MoonageDayscream t1_j96hfom wrote

They were not kidnapped because Russia wanted to exterminate them, they were kidnapped because Russia has a population crisis as they wanted to take them out of Ukraine, and take anything Ukrainian out of the kids. The kids were destined to become loyal Russians willing to serve Russia, and not feeding and caring for them would have made the kids more stubbornly Ukrainian, not less.


MoonageDayscream t1_j2ezw9g wrote

It's you, not the headline. You are so focused on your silly narrative you can't see it makes perfect sense. As the headline states, this law cannot be used to prosecute doctors for abortions. That has absolutely no effect on the other laws (like malpractice) that a doctor could be prosecuted under. It most certainly does not say that a doctor can't be charged under any law, just that they can't be charged with violating this one, pre statehood, law.


MoonageDayscream t1_ix5cclr wrote

It's always been ok. How old were you when you were taught about gender? I remember teachers sorting us by gender. I remember "Sugar and spice and everything nice, that's what little girls are made of. Snips and snails and puppy dog tails, that's what little boys are made of." How old were you when you were first introduced to the idea that Mommy and Daddy were married? Attended a wedding? Should we ban children from being ringbearers and flower girls because they is participating in socially sanctioned sexual expression? It makes as much sense as banning a book where Timmy has two dads or firing a teacher for mentioning their same sex spouse.


MoonageDayscream t1_ivgrhc3 wrote

It's well known that offenders in the Church are protected. Not so much the secular institutions that offer similar access and those certainly don't have the global reach to shelter them, the social control to force silence or "forgiveness", or the deep pockets to harass or pay off victims and their families.


MoonageDayscream t1_iuj9ph1 wrote

Legal definition? I don't know if they actually do what you are looking for here. There's a statute for forcible rape and one or more for non forcible. They are left vague so they they cover many situations, and the prosecution has the opportunity to decide which fit best.

Some people don't believe that certain situations are "real rape". I have heard arguments that if the victim was unconscious then it wasn't "rape rape" because she didn't know it was happening. Same for those in a medical facility raped by a caregiver while they were sedated. It's horrifying to hear this argument. Some people think that consent can't be revoked, that going outside agreed parameters (like wearing a condom) isn't a violation of consent, etc.