They did a piece on the Clinton News Network the other day, or maybe it was another network, I know it wasn't fox and they actually showed the news people in their briefing room trying to decide if they should run this story or not. The decided NOT to because they could never find anything with HER name on it forcing victims to pay for the kits. Not denying that it wasn't so, not even saying she didn't know about it. Just saying they could not link her to it.
i dont care who its linked to. its a bad policy and who ever came up with it should be ashamed of themselves.
The initial story talked about costs associated with other crimes comparing them to rape treatment....and also talked about abortion views. I referenced both crime and abortion. They're two separate issues that are also often linked. The story is about Palin and discusses how this may have occurred as a result of her abortion views.
the only time rape and abortion are linked is when there is a pregnancy resulting from the crime. i have no idea what the statistics are but i doubt that percentage is very high. if a policy came from an opposition to abortion, then it makes the victim pay (literally) for a moral belief about something that may, or may NOT occur as a result of the crime. if the reasoning for the policy is an anti-abortion view, tying the two together is just flat out wrong in my book. rape is a crime, plain an simple. treat it as such.
Agreed... Some are always for abortion, some are always against it, and most people are somewhere in between. I don't think the article was informative enough to determine why the decision was made but was obviously trying to take a stab at Palin. I can't think of a more traumatic experience than rape. I've had to interview victims (all female) and it's even tougher for them having to speak with a man right after they've been violated. There are more women than you would think that decide to continue their pregnancy. That has to be mentally challenging. You are correct in your assumption of preganancy resulting from crime. It's a very small percentage as is high-risk pregnancies. Most abortions are a result of irresponsible behavior. Rape should be separated from behavior but unfortunately it gets pulled in from extreme "Right to Life" and "Right to Choose" activists. I personally have no tolerance for rapists. I think they should get five minutes in the corner to pray (if they choose) and then we flip the switch. Game over! No recidivists! (Would either candidate support that?) Without evidence, it's very difficult to obtain a conviction. It's already a difficult challenge to have a victim testify as the defense can get pretty ugly. Most victims just want it to go away. I can't believe any elected official (regardless of moral views) would be against funding for examinations, crime scene analysis, treatment, etc. I'm guessing this was something that was part of a larger funding issue or an attempt to have another funding source cover the expenses.
i agree with a lot of the rest of your post and since i have stated what i think about the abortion angle and am not gonna rehash it. on the funding issue. someone should still be ashamed. as these exams are to get evidence of a crime, and in a way that the victims are probably submitting to ONLY to assist in going after the perp. to ask them to pay is callous and cruel. did the same dept ask victims of other crimes to pay for collecting evidence? to finger print a burglery, did the victims have to pay for the dusting up front? cash, check, charge? as i said, whoever came up with the policy should be ashamed. if anyone with "veto power" knew of it and did nothing, they should be ashamed also.
:hihi: I score one point to tirk...I'm sorry. This shouldn't be a laughing matter...but that's some funny ****.
