X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| ||||||||||||
sarah palin,wasilla,rape,kit Under Palin, Wasilla Made Women Pay for Rape Kits
Comments  who voted for this video NetRunner
- siftbot
x100 | Friends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote                 Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 14. Seric
(139 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments         | |||||||||||
Stumble This
Beginning in 2009, states in the US will have to pay for "Jane Doe rape kits," also known as anonymous rape tests.
Where's she from again... Iran?
You know what I tell the respectable ladies about self defense, and anti assault techniques?
Buy a gun, learn to use it. Get a tazer and mace, use those before you use deadly force.
If its an grope use the mace, if its a trying to take the clothes of use the tazer, if its full on rape use the gun.
But Palin who should be an icon for womans rights thinks rape is a womans fault and she should pay.
Ooooooh. So it's not their fault. Now I get what the prosecutor meant.
I get charged for my rape kit. They pass those out free somewhere? Where? Please tell me where I can get duck tape, rope, Roofies and a shovel for free.
Damn that is a well crafted LMAO sift comment, but my wife didn't think so at all when I read it to her.
I get charged for my rape kit. They pass those out free somewhere? Where? Please tell me where I can get duck tape, rope, Roofies and a shovel for free.
Come over to my house and I'll give you the first three for free. Though in reverse order and I'll have to hold on to the shovel because I'll need it later.
As opposed to taxing her, and using a portion of the revenue to pay for Rape Kits. Right. Then she wouldn't have to pay for it.
The difference being that given the millions of taxpayers, each individual taxpayer winds up paying only a fraction of a cent for the kit versus forcing the rape victim to pony up several hundred dollars all by herself.
^ Yes, because a $0.50 tax on everyone is soooo much worse than a $300 charge to a rape victim.
I sure wish we could make laws devoid of passion and give reason a chance. A compassionate government (which is an oxymoron) is a tyrannical government. My three cents.
^I agree, if everyone only gets taxed on Rape Kits, but shes also paying a lot of other taxes on items she doesn't use--its a magic trick--you don't see all the other items she paid taxes on but never used--all you see is the rape kit. Either way shes paying that $300, and then some.
Somebody's been reading too much Ayn Rand. That's a fantasy. Very fun to think about, but not realistic. If we stopped paying taxes and stopped getting government services, the poor and ingorant would be living like animals, with short and brutal lives.
Maybe you think everybody would rise above it and help each other from becoming so destitute. Well we have a system designed to do that. It's called government. If the system is broken, we can fix it if we work together. But calling for its abandonment will not help anybody.
So yes, she is paying the $300 one way or another, but not in the middle of the most traumatic event of her life.
>> ^imstellar28:
^I agree, if everyone only gets taxed on Rape Kits, but shes also paying a lot of other taxes on items she doesn't use--its a magic trick--you don't see all the other items she paid taxes on but never used--all you see is the rape kit. Either way shes paying that $300, and then some.
Somebody's been reading too much Ayn Rand. That's a fantasy. Very fun to think about, but not realistic. If we stopped paying taxes and stopped getting government services, the poor and ingorant would be living like animals, with short and brutal lives.
Maybe you think everybody would rise above it and help each other from becoming so destitute. Well we have a system designed to do that. It's called government. If the system is broken, we can fix it if we work together. But calling for its abandonment will not help anybody.
So yes, she is paying the $300 one way or another, but not in the middle of the most traumatic event of her life.
just curious, whats stopping the "women against violence" charity from donating money to cover the cost of local rape kits? or a judge from sentencing every convicted rapist (among other consequences) to cover the cost of 25 rape kits?
i've read two books by ayn rand--one at 138 pages, and one at 224 pages. i guess thats a lot if you're someone who doesn't read any books?
just curious, whats stopping the "women against violence" charity from donating money to cover the cost of local rape kits? or a judge from sentencing every convicted rapist (among other consequences) to cover the cost of 25 rape kits?
Nothing is stopping them. That's kinda the point. There obviously isn't a charity or restitution program in place to do so.
If there was a charity to take the burden from every government service that you don't want to pay for, that would be wonderful. But there isn't. The idea that there should be is just a very nice dream you are living in.
"Nothing is stopping them. That's kinda the point."
How is it true that nothing is stopping them? If people are already forcefully taxed to provide police service--wouldn't most people assume that rape kits are included in that service? Thus wouldn't most people assume they wouldn't have to donate to a charity providing rape kits for women? Isn't that what most people in this thread assumed--and why they were so shocked?
"There obviously isn't a charity or restitution program in place to do so."
why is that statement obvious, and why is it true? if women are being raped, and forced to pay for rape exams anywhere in the country--it doesn't seem obvious to me that nobody would be there to help them--it seems obvious to me that somebody would be there to help them. for the simple reason that if you run a news article about it, theres going to be a lot of people who find that unacceptable.
