Who Hijacked Our Country

Wednesday, May 04, 2005

Conservatives in favor of Rape, Incest

Have you raped and/or impregnated your teenage daughter? And now you’re worried about your rights? Don’t worry — House Republicans are looking out for you. Decent Godfearing conservatives have got your back.

The House of Representatives has passed a law making it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines for purposes of obtaining an abortion (HR 748). This takes away the forbidden allure of that heathen land just over the state line where you can get an abortion without telling your parents.

The law carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail and/or a $100,000 fine. You can also be sued by the girl’s parents.

OK, no surprises so far. Republicans are in control and this is what they’ve been clamoring to do since 1973.

Democrats tried to tack on several amendments to the bill; all were defeated. Again, this is just politics. The majority party likes to slamdunk a bill through Congress with no amendments from the minority party. Both parties have been guilty of this.

But, one of these amendments would have prevented the girl's father from filing a lawsuit if the girl was carrying her father's child. That’s correct. Democrats had this godless radical idea that if a man impregnates his teenage daughter, he shouldn’t then be allowed to sue the person who tries to arrange an abortion for her.

The amendment was defeated, 245 to 183. OK, so 245 members of Congress think that if a man impregnates his daughter, he should also have the right to sue anyone who tries to enable her to get an abortion. In their blind flailing against abortion, they’ve ended up protecting men who impregnate their daughters. Doesn’t the Bible have anything to say about this?!?

What part of the Bill of Rights protects fathers who impregnate their daughters? Oh, that’s right, now I remember, the Jim Bob Amendment. Sorry, I forgot.

Let’s thank the snakehandling wing of the bookburning party for yet another one of their sick, perverted stunts. Every time you think the Talibanagain Christians have hit rock bottom, they sink even further.

(Insert your favorite inbred hillbilly joke here.)

23 Comments:

Anonymous JollyRoger said...

Now now...... fathers impregnating their daughters is good old Biblical tradition. And the Jesusistanis are looking to get us back to a "traditional" America, aren't they?

May 4, 2005 at 6:50 AM  
Blogger Brother Kenya said...

Sounds like we're gonna get our long lost patriarchy back, boys! Yee-ha!

May 4, 2005 at 7:26 AM  
Blogger frstlymil said...

Good God. Is there no end to the indecency? I would like to have a serious sit down Q & A with each and every one of them regarding the ongoing protections of the child molester and rapist over the victim of the crime or the prevention of such crimes - when if there was ever a case for the death penalty - the perpetrators of that kind of act should be first in line. I would like them to look into the eyes of a child victim and tell that child why.

May 4, 2005 at 9:26 AM  
Blogger Mags said...

Ugh. Ridiculous. My head is about to explode.

May 4, 2005 at 9:54 AM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Jollyroger: Yeah, and we need more of these Biblical traditions. I think there's a line from a country song that went "I'm my own grandpa."

Brother Kenya: The term patriarchy never had such a creepy ring to it. "Hi, I'd like you to meet my father, and he's also my grandfather." Eek.

Frstlymil: I don't think there's an end to their indecency. Every time I think they couldn't possibly sink any further, they do.

Mags: Hey, don't let that happen. Who'd take over your blog :)

May 4, 2005 at 12:02 PM  
Blogger Erik said...

The very concept of a father having sex with his own daughter is so thoroughly repugnant that extending it to him suing someone for terminating an incestual pregnancy makes me just deeply, deeply sad.

May 4, 2005 at 2:00 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Johnny Huh?: Yes, it's sad all right. It's sick that people do that and even sicker that the government wants to protect the legal rights of these "fathers."

May 4, 2005 at 2:55 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

Rant mode on:

With these GOP lawmakers, the fetus must be born, plain and simple. Remember, this is the "culture of life" we're talking about! So if a girl's dad wants her to have his baby, because he believes in this "culture of life" thing, then by heck he oughta be able to sue if the fetus is aborted!!? Arrrgh...

This is absolutely ridiculous. How little coverage is the "liberal media" going to give this one?

IMHO, the "culture of life" idea could be a noble thing, if those pushing it would also pay attention to those billions of people who are living, walking, and breathing right here and right now, on the face of the planet... not just those who are soon to be born or who are soon to die. A real "culture of life" attitude would suggest we all do whatever we can to better the lives of those living in poverty, of those facing financial hardships from catastrophic illness (because we have no national health plan to cover such things!), of those around the world suffering from hardships brought on by natural disasters... Attending to needs such as these, that is what I would consider the heart of a "concept of life"... a quality-of-life approach is what we need, not some bunch of power-hungry stinkers pushing a religious agenda down our throats.

Our country has the money and the resources to make the world a better place, but we are letting a handful of greedy SOB's have control of just about all of the money and resources. What gives?

Whew! Sorry. Got a bit blustery there. Back on topic: letting a father sue over the abortion of his daughter's incest-generated fetus absolutely takes the cake.

I'm going to go join Mags now in the Exploding Heads Club.

