The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: thundley4 on September 27, 2012, 12:48:24 PM
-
Rapist wants visitation rights; teen mom fighting back
An admitted Massachusetts rapist is seeking visitation rights to the child he fathered after raping his underage victim, setting the stage for a precedent-setting legal fight in the Bay State.
The victim and her family are fighting back, saying the rapist is only showing interest in the family now that the child support bill is coming due.
"She got raped at 14. She decided to keep her baby. And now she has to hand her baby over for a visit with her rapist?" the victim's mother said.
The teen mother, who still suffers from severe anxiety and depression, says she's terrified at the thought of having to face the man who raped and impregnated her to arrange for visitation rights.
---------
It happened when she was in eighth grade, just 14-years-old. He was a 20-year-old man she knew from her church, the boyfriend of her friend's older sister.
When her mother found out, they went to the police to press charges. But she decided to keep the baby.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021419538
BlueCaliDem (3,384 posts)
1. Well, it's clear she is anti-abortion and now she will pay the consequences
for keeping her rapist's baby based on religious beliefs and not knowing the difference between an embryo and a baby. Now, based on that same Christian belief, she must also find it in herself to forgive the rapist and allow him to have visitation rights.
This brings to light another glaring problem when Republicans are trying to make abortion illegal: the dilemma regarding legal visitation rights of the rapist.
Better to kill that baby than to pass a law that would deal with this. F*cking baby killers.
I couldn't read any more after that comment, and it was the first one.
-
BlueCaliDem (3,384 posts)
1. Well, it's clear she is anti-abortion and now she will pay the consequences
for keeping her rapist's baby based on religious beliefs and not knowing the difference between an embryo and a baby. Now, based on that same Christian belief, she must also find it in herself to forgive the rapist and allow him to have visitation rights.
What? :mental: That is just weird to blame the victim
-
BlueCaliDem (3,384 posts)
1. Well, it's clear she is anti-abortion and now she will pay the consequences
for keeping her rapist's baby based on religious beliefs and not knowing the difference between an embryo and a baby. Now, based on that same Christian belief, she must also find it in herself to forgive the rapist and allow him to have visitation rights.
Excuse me for what I'm about to say:
**** you, you callous bitch! What a pathetic, vicious **** you are! Party of compassion, my ass. And you guys say OUR side is waging a war against women? You're taking the side of a ****ing RAPIST over a teen! What a dark soul you have. This girl and her family, YOUNG AS SHE IS, are living their values. She certainly could have sneaked off and gotten an abortion, but she didn't. Here your side is talking about our side waging a "war against women" and what's the first thing you do when ANY woman, let alone a young teen who could use the encouragement and support of other women, doesn't do it your way and rip a baby from her womb limb from limb, you attack HER! Not the rapist...you unload on a young girl who was ****ing raped! THAT is a war on women. What a ****ing sack of shit ****!
Sorry everyone...calming breaths, calming breaths.
Cindie
-
Rapist wants visitation rights; teen mom fighting back
An admitted Massachusetts rapist is seeking visitation rights to the child he fathered after raping his underage victim, setting the stage for a precedent-setting legal fight in the Bay State.
The victim and her family are fighting back, saying the rapist is only showing interest in the family now that the child support bill is coming due.
"She got raped at 14. She decided to keep her baby. And now she has to hand her baby over for a visit with her rapist?" the victim's mother said.
The teen mother, who still suffers from severe anxiety and depression, says she's terrified at the thought of having to face the man who raped and impregnated her to arrange for visitation rights.
---------
It happened when she was in eighth grade, just 14-years-old. He was a 20-year-old man she knew from her church, the boyfriend of her friend's older sister.
When her mother found out, they went to the police to press charges. But she decided to keep the baby.
According to the left, a 20 year old is a child. Remember, you don't become an adult until 26.
-
Excuse me for what I'm about to say:
**** you, you callous bitch! What a pathetic, vicious **** you are! Party of compassion, my ass. And you guys say OUR side is waging a war against women? You're taking the side of a ****ing RAPIST over a teen! What a dark soul you have. This girl and her family, YOUNG AS SHE IS, are living their values. She certainly could have sneaked off and gotten an abortion, but she didn't. Here your side is talking about our side waging a "war against women" and what's the first thing you do when ANY woman, let alone a young teen who could use the encouragement and support of other women, doesn't do it your way and rip a baby from her womb limb from limb, you attack HER! Not the rapist...you unload on a young girl who was ****ing raped! THAT is a war on women. What a ****ing sack of shit ****!
