Legal Loophole for Both

I don’t know about you, but I believe those who perpetrate the crimes of incest or rape are far beyond immoral. Why would any state legislature, let alone US lawmakers, dilute the punishment of either crime? You may be puzzled by that statement, but that’s exactly what states are doing with their anti-abortion laws. Let’s back up and consider a few things.

Take a few moments to read what the Encyclopedia Britannica says about rape during war: “The rape of women by soldiers during wartime has occurred throughout history. Indeed, rape was long considered an unfortunate but inevitable accompaniment of war — the result of the prolonged sexual deprivation of troops and insufficient military discipline. Its use as a weapon of war was gruesomely demonstrated during World War II, when both Allied and Axis armies committed rape as a means of terrorizing enemy civilian populations and demoralizing enemy troops. Two of the worst examples were the sexual enslavement of women in territories conquered by the Japanese army and the mass rape committed against German women by advancing Russian soldiers.”

Rapists of Moscow

Now we are seeing Russian troops raping in Ukraine. We are quick to call such behavior a war crime, and indeed, with accurate proof, it is. Most United States police departments take rape seriously. After an alleged sexual assault, good policing includes a visit to a hospital and deployment of a rape kit to gather evidence. Although incest is prosecuted less in America, it’s still a heinous crime and any person inflicting such physical and emotional pain on a child should be held accountable.

Each state has its own set of rules and penalties for those who commit such atrocious acts but one thing is certain, there has been a change in attitude toward rapists in America. In most states, a woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy caused by rape.

According to the End Sexual Violence website, “Sexual violence occurs on a continuum of complex and difficult crimes having devastating impacts on victims. According to the United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 31% of rapes are reported to law enforcement. The term ’forcible rape‘ is used in the Uniform Crime Report by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to report incidents of rape and is defined very narrowly excluding many forms of criminal sexual behavior. Use of the term ’forcible rape‘ in the Uniform Crime Report coupled with the underreporting of the crime has led to very limited statistical picture of sexual violence. Additionally, the term ’forcible rape‘ fails to track either federal or state law relating to sexual crimes.”

But wait, all rape is forceable. You are forcing yourself on someone who doesn’t want you. I have a feeling this is more a legal definition than a description social policy can be fixed on.  I think it has more to do with the victim being beaten or injured in the commission of the crime. Just because someone allows it to happen (which is what women are advised to do if they have hope of avoiding injury or death), does not mean they weren’t raped.

Healing the Incest Wound: Adult Survivors in Therapy is a book authored by Christine A. Courtois. In it she discusses rape based on force and power. “Prevalence is difficult to generalize, but research has estimated 10–15% of the general population as having at least one such sexual contact, with less than 2% involving intercourse or attempted intercourse. Among women, research has yielded estimates as high as 20%.”

The recently passed bills in Texas, Oklahoma and other red states prohibit the medical termination of a pregnancy with no exceptions, not even if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. In a sense, these poorly written laws are giving a pass to those who force themselves sexually on a woman or family member. It’s the ultimate erasure of women’s rights to their own bodies These laws legitimize the result of rape.

The justification for these errant laws is God has “blessed this union” simply because one of more of the rapist’s sperms caused conception. Who are these people who would convict the victim to a lifelong responsibility of raising the product of a vicious and violent act? And who dares speak for God? If a law prevents a woman who endured a forceful rape from taking the recourse of ending the ultimate form of unwanted pregnancy, then what have we become as a nation?

Any law forcing a young girl to endure a pregnancy that her father or brother brought on through a highly sinful and atrocious act goes against the grain of many Biblical parables. Remember, God ordered the death of a child for a person to prove their loyalty to God himself. Why wouldn’t you allow the death of an unborn fetus resulting from rape or incest? Wake up you legal misfits. You are not God and you shouldn’t prevent a woman disconnecting from her rapist with a simple and safe medical procedure.

If the Supreme Court cannot see the simple difference between an unwanted pregnancy and a pregnancy as evidence of a crime, then we are not the advanced society we claim to be. If you want to go back to the letter of the law of the Holy Bible, I challenge you to show me where it says rape is okay. If you are so draconian you believe that two-thousand years ago humans were without faults or deceptions, then tell me how a modern world of justice for all works.

On the surface, justice for a fetus might seem like a worthy legal pursuit, but if you are giving rapists and perverted family members a break, then you should take a good hard look in the mirror and ask this question, “If my daughter was raped, would I want the perpetrator to have parental rights to my grandchild?” If you answer yes, then you are the problem, not Planned Parenthood. And if no, then you understand that no person should have to be reminded of the pain and suffering of that event, every day of their life.


Find a job, Find the candidate you need. 

How to Hire Great People: Tips, Tricks and Templates for Success

Great companies hire great people. This short, easy-to-read book will help you recruit, review and refocus your new workers into the style and culture of your company. Motivating people to do great work will manage turnover and keeping good workers at your company will maintain your success. Employee inspiration makes a positive difference in our competitive world. HOW TO HIRE GREAT PEOPLE covers everything, including testing, training, tricks and tips. Follow this guide and you’ll assemble strong teams with smart workers, and you’ll learn some time-tested techniques about how to keep them. Kindle and Paperback Click Here

Check out all the books written by Dwight C. Douglas here. 

New Modern Art – Doodles and Cartoon Website


2 thoughts on “INCEST AND RAPE

  1. The Supreme Court has many things to consider when reviewing these laws designed to be challenged. While Originalists puts all national law-making in the hands of Congress, that is not the way our system has grown and evolved. By reaffirming Roe V. Wade, they will not only uphold the concept of “settled law,” but will be deciding whether individual states can enforce laws that significantly impinge on personal freedom based on the religious beliefs of some of its residents, And whether, in this day and age, your personal autonomy is based on your address. There’s no two ways about it: These recent laws are not intended to limit Roe V. Wade. They are intended to ultimately overturn it. The smartest thing the court could have done was say, “we aren’t taking this hot potato,” but it didn’t. Now, it remains to be seen who gets burnt.

  2. I’m of two minds about all this. First of all, I suspect these harsh laws that would force women to continue pregnancies even in cases of rape, incest and, inexplicably, in threat to the life of the mother are really just red herrings, intended to distract people from the base (and I do mean base) intent of the laws. These laws hope to turn the bodies of pregnant women over to control of the government for nine months. Put that way, it is hard for anyone to argue that is a good idea, but if people are so busy beating each other up about exceptions, they are distracted from discussing the full impact of the law. That’s the first point. But my second thought is that most Republicans legislators really would rather not be talking about this at all. Perhaps they hope that if they pass a truly Draconian law threatening the personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution, the Supreme Court will have no choice but to overturn it. If it does not, these elected officials (I refuse to call them leaders) win with their base. If it does, they’re off the hook, not their fault — they tried — the court ruled. It ‘s nothing like a little ironic that the very people who say law should not be made by “activist judges” are hoping the Supreme Court — where all of this will eventually wind up — will be activist on their behalf. That’s just nuts!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.