Mar 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, arielg wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 4:55PM, REteach wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 1:24PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Rape? The definition of rape is being forced to have sexual intercourse.

So if someone sticks a dildo in your vagina against your will, that is not rape simply because it wasn't a flesh and blood penis?

Who the hell  is talking about pushing anything against her will?

Someone who sticks a medical device in the  vagina of someone who is asking for an abortion is not forcing the woman to have sexual intercourse. Is it that  hard to understand the difference?

Is like viewing  a doctor who performs an operation with knives as attempting to murder them. Murderers cut people, so the doctor must be a murderer, according to this twisted logic.(or lack of it)  Geeezzzus!!  Talking about irrational  fixation.

So you think the women in the 50s who were sterilized against their will really consented just because it involved surgery?

Mar 20, 2012 -- 8:25PM, mainecaptain wrote:

I bet this kind of person would say yes.

It has nothing to do with believing any of this. It is simply that they (generic) wish to position themselves on the teaparty right wing. The desire to hurt people. After all they (generic) do not think it will have any personal affect on themselves,  so what do they care if someone else is violated.

Their lack of concern for other people is puzzling. In another thread I was called a "bleeding heart liberal" as if it were a bad thing to care about my fellow human beings.

Well.... I'm sorry. I care about my fellow humans. I do not want anyone forced to undergo an unnecessary personal violation just to satisfy someone else's extremist religious beliefs. That's what what this thread is about; speaking up and protecting my fellow humans from religious extremists. The Taliban or christian, the extremists must be marginalized for the good of all humanity.

Mar 20, 2012 -- 4:55PM, REteach wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 1:24PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Rape? The definition of rape is being forced to have sexual intercourse.

So if someone sticks a dildo in your vagina against your will, that is not rape simply because it wasn't a flesh and blood penis?

If you look up the legal definition of rape by state then it depends on the state; however, all of the defintions of legal rape require a lack of consent or an inability to consent (minors, etc.) neither of which apply to this medical procedure.

I agree that the requirement of the medical procedure is BS, but calling it rape is also BS.

Mar 20, 2012 -- 9:16PM, Girlchristian wrote:

If you look up the legal definition of rape by state...

And they all include forcing something, or trying to force something, into a woman's vagina against her wishes.

Mar 20, 2012 -- 9:48PM, mountain_man wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 9:16PM, Girlchristian wrote:

If you look up the legal definition of rape by state...

And they all include forcing something, or trying to force something, into a woman's vagina against her wishes.

Typical right wing behaviour, to try and change the defintion of rape.

"forcing something, or trying to force something, into a woman's vagina against her wishes." Is rape and/or sexual assault. No playing around with words will change this fact.