Will Allegations (false) of Rape Increase in No Choice States?

[Jacobin]

I was speaking to someone the other day about Mississippi's new proposed No Choice law, making abortions illegal, except in the case of rape, incest or imminent danger to the life of the mother.

Immediately, she said that would increase the cases of teenage girls who had consensual sex and became pregnant of accusing the man of rape, to allow for a legal abortion.

I hadn't thought of that issue, but it does seem to make sense that this would be another bad fallout from these laws?

Anyone heard anything about this possible consequence?

[slackmaster]

1. IMO that is an inevitable unintended consequence of No Choice laws

:nuke:

[kenny blankenship]

2. How about this:

all women emigrate from no-choice states. Leave the men to fuck each other and the livestock.

[Jacobin]

4. It is amazing what has happened in five short years

well, not exactly 'short' years...feels like an era.

[MindPilot]

13. Right you are Kenny

but I think that would be rather unfair to the livestock.

[havocmom]

21. It really isn't about "no-choice states"! It is about getting to SCOTUS

and letting the new appointees get a crack at Roe for the whole all of wax.

Being derisive about particular states misses the big picture AND does the GOP's work for them by alienating people who might be sniffing around for new party/candidates to vote for as they become more aware of bushco damage.

Comments like "Leave the men to fuck each other and the livestock" actually just fucks over chances to get these people on our side!

[SnowGoose]

3. You can count on it.

eom.

[SCDem]

5. In states like South Dakota where there is not even a rape exception

I guess we don't even have to ponder that question <sarcasm>

[Jacobin]

9. True, that

I wonder when they will introduce a bill to make it a crime for a South Dakota resident to cross state lines to obtain a legal abortion?

[gollygee]

6. It absolutely will be - it was in pre-Roe v Wade days

Women would claim they were raped and therefore not psychologically able to continue their pregnancies. Women would file false police reports.

[LisaL]

7. There is no exception for rape.

[Jacobin]

10. there is in the Mississippi law, but not the S.D. bill

[BOSSHOG]

11. The MS state legislature

amended the bill they sent to the governor to allow for abortions in cases of rape or incest.

[BOSSHOG]

8. One fallout I'm really looking forward to

is a convicted murderer challenging his sentence because in Mississippi where religious zealots rule and who believe abortion equates to murder, the penalty for performing an abortion (murder) is a fine of up to $5,000 and "up to" one year in Jail. One year for murder? A great precedent to challenge other murder sentences I would believe. Go Zealots!!

[cali]

12. Gee, let's go more hysterical

about something that hasn't happened. There are no states where abortion is illegal. SD's law and any other like it will be struck down by federal courts. SD's will probably never make it the SC. That's the consensus of the vast majority of legal experts. Some other state's slightly less draconian legislation that would require the overturning of Roe, may. This court would uphold Roe.

We've got more insidious encroachments to worry about. They're real, this one isn't. Not yet and not for several years at a minimum.

[gollygee]

14. OK. We won't worry about it till it's too late.

thanks.

[cali]

17. Worry about it to your heart's content.

My statement's still true: the true threat to Roe is being heard this year.

[Jacobin]

16. somewhere I read that we had two new SCOTUS

justices......hmmm....maybe I was dreaming.

I like your optimism. Unfortunately, I don't share it

[cali]

23. Jacobin, seriously.

Do some reading. Kennedy has voted to uphold Roe in the past. There's no reason to believe he's likely to change from that position. Not one legal expert believes he will. Ginsberg, Souter, Breyer and Stevens are solid votes for Roe. It was 6-3, now it's 5-4. I'm not being optimistic. I'm being accurate.
And as I say often on DU, we've got a case coming up before the SC that could really do damage to Roe. Less attention grabbing than SD, more of a threat to reproductive rights.

[Jacobin]

26. This is what I'm thinking

I'm not sure that Kennedy is firm on his position and have read that he was on the fence. Also, the mortality of the remaining justices has to be considered. It is not at all unlikely that one or more of the remaining justices will have to step down before Bush leaves office and before the SD challenge wends its way to SCOTUS. If another RW justice is appointed, then there would be little doubt that the game is over.

