re: #113 Buck

I really think I have covered that. You are making me repeat myself over. After this I am done.

Sex with someone who cannot consent is to force yourself on them. You can agree or disagree with that, I no longer care.

Yeah, you are done. Pathetically so.

You can’t show where there is force in that scenario because there is none. There is no force involved. There is only taking advantage of someone who is mentally impaired.

Again:

You defended the interposition of the word ‘forcible’ in an amendment that was designed, in its other aspects, to limit the funding of abortions. Your fatuous explanation for this is that the GOP was just trying to emphasize that they saw all rape as forcible. That this makes no sense— why would they add that language, since your claim is its tautological?— doesn’t deter you. That the obvious aim of the rest of the bill was to deny abortion access to women doesn’t deter you. That actual rape victims have told you that there can be rape without force doesn’t deter you. You are bound and determined to defend those poor, poor GOP members.

You ignore completely that the GOP is now openly attempting to prevent abortions even for those who have been raped under any circumstances.

littlegreenfootballs.com

Your argument has no merit. Your motive for the argument is obvious, and terrible. The extent to which you’ve attempted to smear me, someone who was actually raped as a child, as somehow thinking that children can meaningfully consent to sex, is monstrous.

That is what you’ve done today.

Congratulations.