Congress

Rape Redefined and Brought to You by Members of the US House of Representatives

Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger

The new Republican majority in the House of Representatives is moving to make changes in abortion law. The new No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H. R. 5939) has 173 co-sponsors—most of them Republicans. According to The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape, an article in Mother Jones that was written by Nick Baumann, John Boehner (R-OH) considers the bill a top priority for the new Congress. The bill, reportedly, includes a provision that rewrites the definition of rape.

Federal laws that have restricted the use of government funds for abortions have contained exemptions for pregnancies that resulted from rape and incest and for pregnancies that could endanger the lives of women. Evidently, the new legislation proposes that the rape exemption be limited to “forcible rape.”

Laurie Levenson, an expert on criminal law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said that the authors of the bill used language that was unclear. She thinks that some women will probably lose protection if the bill becomes law. Evidently, the term “forcible rape” is not defined in the criminal code—and the authors of the new bill did not provide their own definition of the term. In addition, there is no legal definition of “forcible rape” in some states. This would make it unclear whether any abortions could be covered by the rape exemption in those states.

What are some types of rape that would no longer be covered by the rape exemption if this bill becomes law? The rapes of women with limited mental capacity and rapes in which women were drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol.

Sources: Mother Jones

130 thoughts on “Rape Redefined and Brought to You by Members of the US House of Representatives”

  1. this bill is an ECONOMIC BROADSIDE delivered like a backdoor trojan horse to control public behavior that eliminates abortion as a remedy to inflicted harm.

    Caution; NASty alert:

  2. Regarding the term “forcible rape”: I have always thought rape was a crime of force. Here are two definitions of rape that I found in The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:

    Rape

    – Noun: The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.

    – Verb: To force (another person) to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.

  3. Elaine and Lotta,
    The information is astounding that in this day and age employers are being forced to choose between money and providing insurance for their employees to cover an abortion even in a rape situation.

  4. Lottakatz,

    I just found the video of Cenk Uygur and Diana Degetteon YouTube:
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LOKxcW-388&w=480&h=390]

  5. Lottakatz,

    “The “forceable” rape provision may be out but the change to tax exemption for private insurance is still in the bill and this could well induce employers (that greatly benefit from the insurance exemption) to drop coverage that does cover abortion. The bills sponsors won’t take questions on that though.”

    I’m reposting the link below for you. Cenk Uygur interviewed Democratic Rep. Diana Degette of Colorado on his show and they discussed what you wrote about in your comment above.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/#41396896

  6. SwM,

    That’s what I wondered after your post from the airport.

    Hate to say “I told you so” about Pelosi but we did! Just wait till all the graft and greed returns to that office when the Orange Man really gets settled in.

  7. Woosty, we were apparently composing our postings at the same time regarding making it more difficult to get abortion coverage through private insurers; great minds thinking alike and all that 🙂

    “…stem to stern by ideology and athwartship economically…” Wow, nice turn of phrase there.

  9. The “forceable” rape provision may be out but the change to tax exemption for private insurance is still in the bill and this could well induce employers (that greatly benefit from the insurance exemption) to drop coverage that does cover abortion. The bills sponsors won’t take questions on that though.

    http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/end-abortion-insurance

    From Mother Jones:
    “Perhaps the easiest way to answer questions about a bill’s intent and impact is to go to the men who wrote it. But that’s not as easy as it sounds. Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) was an original co-sponsor of the bill with Smith (Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.). But Lipinski’s office said he wouldn’t be available to answer questions about it—and didn’t respond to followup queries. Smith’s office was even less responsive—multiple calls and emails over a period of several weeks produced no one who could comment on the bill. Are abortion rights supporters right that the bill would affect private, employer-provided health insurance? Or are they blowing things out of proportion to fire up their base? I can’t get an answer.”

  10. I’m glad the Repugs have backed down on the language regarding rape but still intact:language that makes it tougher for women to obtain abortion coverage through their private insurers. So what is the difference between regulating what PRIVATE insurere can NOT cover vs. what they MUST cover? Isn’t this a tad hypocritical?

    Mike Spindell: “My greatest anger toward President Obama is that he has framed his battles in this way and thus allowed the mass of Americans to disregard the need, thinking it doesn’t affect them.” I agree…but the US of A is no longer a Unified Country having been split stem to stern by ideology and athwartship economically….so how else can he proceed with any effect at this point?

  12. “This latest incident marks the most recent attack on abortion, a conversation that’s really about poor women of color”

    Woosty,
    Good point. One of the greatest mistakes of those selling or defending progressive ideas is to only focus on the poor or the outcasts. This regressive attack on abortion is an attack on all women’s bodies and should be discussed in that vein. Similarly the focus on health care was on those millions without it. This allowed the focus to stray from the fact that the system is broken and that the middle (shrinking) and working classes that represent the majority of people in this country, were also suffering from the predations of the Health Care Insurance industry and from the for profit Hospital Corporations.

    The right of control of their own bodies is an issue for every woman and that is the point that should be made in defending it. This is not to say that people on the bottom of the economic scale are not terribly affected, my lifetime’s work has taught me this, but by using them as the reasoning it lets the ordinary citizen off the hook by viewing the problem as not affecting them. My greatest anger toward President Obama is that he has framed his battles in this way and thus allowed the mass of Americans to disregard the need, thinking it doesn’t affect them.

  13. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/report-republicans-give-up-on-forcible-rape.php?ref=fpb With the help of Jon Stewart women’s groups get the republicans to give up. None of this would be happening if we still had Nancy Pelosi. Can’t get past the arguments I had on this blog about how much better things would be when Pelosi was gone. The democrats will probably lose the Senate. The next argument will be how much better things will be when Obama loses to the republicans.

  14. Tony,

    I think The Daily Show and The Colbert Report often “get it” better than “real” news. They expose politicians and their inane statements and actions. Stewart and Colbert get at the truth of the matter by skewering idiots and hypocrites.

  17. The one thing that has ever made me want to download copyrighted material is the Daily Show. I used to stream sections of their show from the website every day, but then a UK channel, More4 started broadcasting the whole episodes and at the same time Comedy Central stopped letting people from British IP numbers download any broadcast material. Now More4 has stopped its daily broadcasts and only shows the weekly digest, the “International Edition”, and Comedy Central still won’t let me see the show.

    If I want to see this news-based comedy show near to the time of broadcast literally have no option except to break the law.

  20. “This latest incident marks the most recent attack on abortion, a conversation that’s really about poor women of color, who are the ones left most in danger when abortions are harder to access.” commondreams.org/headline/2011/01/27-3
    ————————————–

    color schmolor, advocating the denial of abortion access and rights is about condemning women to the role of chattel for the purpose of use….pure and simple. It is a pure statement that women have only 1 path….to bear children, regardless of resource, regardless of who the father is (thus promoting rape) and regardless of consequence (contratry to popular myth, childebearing is not without risk or investment on the womans part….).

    This is a sick power play

Comments are closed.