But, I agree with you that the chipping away at reproductive rights is at hand right now and the RW will continue to chip away and probably be more successful at a slow chipping away that will do more damage, at least in the short term, than an outright decision overturning roe.

Sorry to be snippy in my prior response. I guess we are all on edge to one degree or another about the theocrats who have taken over our country. But that's no excuse for bad manners, and I apologize.

:hi:

[cali]

29. No need to apologize. You weren't in the least bit

out of line. thanks, though. We just disagree. I don't think, despite the hopeful rw rumoring, that there's a chance Kennedy will vote to overturn. Yes, it's possible that Ginsberg or Stevens or some other pro Roe vote could step down, but I don't see it all that likely. In addition, if we take back some seats in the Senate- even if we don't gain control, Bush will have an impossible time pushing through another radical judge. He's a lame duck and historically lame duck presidents do not get their choice of judges. Just the way it works.

[CornField]

25. Since when is being proactive being hysterical?

I seriously do not understand the thinking on DU about this and other issues. If we have learned one thing from this administration it should be: We are on our own. It was evidence with Katrina... it has been evidenced with budget cuts... it has been further evidenced with tax cuts for the rich... even further evidenced with proposed medical savings accounts... even further evidence with proposed privitization of social security... Need I go on?

If there is one thing we should all realize about America today it is that we are very much alone. There is no soft cushion behind us if we fall. Therefore, it is imperative that we, as citizens, work together to understand the ramifications of each new, major change. The ideas proposed in this change, as I've recently come to understand, will not only affect my son and my daughters, but they affect me as well. (If I'm raped, the state of South Dakota would say that regardless of past horrible pregnancies and health concerns, I would be forced to carry term. It is not only an insult to me, but it is possible injury to my family.)

[cali]

27. useless speculation

about whether the claims of rape would increase in a state where abortion is only legal in cases involving rape or incest is not being pro-active. I have no quarrel with most of the points you make, I just think we're getting sidetracked by the sensationalism of what some states are doing. Yes, it's important, and we should certainly use it politically, but right now the real danger to Roe, the PBA case, with NO exception for the health of the mother, is about to heard by the SC. No one here talks about it, and it's a damn sight more of a threat than the legislation in SD. It's terribly written, could effect several types of abortion, and if allowed to go into effect, will enable statet to enact very restrictive law.

[CornField]

30. Just a couple of things

1) Please don't refer to it as PBA. Call it by the medical term: D&X. I'm one of those women who had a D&X. Our son was diagnosed at about 20 weeks into the pregnancy as having numerous neural tube defects. The worst of those was the always terminal anencephaly. Without going through the whole story again, under the legislation currently before SCOTUS, not only would my son be dead but so would I.

Myself and many women who have been in similar circumstances have made our stories known to our legislators. We aren't just sitting around and wringing our hands. We *know* the current legislation will result in both more death and a reduction in future reproductive opportunities. It is an anti-family law in as much as it is an anti-choice law. Once your loved one has been given a death sentence by any disease or defect, the government should have no say as to when your family chooses to pull the plug on life support.

2) Do you know why female American Colonists were first given the opportunity to have an education? Because it was determined by the men in charge women should have at least a rudimentary understanding/education in order to raise up their sons properly. That is, men felt no responsibility in caring for their young sons. Such activity always fell on the women in the household (who were not allowed to take part in public business dealings, attend meetings, etc.). Yet, men desired their sons to have the best opportunities available. Women being allowed education, then, was not for the betterment of women -- it was for the continued betterment of men.

In many ways, society hasn't changed so much. The same legislators who will write off young pregnant women as sluts who deserve exactly what they got are much less likely to feel the same about the young men who helped. This is why the discussions on the claims of rape is important to this legislation. It is doubtful that legislators have moved beyond their thinking of saving fetuses to understand there will be both a young man and a young woman who will bear the brunt of the consequences.

