Reply
Tue 1 Feb, 2011 01:18 pm
a tad dramatic perhaps, by NJ Representative Chris Smith, a Republican and a staunch anti-abortion worker, is seeking to redefine rape, removing statutory and coerced rape, leaving only forcible rape.
This would further limit a woman's right to treatment after a rape as federal funding would be limited.
@plainoldme,
You got the MoveOn email, eh?
They're a bit sensationalistic about it and are fudging what's at stake a bit. I just happened to have a few windows open about this, I'll plonk.
This is the actual bill:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/text
This is a good run-down:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
The main thing is that this is a pretty narrow focus, regarding
when federal funds can go towards abortions. (It's not about rape or treatment for rape more generally.)
It specifies that federal funding can still be used if rape is forcible -- but leaves open the question of, what if it's not forcible? And what is "forcible," anyway?
Thanks, soz. I did a little research on Smith which asked more questions than it answered. I also noticed that moveon was correct but not accurate when describing Smith on stem cell research.
I posted this to see who knows what about Smith.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace