House Republicans Are Already Redefining 'Rape'But for years, there have been exceptions for abortions that are eligible for federal funding: In case of rape, incest, and when the pregnancy endangers the mother's life. The "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" would make some changes to trifecta! Mother Jones' Nick Baumann reports: With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. (Smith's spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.) [...] Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes. The fact that "forcible rape" has no real meaning as a federal legal term makes this all the more obnoxious. Oh, and what about the incest exception? "As for the incest exception, the bill would only allow federally funded abortions if the woman is under 18." H.R.5939: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress edit-- H.R.3: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress What are your thoughts on this bill? To me it seems like more GOP pandering to the religious right. My money's on it dying in the Senate.