[cali]

31. Look, I'm sorry you underwent such an experience,

and I deeply appreciate that you and others have shared your stories with legislators, but the truth is it's officially called the PBA act. That's the reality of it. I'm keenly aware that there is no such actual procedure. I know what D&X entails. None of that changes the fact that the SC is going to hear the PBA act.. Again, that's the name of the law. When I refer to the furor over the faux procedure, I say "so called partial birth abortion. There's a distinction between a medical procedure that doesn't exist and legislation by Congress that does.

Thank you for the lesson about colonial history. As my grad degree is in history, I'm compelled to suggest that things weren't quite as simple as the scenario you described. They rarely are.

"It is doubtful that legislators have moved beyond their thinking of saving fetuses to understand there will be both a young man and a young woman who will bear the brunt of the consequences."

They don't care. These legislators are incapable of understanding the repercussions of their actions. More to the point; they don't give a shit. All the explaining in the world won't change that.

Respectfully,
Cali

[CornField]

32. Ah, well... my apologies

I obviously had no idea I was dealing of someone with an intellect so far superior than my own... grad degree and all. Enjoy that.

[cali]

33. Accepted. How could I ever refuse

anything so graciously offered?

[Solly Mack]

15. Wouldn't you cry rape if that was your only option?

but if "girls" are having sex with "men", then it is rape. "Consent" is an illusion - because underage is underage and "men" screwing around with underage "girls" should be jailed.

That said - Circumstances do vary and no one size fits all law can cover all those circumstances. For example - 2 16 year olds engaged in a sexual relationship.


But if society left me with no alternative, I'd holler rape so fucking fast heads would spin. My life is on the line and government forces me into a corner? Fuck it - I'm living.

[Jacobin]

19. I didn't mean to imply in my hypothetical

that statutory rape was involved.

I think it is quite common for two teenagers to have sex and for the girl to become pregnant.

And your response seems to answer the question of whether false accusations of rape might increase.

[Solly Mack]

24. Of course they'll increase

women and girls are being left without an option.

and I will not blame women and girls for what society forces them to become through stupid laws.

You can't push people into a corner and not expect something like this to happen.

Yes, it is quite common for teenagers to become pregnant - and it's tragic that society will be making the problem worse through ignorance and hate.

I apologize for my tone. I saw "girls" and "men" and reacted to it.

[Jacobin]

28. I know what you mean

No apology necessary. This whole thing about so-called 'conservatives' taking over and trying to micro manage women's lives is appalling to me.

[triguy46]

18. So the best approach is to set the cops on the guy.

Nothing the fundies would more enjoy, making you have the baby, and locking up the daddy. the Kansas AG tried this through blanket subpoena of medical records to determine if a "crime" had been committed. This is beyond orwellian.

[CornField]

20. To further your original questions

In many of these same states, there are laws on the books which make it illegal for minors to engage in sexual activity. How will our already overcrowded prison system deal with the influx of young men and women not only accused of such crimes, but caught with evidence right in the girl's uterus? (In past cases where there has been charges filed, only the boys in such situations have had to deal with the brunt of the law. I wonder if that will change? I also wonder if it won't be easier for girls to scream rape -- in order to both circumvent the new abortion laws and minor sexual activity laws -- and leave a mark on many young men in our nation which will last a lifetime.)

How will our overcrowded and ineffective human services agencies deal with the influx of infants which must now be moved into foster care and/or group homes?

The problem with all of these new banning abortion laws is that they have tunnel vision. Most supporters have been led to believe that the only women having abortions are wild, 'easy,' non-thinking and ignorant as to forms of pre-conception birth control. They make no considerations and have no understanding of women who are in long-term relationships (including marriage), are intelligent, without state aid and intelligent.

So, let's cut the crap: If there really was an intent to devoid or severely cut the number of abortions done in the US today, there would be a real push and real funding for the development of 100% accurate birth control. Since that is not the case, we can only assume that the supporters of such legislation don't really have that aim.

[Jacobin]

22. I wasn't aware of that

Probably because prosecuting minors for having sex is quite rare.

However, how does law enforcement ignore a teenager who accuses a guy of rape? I don't think they will ignore it. I think its going to be a major problem.