Comments on: Proposed New Mexico law would incarcerate rape victims who have abortions

By: Gilbert Wham

Gilbert Wham — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:53:00 +0000

(not that I’m having a D&C done in order to provide evidence is a Good Thing, you understand. Cos, clearly, it fucking isn’t)

By: Gilbert Wham

Gilbert Wham — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:52:00 +0000

Um, wouldn’t biological material from a D&C provide DNA evidence, if that is, indeed, their (publicly stated) aim? Also, fuck those people and their crazy new ideas for crazy laws.

By: starfish and coffee

starfish and coffee — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:24:00 +0000

A rape case is judged on whether there was consent or not. Conception does not prove either consent or not consent so irrelevant as criminal evidence.
I realise that there was mention of incest in this particular case, but again there *could* theoretically be consensual incest (not likely I know..) for which again conception would not prove anything either way.
So evil aside, it’s not a very clever argument.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:02:00 +0000

You’re giving it its most benevolent possible interpretation, which does not square with what we know of law and how it’s enforced in the real world.

By: glaborous_immolate

glaborous_immolate — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:28:00 +0000

I think the bill just says its evidence tapering IF YOU INTEND TO tamper with evidence to hide your own crime. So this is wildly misleading as an article.

By: glaborous_immolate

glaborous_immolate — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:26:00 +0000

No, lots of rape is done by someone the victim knows and is in a relationship with. Rape is not just strangers jumping out of bushes.

By: glaborous_immolate

glaborous_immolate — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:22:00 +0000

The language of the bill says exactly that: it applies when the act is done “with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.”

By: echolocate chocolate

echolocate chocolate — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:04:00 +0000

Well the point is obviously to be politically opportunistic and screw the consequences. That every one of these backward policies will have no effect other than to roll back civil rights and ruin people’s lives is inconsequential to the parasitic sociopaths making these proposals.

By: That_Anonymous_Coward

That_Anonymous_Coward — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:45:00 +0000

I think that happened about 10 years ago…

By: redesigned

redesigned — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 07:22:00 +0000

fuckpublicans…they put the evil in ignorant.

By: L_Mariachi

L_Mariachi — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 07:20:00 +0000

The reason I don’t like this line of criticism is that voting only in one’s own direct self-interest is not something we should aspire to. Of course there’s a big difference between voting to raise your own taxes to fund homeless shelters and voting to give largesse to Walmart and pro sports team owners at the expense of the public treasury, but the “voting against their self-interest” language elides that distinction.

By: Marja Erwin

Marja Erwin — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:02:00 +0000

This is America. The likely scenarios can also include prosecutors trying to pad their records and private prisons bribing officials to fill their cells.

By: Marja Erwin

Marja Erwin — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:00:00 +0000

How would that punish the survivors? Isn’t the point to punish the survivors?

By: anankesf

anankesf — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 05:26:00 +0000

Handmaid’s Tale perhaps?

By: JonS

JonS — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:48:00 +0000

Jokes aside(?) … I wonder if this could be re-worked as a way of getting rid of the death penalty. Because, you know, once you kill some one, it’s kinda hard to get them to confess/provide evidence.

By: echolocate chocolate

echolocate chocolate — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 02:58:00 +0000

And in that situation, surely it would be better to provide optional and confidential counselling to abortion patients, giving them a chance to tell someone and start on the road to prosecution of the rapist… rather than treating them like a piece of meat that is only useful as “evidence”.

I mean for christ’s sake, criminalising victims for destroying evidence of crimes against themselves, are you fucking kidding me?

By: Velocirapt42

Velocirapt42 — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 02:52:00 +0000

The only even slightly likely scenario in which this would happen is with incest, where the rapist would stick around long enough to know about the pregnancy. God knows a girl pregnant with her father’s baby should be stopped from terminating the pregnancy at all costs. If it was legitimate rape, her body would have shut the whole thing down anyway.

By: deaduncledave

deaduncledave — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 02:09:00 +0000

For the record, Google still has cached her contact information under the nmlegis.gov website. I expect she’d love to hear your opinions on this matter…

By: deaduncledave

deaduncledave — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 02:04:00 +0000

Exactly. The majority is Hispanic. (You’d be surprised how much racism there is against Hispanics in this state.) The problem is the holy Roman Catholic church.

By: deaduncledave

deaduncledave — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 01:59:00 +0000

She reps Eddy county in NM, one of the most conservative parts of my state. Don’t hold your breath.

By: Ipo

Ipo — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 01:03:00 +0000

New Mexico doesn’t have white majority. I think the divide is religion not race. Same as in Pakistan.

By: Ipo

Ipo — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:55:00 +0000

No real Scotswoman would.
No need to check under skirts or kilts, no humane human would.

By: peregrinus

peregrinus — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:26:00 +0000

The taliban have clearly decided to work from the inside of their most evil enemy. Obama’s clearly pulling troops out of Afghanistan to put them into New Mexico.

By: Petzl

Petzl — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:34:00 +0000

Isn’t it cool how anti-abortion republicans keep coming up with novel arguments that insult the intelligence and disgrace our humanity? It’s like dystopic psychohistorical fiction, but it’s not.

By: jerwin

jerwin — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:08:00 +0000

Tampering with evidence of God’s love.

By: Marja Erwin

Marja Erwin — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:04:00 +0000

“Do you think this penis makes my rights look bigger?”

No. I can’t find the studies right now, but trans womyn face more violence, including sexual violence, than cis or intersex womyn. An immunity to pregnancy and to the specifics of this proposal doesn’t mean an immunity to rape and the ways this proposal legitimizes rape and punishes survivors.

By: Marja Erwin

Marja Erwin — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:53:00 +0000

When does the sheer madness stop being beautiful and start becoming an ugly dystopia? Do they have to start sending even more people into the prisons to provide even more cheap labor to their campaign donors? Do they have to turn the reeducation camps for lgbt youth into concentration camps?

By: cwcaton

cwcaton — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:48:00 +0000

Thank God you posted that. I almost said something foolish about the law says “intent to tamper with evidence,” but then that article points out that having an abortion to hide a rape is a perfectly acceptable decision for a victim to make. I appreciate you keeping me from putting my foot in my mouth!

By: spacedmonkey

spacedmonkey — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:41:00 +0000

Seriously, anyone who votes for people like this is a evil sack of shit and utterly worthless as a human being. I can’t figure out any other way to see it. And don’t say they’re just dumb and ignorant. “Sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil.” Being that stupid is an explanation for why people do evil shit, but it’s no more an excuse than, say, having too much testosterone is an excuse for being violent.

By: tofagerl

tofagerl — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:27:00 +0000

It’s all the rage among religious fascists over in the middle east!