset that I was explaining why they can't just allow a rape claim without some confirmation a rape actually happened.
Edit: I was just explaining the situation, though.
Edit: also thanks, I appreciate the answer.
I imagine it'll be more like:
"You were raped? Do you have a photo of yourself in the outfit you were wearing when you were raped? We need see if you were asking for it or not before we make that decision"
"Did you orgasm? It's a sin if you were raped and enjoyed it." Wait, that's for church.
If there was a line between the church and the state we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.
It’s too bad our country’s founders didn’t consider whether there should be a separation of church and state