2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

Of course it would be a guy who would think its "off-kilter" and that  there MAY be cases where there are "distinctions" of rape!

I am not talking about abortion or "degrees" of consent.  Sex without consent is rape.  If I had consensual sex with someone last week, that doesn't mean consent in perpetuity.  Again, I am at a loss as to grasping when "with rape lines are often not as clear."  When it is not clear? 

No consent = rape. 

Consent earlier in the evening but currently passed out = rape.

Consent when married but not today = rape.

When does non-consensual sex equal something less than rape?  Please enlighten us?

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

If you were drunk and someone stole your car or your wallet or if you left your keys in your car and someone took it, the law does not take into consideration your state of incapacitation/intoxication.  You are not blamed for lacking the state of mind to prevent the crime, thereby forcing the charge against the car thief to be reduced to criminal mischief.  It does not, in effect, blame you for making yourself a victim. 

If you are not home to defend your property and someone breaks in, the law doesn't say "You should have BEEN there."

There is still a burden of proof and these cases will not be a slam dunk.  Unless and until this country values its women as much if not more than it values its property or money, we are lost.

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

So - scottmil - please tell me when rape isn't rape? 

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

The OR House did the right thing.  Hopefully, the Senate will, too. Just in case, people should email their state senators and let them know we're watching this one.

This merely brings Oregon law into line with the majority of other states that do not consider HOW a women became incapacitated.  Does that mean being charged with first degree rape will dissuade some rapists?  Highly unlikely.  If they had the capacity for that type of thought process, would they be raping women? 

Is the mandatory sentence enough?

It's not as if a rapist steals your car or takes your money.  A rapist violates another human being.  In my opinion, there is NO penalty harsh or severe enough on that one.

Thank Rep. Gelser for her hard work on this one.  The women of Oregon thank you!  Best regards - Sue Castner

posted 3 years, 12 months ago
view in context