• logicbomb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    172
    ·
    9 months ago

    What happens to the rapist, then? Can he get partial custody of the child? Can he use that as an excuse to keep meeting or at least indirectly interacting with his rape victim?

    What a great healing agent, to force women to be repeatedly reminded of that time when they were raped.

    • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      96
      ·
      9 months ago

      This is just a step to eliminating rape as a crime, they’ll find some way to justify as “for the babies”, the GOP are completely garbage people.

    • wicked@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      9 months ago

      Don’t worry, the good bible has the answer.

      28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered,
      29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

      • logicbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s pure evil, but one part stands out, not as the worst part, but somehow still stands out.

        “and they are discovered.” What’s that got to do with anything? If this is from the religious point of view, then surely God knows what he did, so why would it matter if they’re discovered. If it’s from a legal point of view, then of course you can only redress crimes that are discovered, so there’s no need to include that phrase.

        So, including that phrase doesn’t seem to have any relevance or benefit. Conversely, including a phrase like that does imply that if they’re not discovered, then God doesn’t care whether anything happens to the man. The girl has been violated and lost her virginity. But since they weren’t discovered, there’s no penalty, even from God.

        The other thing this makes me think about is, “If the penalty for breaking a law is simply a fine, then the law really only applies to poor people.” So, a person who can afford fifty shekels of silver can just pick any maiden he wants to marry, as long as she’s not pledged to be married, even if he’s old and gross. All he has to do is something terrible and then get “discovered.” This section simply seems to legalize rape for rich people.

        • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because if they are not discovered then it’s just her word against his so there’s no proof so he’s free to go rape someone else. Honestly, I think that’s really what that means.

      • clgoh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Fifty shekels of silver? That’s how much today in Stanley Nickels?

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      A child that will be a living, breathing reminder of their attack for the rest of their life is also a cruel thing to force upon them. But this is masochism sadism.

  • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    115
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    From the article: "Also in 2022, a Michigan Republican candidate said he told his daughters “If rape is inevitable, you should just lie back and enjoy it.”

    I do not think I’ve ever read a statement from someone that has pissed me off so fucking quickly. Someone needs to check on this man’s daughters and fucking take them from him, forcibly if necessary, ASAP, and then put them with a family who legitimately loves them.

    FUCK I HATE THIS TIMELINE.

      • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        You’re right. They are the ones platforming these types of people.

        I’d like to hope that enough of them would hear something like that and be like “Gross, I want nothing to do with the likes of this fucking asshole”, however, unfortunately, I do not know that this would be the reality. Which is an absolutely mind-boggling statement to make.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    9 months ago

    I would make this guy walk around with a cantaloupe in his ass for 9 months and then shit it out, take it home a day later, and send him a bill for $10k a week later.

        • ngdev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Bad take, straight men can enjoy a good pegging. Also empathy is not a prerequisite for homosexuality. I wager empathy has nothing to do with sexuality nor is it any indicator of sexual preference.

          This is just bullshit he’s spewing to justify forcibly spawning more meat for the grinder, by hook or by crook. While I don’t know if he’s married to a woman, I highly doubt he’d think this would apply if his wife was raped and became pregnant as a result. Carrying a rape baby to term is for proles in the eyes of people like this

    • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You don’t want to do these fuck-knuckles any harm, you just want to give them opportunities for great healing events of their own.

      • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I so wish there was a way to take away all this guys money, power, status, and then force him to push a baby out of his urethra…and then ask if he feels “healed”.

  • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This dude looks like he has some kind of ulterior motive, here.

    What i am saying is: he looks like a rapist.

    • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, it looks like he wants to rape women and force them to have his rape babies. I’m guessing he’s already raped somebody, based on this pro-rapist attitude.

    • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      If nothing else, he needs to come to terms with his vanishing hairline with more dignity than that. That ‘Ghost of Chunk Sloth from Goonies’ hairstyle does nothing fire him.

  • Norgur@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    9 months ago

    I literally feel ill. Like physically ill. My wife blessed me with my baby boy and imagining that someone could force her to go what she went through to get him into this world is… IDK what it is… Too angry rn. Fucking disgusting fuckfaces!

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Of course the members of the pedophilia party would say that having a rapist’s baby would be beneficial to the rape victim.

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    We are seemingly moments away from women being prosecuted for giving men erections.

  • VioletRing@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    9 months ago

    It seems more honest than touting exceptions as some sort of compromise. Have you ever thought of what a rape exception (or other exceptions) looks like in practice? They just don’t happen. How many abortion providers are willing to test the law? How many pregnant people are able to get a police report necessary to be exempted? How many abortion providers are even practicing in states with rape exceptions to their otherwise strict abortion laws?

    Arguing about what exceptions should or should not be on the books is a distraction. It’s only service is to placate the general public into accepting barbaric abortion bans.

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/01/21/us/abortion-ban-exceptions.html

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It’s also the most logically consistent. I respect these shitstains infinitely more then Republican politicians who support exceptions.

      Respect is doing a lot of work there, but really it comes to down to fact that at least they ACTUALLY believe abortion is murder.

      All those other GOP politicians who support exceptions are just groveling maggots.

      What? You believe it’s okay to murder babies in certain circumstances? Get fucked.

      If you’re going to destroy the lives of countless women, at least do it because you have an actual deeply held conviction, and not simply that you want to win a primary.

  • Doubletwist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    This fuck-knuckle has 5 kids. If any of them are girls, I’d bet good money he wants this because he wants to be sure they can’t have an abortion when he knocks one (or more) of them up, as part of his Handmaid’s Tale fantasy.

    • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      We are reaping the rewards of “respecting religious beliefs”.

      I would absolutely abolish the goddamn psychos.