It absolutely does happen. Neat article on it. I only went searching for it because I saw it on one of the news channels yesterday; can’t remember which channel though, and can’t find that particular news source’s article or info. However, reading this, I recognize many of the quotes verbatim, so maybe this IS based on that interview.
No, and any rapist who tries should be charged with stalking.
WTF, seriously? A transparent ploy to get a reduced sentence shouldn’t be accommodated. It should be laughed out of court.
There is a difference between the other examples but I was trying to be “diverse” in terms of the options I gave. The two other examples are ones whereby the act itself had a lot of mitigation. The marital rape one, in a context of a loving relationship before and after, is one where there is no mitigation for the act itself but there is some for the circumstances, if that makes sense?
Marital rape, is still rape, and it does NOT happen in a truely loving relationship. So no, it does not make sense.
It depends on your definition of “truely loving”. I would take your point that at the time of the rape the relationship was clearly not truely loving. But conceivably it could be before* and (with considerable difficulty but remember we are talking about unusual cases here) after. Anyway this is not a hill I’m going to die on, I was just trying to come up with examples of stuff!
*If you disagree with this, consider a happily married couple for fifty years that dote on one another. Then the husband gets alzheimers and stabs the wife to death. Sorry, but the relationship WAS truely loving beforehand. Life is not shades of grey. We are barely evolved monkeys. Please be realistic.
It gets him to the courthouse. We’ll catch him outside and beat the snot out of him.
In the thread of ‘Should a rapist be able to sue for Paternal rights?’ I think to answer it fairly we need to look at the other possibility.
If the one committing the rape is female and she gets pregnant from the act should she have any rights to the child beyond the right to carry the child to birth? Or should she not even have that right and be compelled to abort?
After the birth should she have any maternal rights? And more important to the 2 threads, how is any gender inequality in the law related to the 2 situations (male vs female rapist) justified?
What? No. Rapists should be able to sue for the right to be beaten to death, maybe, but that’s it.
If I were Emperor I think I might call for forced abortion of female rapists - if I were that happy ignoring the enormous reaction such a call would stir up - or else have the State treat the rapist as a permanently unfit mother and perhaps give the rape victim some special rights regarding the fate of the offspring.
If I had considerable sway on the existing American legal system I’d push for no legal rights on the part of the rapist regarding the offspring, some special rights on the part of the rape victim regarding the offspring, and full vigorous governmental protection and support for the offspring prioritizing the interests of the offspring first.
“Giving away your sperm (or something like that) is tantamount to reckless abandonment.”
[reply] “I think you just won your case.”
Forced abortion? So we’re going to forcibly invade someone’s genitals to show that we think sexual assault is wrong?
(I kind of see the point of those anti-death penalty people who point out that it doesn’t make much sense to kill people to show that we think killing people is wrong.)
If you think that the mom shouldn’t have parental rights, why not just take the kid from her at birth? I’ve seen firsthand that that is typically how it’s handled when CPS is involved with a pregnant mom who has severe drug issues.
Of course, I’m against rape whether the rapist is male or female. I just think that this issue of taking custody from rapists is not as easy as it seems due to the logistics of proving beyond all doubt that the sex act was rape is not always easy and terminating parental rights based on an accusation is a very serious matter.
Biology; she’s still the one carrying the fetus regardless of how it got there.
She shouldn’t be forced to either carry the child or to have an abortion. However, she shouldn’t be permitted to have custody.
Rapists, male OR female, should not have custody of any child that may be a result of said rape. Nor should any woman ever be forced to decide what she’s going to do with her own body. Period. (If she doesn’t want to have an abortion, in this case, custody would go to the father, OR, if he didn’t care to be a parent, said child would be put up for adoption)
Different scenario – someone with Alzheimers, or any other form of dementia, in such a stage, is obviously not in his right mind when committing such an act, and most likely wouldn’t be held responsible for his actions. That is not even the same thing.
Wait a minute. Is the rape “legitimate” or “illegitimate”?
Seriously, no way would I support forced abortions. It’s not the child’s fault his mother is a wackjob.
I’m sure this happens all the time. :rolleyes:
Female rapists don’t have to sue for maternal rights. They have them by default. Are you asking if the state should remove them?
I said no, but technically yes. Because a rapist should have the opportunity to sue on the claim that he is not a rapist. The law should not preclude this. Hopefully he wouldn’t win.
I’m glad I got to know my biological father. Committing rape at some point in the past doesn’t mean you’re irredeemable. (And he didn’t consider himself a “rapist” and maybe he wasn’t under the law at that time. It was my mom who much later characterized my conception as “date rape.”)
That doesn’t mean I would support giving him legal parental rights as such.
It happens with statuary rape. In those cases, the statutory rapist mother can and often does get both custody of the child, and child support payments from her victim.
Merged two threads about the same thing.