Sorry everyone...calming breaths, calming breaths.
Cindie
No apologies necessary. H5, BTW.
Also, Gina . . . it's what they do. The responsibility of the perp is never, ever considered in any context, for anything. The government is responsible for healing all of these little OWSies and the like.
-
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #18)Wed Sep 26, 2012, 04:35 PM
cthulu2016 (4,781 posts)
27. WTF are you talking about? The "baby" doesn't need to be justified as anything.
I consider an early term zygote to be a part of the woman's body that she is free to remove as casually as a mole. (And I am an absolute atheist.)
I also think that if a 14 year old girl has the right to chose to abort then she must have the right to not abort or else it wouldn't be a ****ing choice.
And she has a right to religious views, if she has any.
And she does not need to "justify" her choice to think of her body as she thinks of her body.
And your snide denigration of her choice is not how liberals think. Ask one sometime.
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
-
Oops, this was what the above DUmmie was responding to.
Response to cthulu2016 (Reply #11)Wed Sep 26, 2012, 04:21 PM
BlueCaliDem (3,384 posts)
18. No. Keeping the product of your rapist while justifying it as a "baby"
is like a Rightwinger would think.
Liberals are smarter than that.
-
Oops, this was what the above DUmmie was responding to.
What a sick, twisted mind! That anyone could thing like that is so far out of my sphere of reality it's mind blowing.
Cindie
-
there really is no hope for some of them is there? :???:
-
Agree with Cindie. Nothing else to say. What a bunch of reprehensible bitches over there. Anybody notice how a 30 year ok law student can't be expected to be responsible for the cost of birth control but a 14 year old child who was rape should have to deal with her rapist just because she chose to keep the baby he forcibly conceived in her womb. Unbelievable.
-
What a sick, twisted mind! That anyone could thing like that is so far out of my sphere of reality it's mind blowing.
Cindie
Happens every day, some one is going to be gotten even by a perp that put them in Jail.
Dude in town impregnated his step daughter, he got 30 years in jail. But, as the father of the child he demanded visitation to prision to see and bond with his daughter. His right to see and interact to the child. He was granted this.
Lots of extremily unbeviable storys out here. Scare the socks off anyone that knows about this shit.
Say your daughter at 16 becomes pregnant the father disapears, the daugher later marries and when the cild turns 12 the father shows up demanding over night visites with his daughter. As there is no court order for him to suport but he has Dna report that he in in fact is the father, what to do when she by court order has to go with a strange man ??
Not every one can afford to hire a lawyer to close all the loop holes in the law, Few think down the road what may or can happen 10 years later.
-
Response to Liberal_in_LA (Original post)Thu Sep 27, 2012, 12:41 PM
Xithras (12,782 posts)
114. This isn't going to be popular, but I disagree with the use of the term "rapist" for this guy.
Statutory rape is clearly a crime that should be prosecuted, but "rape" implies a lack of consent. While the law states that a 14 year old can't give consent, the reality is that 14 year old girls (and boys) have sex by the millions in this country, every single day. What's the legal difference between a 14 year old pursuing and having consensual sex with a 15 year old, and a 14 year old pursuing and having consensual sex with a 20 year old? In most states, legally, there is none...it's the same crime.
Which begs the question...is it rape? My wife was raped, violently, in our own house (I interrupted it). My daughter was nearly raped four years ago while she was out jogging one morning (tackled, but he was chased off by another jogger before anything could happen). My daughters best friend was raped by a boyfriend who got her drunk until she passed out, and then raped her unconscious body. My sister was raped by a stepfather who was turned on by 8 year olds. Those men were rapists. Rape implies a lack of consent, and a concern for your own well being over that of the person you're screwing. Rape implies an imposition of power over the victim.
Should the term really apply to someone who was in a consensual relationship with someone who simply hasn't reached the "legal" threshold yet? That person is absolutely a felon who should be prosecuted, but I don't think the term "rapist" applies.
