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

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

ALL thinking, rational, reasoning people are. Thanx 4 askin'.

Mar 20, 2012 -- 9:59PM, Girlchristian wrote:

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.

No, what they say is without consent (although some don't include objects and only specify a sex organ). Even the FBI's definition of rape specifies no consent or without consent. You're making something up to fit this medical procedure that a woman consents to before it's done into the definition of 'rape.'

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases...

You keep proving OUR point, for which many thanks.

The consent in these instances, is obtained by coersion and religiously-based political intimidation, which means it is NOT freewill consent in the first place.

Mar 21, 2012 -- 11:24AM, Do_unto_others wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 10:09PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Mar 20, 2012 -- 10:01PM, mainecaptain wrote:

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.

So the FBI are 'right wing'? According to the FBI definition of rape this medical procedure does not qualify as rape.

Sorry, G"C", but the original FBI definition very clearly contained the words "without consent". The women in the cases we are discussing did not "consent" - they were COERCED into having an unwanted insertion of an object into their vagina.

 

The problem here is all the people defending this procedure and saying it is not rape. Actually support this form of rape. The only reason to defend it is if you support it.

And they support it because they don't think it will ever affect them in any way.  They (generic) think it can't happen to them, so they have no problem being complicit.

But supporting and defending this, they join with the rapist. Every-time this device is forced on a women through coercion, (against her free will). All those who support and defend it become part of the rape by proxy.

Mar 23, 2012 -- 10:20PM, fodaoson wrote:

This is rape by FBI, UN, and WHO definitions

 

The United Nations defines it as "sexual intercourse without valid consent,"^[5][18] and the World Health Organization defined it in 2002 as "physically forced or otherwise coerced penetration – even if slight – of the vulva or anus, using a penis, other body parts or an object".^[19]

FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Summary Reporting System (SRS). “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” 

⁵^ ^a b "Rape at the National Level, number of police recorded offenses". United Nations

¹⁸^ Convictions by Type of Conviction, Sex, Country and Year. Database of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

¹⁹^ Krug (2002). Rapport mondial sur la violence et la santé. Genève: Organisation mondiale de la santé. p. 149.ISBN 9241545615.

Thank you