Republicans aim to Keep the Definition of Rape as the Union of One Man and One Woman

Todd and Dick
Dick and Todd

This election a lot of attention has been focused on the subject of rape, due to various republican politicians venturing into this territory with some very bold thoughts on the subject.

In the latest salvo in this long running debate, a group of republican contenders of various elected posts, got together today with an attempt at the definition of ‘rape’ as the union of one man and one woman.

Led by Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock and Mr Todd Akin the Republican United States Senate nominee from Missouri, they are challenging anyone to prove that God did not intend rape as the union between a man and a woman.

“Any other type of rape is unacceptable and goes against our christian family values” declared the panelists in a joint press conference  adding that: “There are a lot of good god fearing americans who would not be around today, were it not for one of their parents raping the other. But nobody was ever born as a result of rape between people of the same sex. God does not approve of that, and never will.”


In addition to these pronouncements the republicans released the following abbreviated Manifesto of Rape:

Keep the Definition of Rape as the Union of One Man and One Woman

Why is rape the union of one man and one woman?

  • The primary public purpose of rape is to bring together men and women for reproduction of the human race.

What harm would homosexual “rape” do?

Several harms would result immediately:

  • Homosexual rape would be subsidized. All taxpayers, consumers, and businesses would be forced to provide financial benefits to homosexual rape victims for rape counseling and rape consequence mitigation such as the sexually transmitted diseases they cause. Except when such rape occurs in prisons, where it is part of the punishment to those sinners who end up in prison, homosexual rape in the free world serves no purpose.

Other social harms would likely become evident over time, because “the law is a teacher.” What would we “teach” society if homosexual “rape” is legalized?

  • We would teach that procreation is no longer a uniquely important public interest. The likely long-term result: birth rates would fall because homosexual rape almost never results in a pregnancy.
  • We would teach that adult lust and desires, not the interests of society, should drive the definition of rape. The likely result: increased demands for legalization of other forms of rape such as polyrape, ie the rape between many men and one woman, one man and many women, many men and many women, or the rape of animals or sex toys by men or women.



One comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s