Under California law, the legal age of consent is 18. ANY male, of any age, having sex with a girl under the age of 18 is committing the crime of statutory rape. When I was 17, I was in a consensual sexual relationship with my 15 year old girlfriend when she got pregnant. According to the logic expressed in this article and by many of the people in this thread, I am a rapist, and I should have been denied access to my daughter as she was growing up because of it. That position is stupid, and defies common sense and basic logic. There is a HUGE difference between violating the age of consent and RAPING someone. There is a HUGE difference between ignoring an age of consent law, and being a RAPIST.
This girl had a consensual sexual relationship with a 20 year old. There was no allegation of force or coersion. She had sex with him, of her own free will, repeatedly and continuously until her mother found out. That's unfortunate, and I don't have a problem with him paying the legal price for breaking the law, but does that make him a rapist? Should he REALLY be denied access to a child that was created during a mutually consensual sexual encounter?
I realize that a lot of people aren't going to like this, but fairness isn't always popular.
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
-
Excuse me for what I'm about to say:
**** you, you callous bitch! What a pathetic, vicious **** you are! Party of compassion, my ass. And you guys say OUR side is waging a war against women? You're taking the side of a ****ing RAPIST over a teen! What a dark soul you have. This girl and her family, YOUNG AS SHE IS, are living their values. She certainly could have sneaked off and gotten an abortion, but she didn't. Here your side is talking about our side waging a "war against women" and what's the first thing you do when ANY woman, let alone a young teen who could use the encouragement and support of other women, doesn't do it your way and rip a baby from her womb limb from limb, you attack HER! Not the rapist...you unload on a young girl who was ****ing raped! THAT is a war on women. What a ****ing sack of shit ****!
Sorry everyone...calming breaths, calming breaths.
Cindie
See, now I was just thinking that critter needed to be beat with a big stick until it stopped moving forever, but you did such a great job of giving the 'Director's Cut' version...
-
Which begs the question...is it rape? My wife was raped, violently, in our own house (I interrupted it). My daughter was nearly raped four years ago while she was out jogging one morning (tackled, but he was chased off by another jogger before anything could happen). My daughters best friend was raped by a boyfriend who got her drunk until she passed out, and then raped her unconscious body. My sister was raped by a stepfather who was turned on by 8 year olds. Those men were rapists. Rape implies a lack of consent, and a concern for your own well being over that of the person you're screwing. Rape implies an imposition of power over the victim.
Holy crap his family/friends have been through alot! :o
-
Holy crap his family/friends have been through alot! :o
I actually find it hard to believe.
-
Excuse me for what I'm about to say:
**** you, you callous bitch! What a pathetic, vicious **** you are! Party of compassion, my ass. And you guys say OUR side is waging a war against women? You're taking the side of a ****ing RAPIST over a teen! What a dark soul you have. This girl and her family, YOUNG AS SHE IS, are living their values. She certainly could have sneaked off and gotten an abortion, but she didn't. Here your side is talking about our side waging a "war against women" and what's the first thing you do when ANY woman, let alone a young teen who could use the encouragement and support of other women, doesn't do it your way and rip a baby from her womb limb from limb, you attack HER! Not the rapist...you unload on a young girl who was ****ing raped! THAT is a war on women. What a ****ing sack of shit ****!
Sorry everyone...calming breaths, calming breaths.
Cindie
Major Hi5 from a "rape baby".
Let me add that I try very hard not to truly hate people, but BluCaliDem just the list.
Congrats, you ****ing ignorant c***.
-
DUmmies.....................die in a fire...................please.
Un-****ing believable. :mental:
-
Excuse me for what I'm about to say:
**** you, you callous bitch! What a pathetic, vicious **** you are! Party of compassion, my ass. And you guys say OUR side is waging a war against women? You're taking the side of a ****ing RAPIST over a teen! What a dark soul you have. This girl and her family, YOUNG AS SHE IS, are living their values. She certainly could have sneaked off and gotten an abortion, but she didn't. Here your side is talking about our side waging a "war against women" and what's the first thing you do when ANY woman, let alone a young teen who could use the encouragement and support of other women, doesn't do it your way and rip a baby from her womb limb from limb, you attack HER! Not the rapist...you unload on a young girl who was ****ing raped! THAT is a war on women. What a ****ing sack of shit ****!
Sorry everyone...calming breaths, calming breaths.
Cindie
Ditto!
