Women's Rights and the GOP

[Wry Catcher]

Is the 'Big Tent' shrinking?

 

[The Infidel]

No

 

[gallantwarrior]

Silly wabbit, wimmins dont gots wrights!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

 

[hortysir]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Redefining rape. Attacking the right to choose. Belitting victims of violence. The Republicans are on a rampage attacking women's health and rights this year. And if we don't speak up, they'll keep going. That's why we need to raise a ruckus, and get the word out about the GOP war on women."

MoveOn.org Political Action: Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP's War on Women

Women will Unite against the War on Women on April 28, 2012. EVERY state in the Union will hold a march or rally. See UNITEWOMEN.ORG to find your state's rally info!

 

[Truthmatters]

the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?

 

[The Infidel]

the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections

Stop derailing threads....

 

[The Infidel]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?

Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.

 

[Truthmatters]

Its right on point.

why else would a party chase every voting block away with insane rethoric?

They dont need voters to win

 

[Katzndogz]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

In California they are like every other victim of a crime, they are a complaining witness.

A crime has occurred, the person is a victim of a crime. As to the person accused of that crime, they are an accuser until it is proved that they are the victim of the convicted.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them. Yes they can and are
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

In California they are like every other victim of a crime, they are a complaining witness.

A crime has occurred, the person is a victim of a crime. As to the person accused of that crime, they are an accuser until it is proved that they are the victim of the convicted.

CA has a Victim's Bill of Rights, see:

http://oag.ca.gov/victimservices/content/bill_of_rights

The first several points clearly protect victims pre-trail:

1. To be treated with fairness and respect for his or her privacy and dignity, and to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse, throughout the criminal or juvenile justice process.

2. To be reasonably protected from the defendant and persons acting on behalf of the defendant.

3. To have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in fixing the amount of bail and release conditions for the defendant.

 

[Oddball]

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?

Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.

 

[Oddball]

Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?

How do you respond to this legislation:

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

Members of liberoidal identity groups are all victims until proven otherwise...Which almost never happens.

 

[Katzndogz]

Those are nice ideals, but seldom practiced.

When I was carjacked someone felt comfortable in giving the gang banger who put a gun to my head my name, address, phone number, work address and work phone number. The harassment from the homies stopped when I got a gun and showed every indication that I would ever so much enjoy using it.

 

[Truthmatters]

what crap

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wry is obsessed with Shrinkage

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cUNNKzj_Nc]george costanza - i was in the pool - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Barb]

Its right on point.

why else would a party chase every voting block away with insane rethoric?

They dont need voters to win

Sweetie, they don't WANT to win. It's liberating, really, to run a race one doesn't want to win. All that red meat fed to the base for next time, a pure message sent out for when they truly have the upper hand, and all the hard work passed on to the party that will be blamed for the pain it all caused.

Americans have a short memory. Few will remember WHY all the hard decisions had to be made, ALL will remember who made them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

And this is the motive behind the OP?

One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?

I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?

Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.

In that matter the 'victim' lied; she was in fact not a victim. However, to point to one example and draw the conclusion that all women should be considered liars first (and not victims until the accused in found guilty) is one more example of the conservatives war on women.