OMG - big image - a breakdown of the right vs the left. Not a perfect image by a long shot, but they do a decent job of finding ways to put things that give both sides credit.
The Republican Party isn't interfering with my life when they tell me it's ok for my coworkers to rape me and tries to stop me from having an abortion and wants to throw me in jail for being with my girlfriend?
That's as far as I got before I realized this graph is fucking insane.
The graph isn't perfect, you can't summarize a whole political ideology into a single snapshot like this....but it isn't talking about republicans and democrats per se, it's just trying to generalize left and right.
The story that brought the Republicans their opportunity to demonstrate their pro-rape stance (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702&page=1&page=1)
Article about pro-rape Republicans with video (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/healthwellness/143164/30_gop_senators_vote_to_defend_gang_rape/)
This site is a bit tongue in cheek (http://www.republicansforrape.org/why-rape/)
You are painting with a wide brush. As puzzling as those Senators are that voted against the measure, it was a Republican who helped the woman's father find her, and ten Republicans did vote for it. Just saying.
Maybe they consider rape an acceptable part of doing business, part of a female's job responsibilities. If they had any decency at all they would include it in the job description so that women would understand what is expected of them.
more specific - sign over rights and ownership of their bodies, and swear to remain silent, for example:
I hereby sign over ownership of my body to any and all who care to make use of it for personal sexual release and recreation and will not complain if that overuse results in the need for surgical reconstruction. I will not abort any pregnancy that may result from this activity because you know how god feels about killing those babies.
Or maybe they don't. You and I both know they had other justifications for voting against the amendment. I don't think their reasons are justified, but agreeing with rape itself is not why they were voting that way.
you and I both know that they were defending defense contractors against liability but the effect is the same. It's open season on women in the defense industry. Maybe in a way this outcome protects women. If arbitration agreements were eliminated they would be forced to kill the women after they finished using them.
The justification that Sen. Sessions put forth was that it wasn't the governments business to get involved in the contracts of private companies... Although now that I think of it, the other party to the contract is ...hmmm...THE GOVERNMENT you dumb ass. This is just one more attempt to make sure that Cheney's old company makes HUGE profits off the rest of us (while we don't have the $ for health care or other social programs)
Yes, because every one of us in the party completely supported that situation 100% and voted against the bill in question and supported the other party members who did.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
no subject
That's as far as I got before I realized this graph is fucking in
sane.no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Article about pro-rape Republicans with video (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/healthwellness/143164/30_gop_senators_vote_to_defend_gang_rape/)
This site is a bit tongue in cheek (http://www.republicansforrape.org/why-rape/)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I hereby sign over ownership of my body to any and all who care to make use of it for personal sexual release and recreation and will not complain if that overuse results in the need for surgical reconstruction. I will not abort any pregnancy that may result from this activity because you know how god feels about killing those babies.
Something like that.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
You mean those reasons that don't jibe with their collective stance on things like defunding ACORN?
no subject
But we knew that already.
no subject
no subject
no subject
EXCUSES>>>EXCUSES
Although now that I think of it, the other party to the contract is ...hmmm...THE GOVERNMENT you dumb ass. This is just one more attempt to make sure that Cheney's old company makes HUGE profits off the rest of us (while we don't have the $ for health care or other social programs)
no subject
no subject