-
What the **** is wrong with those people!?!?!? I guess it would be easier to ask what is right with them. What a bunch of ignorant whores. They are demon filled shitheads.
-
What the **** is wrong with those people!?!?!? I guess it would be easier to ask what is right with them. What a bunch of ignorant whores. They are demon filled shitheads.
:lmao: I love you.
-
:lmao: I love you.
We all love mama here.
<<loved mama from the first time set eyes upon.
Lustrously beautiful in both body and spirit, mama.
-
What? :mental: That is just weird to blame the victim
You know who else blames the victim?
Muslims
Kind of makes you wonder why DUmmies never criticize Islam...
-
Response to Liberal_in_LA (Original post)Thu Sep 27, 2012, 12:41 PM
Xithras (12,782 posts)
114. This isn't going to be popular, but I disagree with the use of the term "rapist" for this guy.
Statutory rape is clearly a crime that should be prosecuted, but "rape" implies a lack of consent. While the law states that a 14 year old can't give consent, the reality is that 14 year old girls (and boys) have sex by the millions in this country, every single day. What's the legal difference between a 14 year old pursuing and having consensual sex with a 15 year old, and a 14 year old pursuing and having consensual sex with a 20 year old? In most states, legally, there is none...it's the same crime.
Which begs the question...is it rape? My wife was raped, violently, in our own house (I interrupted it). My daughter was nearly raped four years ago while she was out jogging one morning (tackled, but he was chased off by another jogger before anything could happen). My daughters best friend was raped by a boyfriend who got her drunk until she passed out, and then raped her unconscious body. My sister was raped by a stepfather who was turned on by 8 year olds. Those men were rapists. Rape implies a lack of consent, and a concern for your own well being over that of the person you're screwing. Rape implies an imposition of power over the victim.
Should the term really apply to someone who was in a consensual relationship with someone who simply hasn't reached the "legal" threshold yet? That person is absolutely a felon who should be prosecuted, but I don't think the term "rapist" applies.
Under California law, the legal age of consent is 18. ANY male, of any age, having sex with a girl under the age of 18 is committing the crime of statutory rape. When I was 17, I was in a consensual sexual relationship with my 15 year old girlfriend when she got pregnant. According to the logic expressed in this article and by many of the people in this thread, I am a rapist, and I should have been denied access to my daughter as she was growing up because of it. That position is stupid, and defies common sense and basic logic. There is a HUGE difference between violating the age of consent and RAPING someone. There is a HUGE difference between ignoring an age of consent law, and being a RAPIST.
This girl had a consensual sexual relationship with a 20 year old. There was no allegation of force or coersion. She had sex with him, of her own free will, repeatedly and continuously until her mother found out. That's unfortunate, and I don't have a problem with him paying the legal price for breaking the law, but does that make him a rapist? Should he REALLY be denied access to a child that was created during a mutually consensual sexual encounter?
I realize that a lot of people aren't going to like this, but fairness isn't always popular.
Reply to this post
Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink
Where did he/she/it get that the girl had sex with him, of her own free will, repeatedly and continuously until her mother found out? There isn't anything posted above that even remotely says that. Thinking maybe he/she/it is feeling guilty for acts he/she/it committed. Now trying to protect a rapist out of camaraderie.
-
When I was 17, I was in a consensual sexual relationship with my 15 year old girlfriend
No such thing at 15 years old. I'd would have beat you to a pulp.
-
We all love mama here.
<<loved mama from the first time set eyes upon.
Lustrously beautiful in both body and spirit, mama.
You and me both fella! :naughty:
-
cthulu2016 (4,825 posts)
11. This horrifying post is like a RW parody of liberal position
BlueCaliDem (3,398 posts)
18. No. Keeping the product of your rapist while justifying it as a "baby"
is like a Rightwinger would think.
Liberals are smarter than that.
cthulu2016 (4,825 posts)
27. WTF are you talking about? The "baby" doesn't need to be justified as anything.
I consider an early term zygote to be a part of the woman's body that she is free to remove as casually as a mole. (And I am an absolute atheist.)
I also think that if a 14 year old girl has the right to chose to abort then she must have the right to not abort or else it wouldn't be a ****ing choice.
And she has a right to religious views, if she has any.
And she does not need to "justify" her choice to think of her body as she thinks of her body.
