Earlier this week I wrote about the redefing rape as “forcible rape” in H.R. 3 (No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act). Today we discover that the “Pro-Life” contingency is unusually quiet, which is quite interesting given how much “Pro-Lifers” love to talk about abortion. Talk about jobs? Not so much. Actually… not at all. Now we can add talking about the definition of “forcible rape” to the Do Not Discuss pile.
But it’s radio silence from the pro-life community, which is usually more than willing to sound off on abortion and what needs to be done to stop it.
Over the course of Friday and Monday, TPM reached out to pro-life groups and Democratic and Republican pro-life politicians — some of whom have backed federal action on abortion with language similar to the House law, known as the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” — to talk about the new bill’s language regarding “forcible rape.” None responded, except Lipinski, who told TPM that he’s willing to take another look at the controversial rape language.
[…]
Pitts and Blunt are still in Congress, and Pitts is a co-sponsor of H.R. 3 (Blunt’s now a Senator, so he can’t co-sponsor a House bill.) Neither responded to requests for comment on the use of “forcible” rape in their amendment, or what the terminology might mean in regards to the House bill.
Most of the Republican leadership in the House has signed on as co-sponsors of H.R. 3, including Majority Leader Eric Cantor. The Virginia Republican is a vocal opponent of abortion who promised the thousands of opponents who gathered for the March For Life this month that “the tide has turned” on abortion since the GOP regained the House majority. His office also did not respond to a request for comment on the forcible rape language in the bill, despite his co-sponsorship.
Anti-abortion politicians aren’t the only ones keeping quiet about H.R. 3 since the forcible rape language came to light. Calls to numerous anti-abortion groups, including National Right To Life, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Americans United For Life, the Susan B. Anthony List and the Abstinence Clearinghouse were either unreturned or met with “no comment.” [emphasis mine]
There silence is speaking. Ever get into a discussion about abortion with a “Pro-Lifer?” You. Can’t. Shut. Them. Up.
I’m beginning to think that the term “forcible rape” was supposed to sneak through, carving it into law before anyone noticed. I also sense that “Pro-Life” groups/congress people are now scrambling to get their definition of forcible rape together. Actually, they already know what they mean by forcible rape – they’re merely trying to repackage their meaning (Christian virgin who fought to the death, but, by a miracle, survived) into a more palatable version for the American public.