A rapist could stop his victim aborting?

(49 Posts)

For the second time Paul Ryan has co-signed a bill that would allow rapists to sue their victims to prevent them from gaining abortions.

Here is the article from first time round - http://jezebel.com/5934975/paul-ryan-sponsored-a-bill-that-would-allow-rapists-to-stop-their-victims-from-aborting

And new one http://jezebel.com/5975076/paul-ryan-once-again-sponsors-the-bill-that-would-make-it-possible-for-womens-rapists-to-sue-them

Ultimately they want to make abortion totally illegal, no exceptions, even in the case of a mother and foetus both dying without an abortion (and they want to ban IVF too).

My uninformed suspicion is that they don't care about human life, they just want a continuous supply of cute newborns for the rich couple adoption market.

Oh, and the bill is called 'The Sanctity of Human Life Act' though the potential mothers lives aren't included in that, obviously.

Trills Fri 18-Jan-13 10:34:26

I think your comment on "cute newborns" is a bit trivial and distracting from the main point.

There are 4 ways that the rules on who gets to decide about abortions could go:
1 - the woman gets to choose
2 - the man gets to choose
3 - both have to agree to an abortion
4 - both have to agree to continue the pregnancy

In the case of 2, 3, and 4 how exactly is it determined that the man asserting his "rights" could prove that he is the father? Can they do DNA tests in vitro with no risk to the foetus? It doesn't seem practical. If the woman disagrees with what the man wants she could (unless she has literally been locked up) claim to have had a one-night stand with someone whose name she doesn't know.

===

My own side-point: If you believe that abortion is murder, and that foetuses have a right to life, then it's more consistent and more honest to say that you think abortion is wrong no matter what circumstances conception occurred under. Rape exceptions have never made any sense to me.

hairychristmasandahappynewyear Fri 18-Jan-13 11:19:12

All I have to say about this is that I think the bill is disgusting and an affront to the human rights of women.

FastidiaBlueberry Fri 18-Jan-13 12:26:20

Absolutely agree with Trills. It is totally inconsistent to believe that it's OK to abort in the case of rape but not in other cases. Either a zygote or a foetus or a baby has a right to life at the expense of its carrier's life, health and long-term welfare, or it doesn't. It doesn't cease to have a right to set up home in her body against her will, just because she didn't consent to the act that put it there - how it got there is irrelevant.

The forced-birthers are inconsistent in many things, but not in this one IMO.

feministefatale Fri 18-Jan-13 15:48:35

Paul Ryan is a weeping pustule on the ass of America singing. I mean this is horrible but doesn't quite compete with the fact that he doesn't think "danger to the life of the mother" should be a reason for an abortion angry.

He is genuinely in my eyes an evil piece of shit.

I think there are 30 something states in America where a rapist can petition for custody of "their" child too. Fun fact of the day.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch Fri 18-Jan-13 17:42:22

I agree with Trills re consistency

This does seem a different twist - not a campaign for an outright ban but the father, especially where the father has assaulted you, being able to curtail what freedom you have under the current law is horrible.

FastidiaBlueberry Fri 18-Jan-13 18:08:16

Yes it is an odd twist, you're right.

It almost looks as though they are particularly keen to ensure that rapists can continue to abuse their victims. I'm guessing it's because they particularly like rapists and they particularly don't like women.

feministefatale Fri 18-Jan-13 18:34:38

Or maybe it's because they don't particularly see rape as a real thing. Or that if a woman got pregnant it could be from rape

KarlosKKrinkelbeim Fri 18-Jan-13 18:39:43

his position makes it fairly clear that his main concern is the ability of men to control women, rather than the interests of the foetus ...

WantsToBeFree Sat 19-Jan-13 10:48:04

I am stupefied. This is disgusting beyond words. I am concerned by the repeated references all around to Rapists' rights-whether it's their right to "humane" treatment even after pulling a woman's intestines out, or their right to stop their victim aborting. Women's rights are completely lost in the debate.

Would he force his wife or daughter to keep a baby conceived through rape? Or is his sickening views only apply to everyone else.

Anniegetyourgun Sat 19-Jan-13 10:58:51

Well, as we all know, it is a scientifically proven fact that women can't get pregnant from real rape, so she must have deep-down wanted that baby really. They're saving her from herself.

<spit>

Trills Sat 19-Jan-13 13:54:53

I assume that the people promoting the bill have not used the word rape at all, and are spinning it as preventing evil women from aborting a baby that the father wants to love and care for..

meditrina Sat 19-Jan-13 14:16:41

An abortion following rape was an important piece of case law in UK in 1938, when Dr Alex Bourne was acquitted of performing an 'illegal' abortion on a 14 year old who had been gang raped. So I can see there are grounds for treating rape victims differently. But I see it as a strong argument for facilitating access to abortion in such cases.

trustissues75 Sat 19-Jan-13 18:58:19

It's hardly surprising; Paul Ryan and his cronies are a bunch of self-serving, privileged, self-righteous misogynists who will do anything to get the right wing evangelical vote ever since the Republicans decided their best strategy was to use hot topic, divisive material to gain the votes of narrow minded and significant slice of the population during Regan's reign. I actually have acquaintances (women acquaintances) who support these people and vote for them. Sickening, utterly sickening.

AnyFucker Sat 19-Jan-13 19:00:46

I wonder what that equally stupid fucker who said "women can't get pregnant if they are raped" would say to this.

trustissues75 Sat 19-Jan-13 19:02:56

He'd find a way to explain away what he originally said....that's what they always do.

monsterchild Sat 19-Jan-13 19:10:46

I'm not sure how this would actually work because in many states when a child is conceived through rape the man has no ability to claim a child or make any decisions regarding the child. Also, by coming forward to make this claim, if the woman has already reported the rape, he is making himself available for prosecution as well.

monsterchild Sat 19-Jan-13 19:12:23

Also, the rapist would have to know the victim pretty well to know that she has actually conceived, and learn this in time to get a court order to stop her from aborting.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch Sat 19-Jan-13 19:20:35

Monsterchild, even if the abortion had already taken place, the prospect of being sued afterwards is pretty horrible. And in some states I think it does (deliberately) take a while to get an abortion - required to have a scan
First and come back another day etc.

monsterchild Sat 19-Jan-13 19:30:54

I agree, TheDoctrine, it's very hard in some states to get an abortion, and from what I have seen, even going to a clinic that performs abortions among other women's health services, regardless of the reason you're going, you'll be harassed by protesters who assume abortion is the number one birth control method.

Again, the rapist would have to know the victim pretty well. Which tells me that Paul Ryan probably assumes most rapists know their victims and can follow up on their situation. It's infuriating.

especially because there are only cuts to services to these same children once they are born.

Seabright Sat 19-Jan-13 22:15:07

Most rapists do know their victims, don't they? I thought "stranger rape" was relatively rare? And if they knew each other, it probably makes the rapists case that it was consensual all the more likely to be believed, so no real threat of prosecution,if the rapist comes forward.

I am open-mouthed at the continual obsession of Americans towards abortion and the total bollocks spouted and reported over there.

SolidGoldFrankensteinandmurgh Sat 19-Jan-13 23:05:14

The motivation is to strip women of human status and have them legally designated as walking incubators. These people genuinely feel that men should be able to stick their dicks in women and impregnate them whenever they feel like it.

trustissues75 Sun 20-Jan-13 07:39:50

What solidgold said: this is exactly what they are going for.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now