Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
After losing all major statewide races to Democrats for the first time in 24 years, Republicans in Virginia are pushing to replace a moderate GOP congressman with a candidate so conservative that he doesn’t even believe that spousal rape should be a crime.
This is not due to his degree of conservativeness.
This is just stupid. A candidate so stupid.
It's not like the more conservative you are, the more you have outlandish ideas about rape.
This is straight and typical Liberal character assassination that's purposely targeted at GOP candidates.
The man never said rape was okay! He never implied that spousal rape is okay! What he simply and clearly said was that he does not know how one can PROVE spoual rape when:
The husban and wife sleep in the same bed together every night.
The wife was already basically undressed.
They slept together in the past. (Important Point)
Lastly, there's NO INJURY. (Important Point)
And from that you all got that this man is okay with spousal rape? What he said is true and common sense. The news clip also conveniently only shows a 10 second of him talking, so we have no clue what he was asked or the context of his logical, valid, and really unprovocative statements of his.
Also it seems as if the OP is trolling because he posted back to back threads with the same theme...
Last edited by DoniDanko; 01-15-2014 at 11:35 PM..
This is not due to his degree of conservativeness.
This is just stupid. A candidate so stupid.
It's not like the more conservative you are, the more you have outlandish ideas about rape.
The candidate is not stupid. The people who buy into these lies and political character assassination tactics are though. This guy DOES NOT have any outlandish ideas about rape...
So this particular violation shouldn't be a crime because it's "inherently difficult to prove"? Does this philosophy extend to other violent acts that are "difficult to prove", or is it only for those committed against women by those who they're least able to defend against?
Huh? Nobody said that rape "shouldn't be a crime." Where do you get that from?
We just need to be careful about wrongful conviction. Yes, this philosophy would extend to any crime that is inherently difficult to prove. The burden of proof must remain on the prosecutor, and we shouldn't cut them slack in making their case just because a particular type of case is hard to prove.
And we're gonna make sure he doesn't win the seat, for sure.
[though stupidity (should we use the word "naivete" instead?) such as his doesn't usually win primaries around here, granted, thus making any effort to prevent social losers such as him winning the seat moot]
Seems to me the clip is taken out of context. He doesn't say it shouldn't be a crime. He's talking being able to get a conviction in court in the situation he described.
If you read the actual quote, the part about the 'nightie' is entirely incidental to the point. The point is just that spousal rape is inherently difficult to prove. We don't want a rapist to get away scot free, but at the same time we don't want an innocent man to be locked up for consensual sex. The flip side of that coin is that the left would tend to disagree--they would like to be able to lock up that innocent man.
The reference to 'nightie' is incidental, i.e. just another case of headline fraud from the left.
How would "spousal" rape be anymore difficult to prove than any other rape?
If you read the actual quote, the part about the 'nightie' is entirely incidental to the point. The point is just that spousal rape is inherently difficult to prove. We don't want a rapist to get away scot free, but at the same time we don't want an innocent man to be locked up for consensual sex. The flip side of that coin is that the left would tend to disagree--they would like to be able to lock up that innocent man.
The reference to 'nightie' is incidental, i.e. just another case of headline fraud from the left.
thank you for saving me the trouble by saying almost word for word what i was about to say
If you read the actual quote, the part about the 'nightie' is entirely incidental to the point. The point is just that spousal rape is inherently difficult to prove. We don't want a rapist to get away scot free, but at the same time we don't want an innocent man to be locked up for consensual sex. The flip side of that coin is that the left would tend to disagree--they would like to be able to lock up that innocent man.
The reference to 'nightie' is incidental, i.e. just another case of headline fraud from the left.
Also sometimes referred to as "yellow journalism."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