May 4, 2005 at 3:34 PM  
Blogger halcyon67 said...

They don't care. You notice how this does make the news, when it is in clear violation of the Constitution. It is disgusting. But yet, we see a woman who has cold feet. Did you hear about Lyndie England? That is gross.

May 4, 2005 at 5:56 PM  
Blogger Unadulterated Underdog said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

May 4, 2005 at 6:19 PM  
Blogger Unadulterated Underdog said...

You know, Tom, that the Christian-Right is always looking for a way to make America into GKOE, AKA God's Kingdom On Earth. Any abortion is wrong no matter how disgusting the pregnancy and any non-Republican initiative is against God because Democrats believe in freedom of choice. Is it just me or is American political arena going to the dogs or should I rather say elephants? Isn't it? It's going to the daughter-rapers and their friends who protect him because they go to church. The Christian-Right is nothing more than a collection of greedy pastors that want absolute Theocracy at any cost, even the loss of the morals they claim to value. It's sick.

May 4, 2005 at 6:22 PM  
Blogger John said...

A father who impregnates his daughter should have his balls cut off and hung from a tree, but why would it justify killing the innocent baby?

The liberal ACLU is the one who protects child molesters, and seeks to legalize possession of child porn.

May 4, 2005 at 6:46 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Snave: That's the kind of news item that would put anyone in rant mode. "Culture of life" -- right. In a nutshell, their philosophy is: human life is sacred from the point of conception to the moment of birth.

Samantha: Yeah, this is disgusting all right. And the Lynndie England news really sucks too.

OK Democrat: You've got it. That's a good description of the Christian Right. Nothing but greed and twisted values. Jesus' teachings fell through the cracks a long time ago.

Jay777: Well, at least we agree on the father who impregnates his daughter.

May 4, 2005 at 7:11 PM  
Blogger Snave said...

"If Christ were here now there is one thing he would not be -- a Christian."

(Mark Twain / 1835-1910 / Notebook)

May 4, 2005 at 7:55 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Snave: Ain't that the truth. The Jerry Falwells and James Dobsons would probably lynch him if he came back.

May 4, 2005 at 8:00 PM  
Blogger Michael J. West said...

Here it is, my first ever post on your blog, and I am completely speechless.

May 5, 2005 at 6:58 AM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Michael J. West: Hi, thanks for stopping in. Stop by any time. (I've seen your comments at Political Rants From A Liberal.)

May 5, 2005 at 10:20 AM  
Blogger Shawn said...

I agree with Snave... most Conservatives feel that a fetus should be born at all costs and they will spare no expense to make that happen (just look at Florida).

Unfortunately, they tend to close the pocketbook immediately after a child pops into the world. Then suddenly it's the bleeding-heart liberals who get slapped down for suggesting that perhaps a little help for the poor, unwed mother might be in order.

Conservatives seem to want to plan the party... but not foot the bill.

P.S. -- I'm not really up on my Bible, but I think it's Leviticus that has the incest story...

May 6, 2005 at 2:06 AM  
Blogger ajmac said...

In case any of you folks are interested in actual facts, rather than unsubstantiated rants against vaporous bogeymen, I offer a couple.

First, rape is illegal. Republicans have done nothing to change that incontrovertible fact.

Second, the Waters Amendments were voted down because they duplicated the judicial bypass provision of the bill, which protects girls in just the situation you identify. If you don't believe me, check out page 84 of the House Report, at
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/109-51.pdf

Sorry to break up your little Christian-demonizing party with truth, but there it is.

May 6, 2005 at 9:36 AM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Shawn: Yeah, that seems to sum up the Religious Right. At the moment of birth the fetus changes from a Heavenly Bundle of Joy to a sniveling little welfare brat.

Ajmac: I don't doubt that there are alreadly laws and court rulings in place that would duplicate the protections of that vetoed amendment. But there are lots of laws that overlap and duplicate other laws. It's common to argue that a certain law isn't necessary because it's already covered by existing laws (both parties do this).

It's true that lawmakers should get rid of all the overlapping and duplicating of laws, but in the meantime it's just too easy to be against a law just because "we already have a law covering this."

May 6, 2005 at 12:32 PM  
Blogger halcyon67 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

May 6, 2005 at 3:07 PM  
Blogger halcyon67 said...

Jay777, the ACLU may do some things that you do not approve of, but without that organization, you would have no freedoms. You would be living in a state such as Iraq.

Personally, I am not for abortion, everyone else can have one, I can't tell people how to live their lives, but I digress

Um, when children who are born out of incest, usually have autosomal distorders, that usually kill them in the first years of life. These disorders also confine a child to the house due to health complications and physical disabilities.

As a result, the child will become emotionally unstable and socially unhealthy.

I am not shunning anyone here, that is how it is.

May 6, 2005 at 3:13 PM  
Blogger greeneyed_lady said...

Far fetched even for a blog, and some real good examples of how misunderstood democrats are conserning religion. I can't understand why the religous ppl feel attacked.

May 14, 2005 at 8:09 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home