Someone would need to set up a charity, and collect enough donations from the town of Wasilla, and still be able to get enough past the overhead to pay for the kits.
Widening the donors would require explaining to people outside the town that "oh, here in Wasilla, they charge victims for rape kits", which likely would result in letters to the governor and state senate asking them to pass a law banning the practice (which they eventually did), rather than donations.
In short, why should people donate money to take up the slack from an immoral government practice? I'm especially curious if the "charge for rape kits" program resulted in a proportional tax cut for anyone. I'd be willing to bet it didn't.
if you recall, my point was that the rape victim would be paying for it anyways. people seemed shocked because they thought it was outrageous she had to pay for it--but what they didn't realize was that in a system of involuntary taxation, she would be paying for it either way.
interestingly enough--nobody raised any reasons for why they should be included in the police budget other than the religious argument of "its just feels right".
interestingly enough--nobody raised any reasons for why they should be included in the police budget other than the religious argument of "its just feels right".
I'm pretty sure that's because the reason is obvious: the rape kit is necessary to collect forensic evidence to be used by the state in apprehending and prosecuting the assailant. We don't, for instance, make murder victim's families pay for DNA or ballistics tests on the murder weapon so why force rape victims to pay for their own tests?
Relativism is the idea that some elements or aspects of experience or culture are relative to, i.e., dependent on, other elements or aspects.
Common statements that might be considered relativistic include
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#question
just curious, whats stopping the "women against violence" charity from donating money to cover the cost of local rape kits? or a judge from sentencing every convicted rapist (among other consequences) to cover the cost of 25 rape kits?
i've read two books by ayn rand--one at 138 pages, and one at 224 pages. i guess thats a lot if you're someone who doesn't read any books?
The contents of a rape kit:
A sexual assault evidence collection kit contains commonly available examination tools such as:
* Detailed instructions for the examiner
* Forms for documentation
* Tube for blood sample
* Urine sample container
* Paper bags for clothing collection
* Large sheet of paper for patient to undress over
* Cotton swabs for biological evidence collection
* Sterile water
* Sterile saline
* Glass slides
* Unwaxed dental floss
* Wooden stick for fingernail scrapings
* Envelopes or boxes for individual evidence samples
* Labels
Other items needed for a forensic/medical exam and treatment that may not be included in the rape kit are:
* Woods lamp
* Toluidine blue dye
* Drying rack for wet swabs and/or clothing
* Patient gown, cover sheet, blanket, pillow
* Needles/syringes for blood drawing
* Speculums
* Post-It Notes used to collect trace evidence
* Camera (35 mm, digital, or Polaroid), film, batteries
* Medscope and/or colcoscope
* Microscope
* Surgilube
* Acetic acid diluted spray
* Medications
* Clean clothing and shower/hygiene items for the victim's use after the exam
Thanks to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_kit
"This is argument by question,"
can you explain why that argument was fallacious in your own words? pointing to a website which claims all arguments ending in a question mark are fallacious prove nothing about your understanding of the issue or the arguments.
As for the rest, it appears to be an argument by gibberish:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#gibberish
wouldn't it be more efficient to just set up one charity with different departments, and collect donations automatically from people as a percentage of their income? or set up two charities which are slightly different, and ask people to choose which one they like every few years?
oh wait...
Wonder if Ayn Rand was ever raped. Wm. F. Buckley intellectually raped and destroyed Ayn Rand's soulless Objectivism. Contrary to Rand, Buckley demonstrated that self-sacrifice was in fact -essential- to achieving rational enlightened self interest.
This is the great thing about the cultural bankruptcy of the 21st century. People can make wild statements without evidence and nobody bats an eyelash. Just ask Sarah Palin.
If everyone really wants to take from the rich and give to the poor--why beat around the bush? Just tax everyone 10% and divide the $1500 billion by 200 million people and write everyone a $7,500 check. People at at the $7,500 federal poverty level get a 100% increase in income, I get a tax cut, and I even though you are still forcing me to pay taxes, at least we can all have a free market.
I am guessing that idea would work great. Stupid inefficient government, instead of making it efficient we should just destroy it! Then we can spend every sunday shopping around for police services.
Can we agree that a rape kit is only useful for the potential capture and prosecution of the offender? Can we not therefor agree that it should fall under the costs of the police department?
Even if we all donated money to a community police organization, would we want those donations to go toward necessary police costs, or bill someone every time they are victimized? To me, that seems to be defeating the purpose of donating money to the police organization in the first place.
How about we all just keep our money, then when we get robbed, raped, or shot, then we call up the police to deal with it and get an itemized bill afterward. Works for lawyers, right? They're not very expensive.
And, oh yeah, if you want good police work, that will cost extra.