And your snide denigration of her choice is not how liberals think. Ask one sometime.
BlueCaliDem (3,398 posts)
71. Unless the baby appeared miraculously and fully developed
in the womb, it started out as a microscopic fertilized egg. She, herself, justified keeping it because it was a BABY. Her own words. In your anger, you must have missed that part in the article. Maybe less rant and more reading would have helped you there before you went on the attack.
I believe she has the right to choose to abort or not to abort, too. See? Just like you, I'm pro-choice.
I never claimed she has no right to her religious views - and if you read the article, which is painfully clear, you hadn't - she does have religious views. By her own admission, she's Christian. Again, that's in the article.
No, she doesn't have to justify her choice, but she clearly had. READ THE ARTICLE ALREADY.
And after you calm down and get a clearer perspective, you'll see that your snide denigration of my opinion, and that without even having read the article, is clearly not how Liberals think.
So keep your WTF's in your pocket and read the damned article already.
NotThisTime (3,106 posts)
28. Are you saying that this living breathing creature is not a baby?
Who are any of us to tell that 14 year old girl what to do with HER body. It's her body, she did not consent to what happened to her, the sperm donor dominated that part of the conversation. If a girl of any age wants to bring to term the embryo that is implanted in her that becomes her child at birth, I assume she made this choice with the help of her doctor and family. That is her right to do so, and no god damn rapist should ever be allowed to lay his damn eyes on her or that child. End of Story.
BlueCaliDem (3,398 posts)
72. Ugh
Please read the article.
I'm pretty sure before the child was born it started out as a fertilized egg, no? And it took nine months to develop. No? Of course the living, breathing creature is NOW a baby, but rationally speaking, it wasn't when she made the choice to not abort, was it?
Her own words:
"Being Christian, the way I looked at it, the way I thought of it, this is a baby, an innocent person that didn't do anything wrong. Like, why should I take away that life?" she said.
TheMadMonk (4,928 posts)
170. Hate Christians much?
Just how many ways are you going to say? "She made her choice based on her Christain beliefs, and now she must live with the consequences."
You've also strongly implied she's a hypocrit, because she's not forgiving her attacker as a Christian properly should.
-
I'm pretty sure before the child was born it started out as a fertilized egg, no? And it took nine months to develop. No? Of course the living, breathing creature is NOW a baby, but rationally speaking, it wasn't when she made the choice to not abort, was it?
There ya go folks, NOT a "baby" until it's ejected from the womb. Another example of DUmmie "logic".
Pssst, DUmmies, you KNOW you are full of shit, but keep telling yourselves this. :bs:
-
Since BlueCaliDhim calls itself Christian and takes fault with the victim for not forgiving the rapist and welcoming him into their lives:
Zygoat (27 posts)
168. you're a Christian?
can you forgive these people in their very real story, for now not wanting that man in their lives?
-
Unbelievable.
-
The guy is just trying to get out of paying child support, which was court ordered. The girl's attorney is smart, and the DA who agreed to the original sentence should be BS many times for such short-sightedness.
"The consequences of sentencing this man to probation for 16 years, which is really until the child becomes an adult, and making him declare paternity and pay child support, includes that this guy gets a legal father-child relationship out of the deal," Murphy said.
Murphy has filed a motion with the court, asking the judge to amend the sentencing conditions and order the man to pay restitution instead of child support, which would force him to support the child he fathered but not give him visitation and other parental rights.
Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/19628763/2012/09/24/rapist-wants-visitation-rights-teen-mom-fighting-back#ixzz283nf2J1h
Nauseating that the DU is spinning this to support their "abort first, ask questions later" political platform.
-
NYC Liberal (13,579 posts)
145. Some of the posts in this thread make me wonder what site I'm on.
View profile
Disgusting. No, a rapist should NOT have visitation rights. Ever. And no, a woman is NOT wrong for choosing to keep a baby after being raped.
You should take a long hard look at the site you are on. The light bulb may then finally go off as to why there are many sites that post the ramblings of the DU misfits in shock and disgust.
-
That is one of the most vile things I've ever read on the Internet.
I'm alternating between rage and a twisted pity for how sad, small, and evil the soul of BlueCaliDem is. S/he will never find salvation in any religion, or peace in its mortal existence, for that matter. Not that s/he deserves either.