Kansas Rep. Pete DeGraaf: Being impregnated during a rape is just like getting a flat tire

[Anonymous]

Hmm... let's see.... how do you plan ahead in order not to get raped? Castrate the males who seem to think it's ok?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you plan ahead for pregnancy after a rape? Is he saying that American woman should expect to be raped and impregnated? Seriously?

yup, that is exactly the implication. well, what he PROBABLY wants is for everyone to have their rapist's baby, since they are asking you to cover your own abortion with special abortion insurance which you must get BEFORE being raped.

I have no interest in Kansas, and this just cements it for me.

Do you remember the case where a woman was raped, but somehow manaed to persuade her attacker to use a condom? That fact was used against her in the trial; I think they said it showed she in some way consented.

Now fast forward to a world where you have to sign up for "rape abortion insurance" when you start your new job at age 22. 6 years later you are raped, and they find the guy -- but in the trial the defense attorney uses the fact that you somehow were thinking about being raped six years ago -- i.e. you MUST have KNOWN you were in a dangerous area, and were planning for it to happen, so in a way you were asking for it.

Not too far fetched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you plan ahead for pregnancy after a rape? Is he saying that American woman should expect to be raped and impregnated? Seriously?

yup, that is exactly the implication. well, what he PROBABLY wants is for everyone to have their rapist's baby, since they are asking you to cover your own abortion with special abortion insurance which you must get BEFORE being raped.

I have no interest in Kansas, and this just cements it for me.

Do you remember the case where a woman was raped, but somehow manaed to persuade her attacker to use a condom? That fact was used against her in the trial; I think they said it showed she in some way consented.

Now fast forward to a world where you have to sign up for "rape abortion insurance" when you start your new job at age 22. 6 years later you are raped, and they find the guy -- but in the trial the defense attorney uses the fact that you somehow were thinking about being raped six years ago -- i.e. you MUST have KNOWN you were in a dangerous area, and were planning for it to happen, so in a way you were asking for it.

Not too far fetched.

I was already beyond outraged, but you make an excellent point. Because, without that scenario, what do you do, buy rape abortion insurance the day after being raped? Well, that won't be allowed either because it's after the fact and you'll be denied for a preexisting condition. There is no good way around this and the legislators in Kansas are morons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll probably get flamed for this but to me I think he just ssaid it wrong. Ok so they banned medical insurance from covering abortions in all cases except to save the life of the mother. But then have a provision for an abortion only policy not just in cases of rape but also unwanted pregnacy

I think that's a bunch of nonsense. An abortion insurance policy? Really?

I haven't had a miscarriage or an abortion, but medically, they can be IDENTICAL and I'm relatively sure that the insurance codes don't differentiate between an abortion that someone gets because she WANTS one and an abortion that someone gets as part of a miscarriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll probably get flamed for this but to me I think he just ssaid it wrong. Ok so they banned medical insurance from covering abortions in all cases except to save the life of the mother. But then have a provision for an abortion only policy not just in cases of rape but also unwanted pregnacy

I think that's a bunch of nonsense. An abortion insurance policy? Really?

I haven't had a miscarriage or an abortion, but medically, they can be IDENTICAL and I'm relatively sure that the insurance codes don't differentiate between an abortion that someone gets because she WANTS one and an abortion that someone gets as part of a miscarriage.

there was a state (was it georgia?) that was planning to investigate miscarriages as possible criminal acts. This country has gone insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm... let's see.... how do you plan ahead in order not to get raped? Castrate the males who seem to think it's ok?

you may be on to something...

[Anonymous]

I think everything should be banned from medical insurance and you need to buy a separate policy on every medical condition that you think may happen to you.
(I am being sarcastic)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm... let's see.... how do you plan ahead in order not to get raped? Castrate the males who seem to think it's ok?

you may be on to something...

it all goes back to the "what if males had to carry the babies?" thing. You know our laws would not be as strict if that were the case.

[Anonymous]

Interesting---conservatives claim UHC will allow the govt to regulate healthcare and personal decisions and yet...here are conservatives telling insurance companies what they can and cannot cover?

I guess when it suits THEM, motherfuckers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll probably get flamed for this but to me I think he just ssaid it wrong. Ok so they banned medical insurance from covering abortions in all cases except to save the life of the mother. But then have a provision for an abortion only policy not just in cases of rape but also unwanted pregnacy

I think that's a bunch of nonsense. An abortion insurance policy? Really?

I haven't had a miscarriage or an abortion, but medically, they can be IDENTICAL and I'm relatively sure that the insurance codes don't differentiate between an abortion that someone gets because she WANTS one and an abortion that someone gets as part of a miscarriage.

there was a state (was it georgia?) that was planning to investigate miscarriages as possible criminal acts. This country has gone insane.

Yeah, I remember that too. When I was a little girl, first learning about the feminist movement, I foolishly thought that those battles belonged to my mother and grandmother, and not to me. I thought my battles would be different and was sure that my daughter's battles would be different than mine. It seems like every day, there is a new woman-hating issue cropping up and every day, there is a new reason to be angry.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps he should experience it himself and then form an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:publishing someone's home address and home # is irresponsible and wrong.

Not in this instance. I hope he is inundated with calls from all over the world and email as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:publishing someone's home address and home # is irresponsible and wrong.

No. It is neither wrong or irresponsible. He is a public official, who has chosen to make make this information public. It is irresponsible not to let him know your thoughts.

That said, I wouldn't be upset if his front door was barricaded with boxes of tires so he couldn't leave the house and "serve on behalf of the people."

But that's just me.

The office no. directs you to an 800 number and the home phone has been disconnected. Wonder why! I sent an email (above address) and I bet that has been changed as well. Thus, it seems this cretin has received a lot more attention than he bargained for.

[Anonymous]

LIVID here chiming in. This guy is an a$$hat, but it isn't surprising. These laws ban insurance companies from covering abortion in cases where there is a fatal defect with the fetus or a health problem with the mother, its just not "life threatening" yet. They don't get it. They believe that every woman seeking an abortion is doing so because having a baby is "inconvenient. " The "punish the slut" mentality. (don't get me wrong, I'm pro-choice for all women regardless of circumstances) These men have never been faced with the women in their lives having a non-viable pregnancy or serious health complications in pregnancy. I wonder if insurance companies would be banned from offering an comprehensive abortion rider that covers the theraputic abortion scenario. My guess is yes. In this guy's tiny little mind there is never a good reason to have an abortion and he grudgingly made the "life of the mother exception."

The latest attacks on women have really made me angry at the FACOG. Where are they? They should be out there saying that theraputic abortions are a sad but necessary part of their practice and they are interfering with the doctor/patiend relationship and practicing the very best medicine for their patients. Every OB/GYN, with a few exceptions performs abortions for medical reasons. Argh!!!.

OK, I'll be getting down off my soapbox now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll probably get flamed for this but to me I think he just ssaid it wrong. Ok so they banned medical insurance from covering abortions in all cases except to save the life of the mother. But then have a provision for an abortion only policy not just in cases of rape but also unwanted pregnacy

I think that's a bunch of nonsense. An abortion insurance policy? Really?

I haven't had a miscarriage or an abortion, but medically, they can be IDENTICAL and I'm relatively sure that the insurance codes don't differentiate between an abortion that someone gets because she WANTS one and an abortion that someone gets as part of a miscarriage.

But the insurance company has access to the medical records, which would show whether the embryo or fetus was showing a heartbeat or not. If heartbeat then the insurance co would only pay for the abortion IF the woman had filed a police report claiming rape AND if the woman had previously purchased rape abortion insurance.