explained it to him as cordially as I could. How does one be cordial to a pompous ass?

Can someone post another picture of the cute little girl in her feminist princess getup? Because this is depressing. Sometimes I can't believe people like Dykstra are able to vote, let alone get elected. I am completely bewildered.

Where did they find this prizewinner?

Either he is so influenced by the rape culture that he thinks sexual assault is a healthy part of human interaction (and I so hope that's not true) or he is truly the stupidest man on the face of the earth.

This suggests that women would just abuse instances of 'rape and incest' to have abortions. Because we are vile, lying creatures. And we will do anything to offend Jesus.

I think someone needs to SHOW him what rape is.

What kind of person makes PUBLIC comments like this?

I fear for the human race if people can be so stupid.

Obviously Mr. Dykstra was never an altar boy.

Whom exactly does Dykstra believe does not understand what the words rape and incest mean? Under what rock have these people that Dykstra believes exist been living? Did the above statements somehow sound rational and intelligent in Dykstra's head before he said them? Wow. What an asshat!

How are you going to define that?�

You know, he kind of has a point with this part. How DO you ban abortion for everyone EXCEPT rape and incest victims?

If just saying that you've been raped is enough, that opens a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. If you require rape victims to file a police report before they can abort, that encourages women to file false police reports. If you require a conviction, that's going to exclude a whole bunch of legitimate rape victims.

There really is no way to ban abortion for everyone except rape victims, WHICH IS WHY ABORTION NEEDS TO STAY LEGAL FOR EVERYONE.

I really have nothing to add except for this:

What.a.stupid.fucking.ASSHOLE.

Despicable.

He can check S.D. Compiled Laws Chapter 22-22-1 ("Rape Defined") or 22-22A-2 ("Incest") if he's interested. Pesky laws!

Took awhile there to translate "you're a fucking moron" into polite speech, but I'm sure he still won't get the message.

On a side note, I truly enjoy the replies I've received lately to letters I've written my representative Peter Roskam (IL). They don't bother to address what I was writing about in the first place, instead they just thank me for my continued support (uh, you never had my vote in the first place, genius)! I'm pretty sure saying that I find his views on women's rights, gay rights, and sex ed misguided and insulting is not supportive.

In my email to him, I made sure to post the dictionary definitions for each word and point out that you don't even need to own a dictionary these days to find definitions if you have internet access. Also, I made sure to tell him that I certainly did not think of my own rape as a buzzword. Ugh! Jackass.

Its worth noting that anti-abortion types like Dykstra might be despicable human beings, that doesn't exactly mean they're stupid. The anti-abortion camp realizes the danger of a rape and incest exception. You have to remember, these are politicians who are used to playing the game, used to building a system with loopholes and cracks.

If an abortion ban passes that has the exception, it becomes largely symbolic. It sends a message, changes the balance of power, puts the pro-choice movement on the defensive, but it won't stop abortions because anyone can say "I was raped by a guy in a mask." People like Dykstra call rape and incest buzzwords because they know that, in a worst case scenario, that exception will be used as a loophole against their vile little law.

My email:

""Rape" and "incest" are not just buzzwords. What a horrible and offensive thing to say about two of the worst crimes that can be committed against a person. You should be ashamed. Where are your priorities?"

I figured I didn't even need to go into the issues of reproductive choice, since an asshole like that would be a waste of my time in that regard. But, if he is going to rely on emotional arguments, he needs to get his priorities straight.

Its worth noting that anti-abortion types like Dykstra might be despicable human beings, that doesn't exactly mean they're stupid. The anti-abortion camp realizes the danger of a rape and incest exception. You have to remember, these are politicians who are used to playing the game, used to building a system with loopholes and cracks.

If an abortion ban passes that has the exception, it becomes largely symbolic. It sends a message, changes the balance of power, puts the pro-choice movement on the defensive, but it won't stop abortions because anyone can say "I was raped by a guy in a mask." People like Dykstra call rape and incest buzzwords because they know that, in a worst case scenario, that exception will be used as a loophole against their vile little law.

Trailer Park Chick,

I completely agree with you. I notice that a lot of the language used by pro-choice groups who lobby against issues like the South Dakota ban (politicians, NARAL spokespeople) will say thing like "It doesn't even include an exception for rape and incest victims!"

So by that logic if the South Dakota ban *had* included such language that would have made the ban "okay?"

I've wondered myself what legal standard would be allowed for the "rape victim" exemption. Only if their attacker was convicted? Only if the woman had made a police report? What would be the legal standard for the so-called "Rape victim" exception (incest is a lot easier to prove)?

It's considered me when I've heard the "no exception even for rape victims" used as a justification for lobbying AGAINST an anti-abortion bill. Because it implies as long as there is an excemption, I guess such a bill would then be acceptable?

Its worth noting that anti-abortion types like Dykstra might be despicable human beings, that doesn't exactly mean they're stupid.

True, but I can confirm that Joel Dykstra is indeed very stupid.

Its worth noting that anti-abortion types like Dykstra might be despicable human beings, that doesn't exactly mean they're stupid.

True, but I can confirm that Joel Dykstra is indeed very stupid.

Now, as much as I disagree with the terrible "she was asking for it" argument, that seems so much less offensive than this utter bullshit!

My email was NOT very polite. But hey, I didn't curse OR call him a perfect candidate for castration. I merely told him that he does not deserve a pulpit from which to speak and I hope that his constituents take his from him.

It gets worse. Apparently this clown has tired of the small-town feel of Pierre, and wishes to go to Washington. Yuck.

Agree with those who point out the practical difficulty in administering a rape/incest exception.

Convictions take more than nine months. You almost never get a conviction if the people knew each other beforehand. Therefore, you can't define a woman as having been raped if her rapist was convicted. Ergo, how do you define rape?

It's a legitimate question. You could require that a woman file a police report with a date of the rape that reasonably approximates the date of conception. You could require that the report be filed within a certain time frame (i.e. not after she's found out that she's pregnant and wants an abortion).

What happens if this makes rape a lot harder to prove? "She's only pressing charges because she wants an abortion." In direct opposition to the current state of affairs, you might only get a conviction if you keep the child.

Whatever happens, we ought to answer these questions in a pro-woman manner.

But if "The girl was a virgin. She was religious."
and of course "She planned on saving her virginity until she was married"
and then only if if "She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."
Well then that would be non-buzzword rape. The rest are just playing it up for political gain.

Aw, but Giffy, that girl wasn't just raped, she was napolied.

My letter to the Right Honourable Mr. Dykstra

Re: Your terminological difficulties

Dear Rep. Dykstra:

I read with great sympathy of your publicly expressed inability to comprehend the definitions of "rape" and "incest". Because I can imagine the distress that a member of the party that wishes to overhaul the educational system must feel at being unable to define terms that the average ninth grader can comprehend, I offer these notes in the spirit of "no legislator left behind".

For a definition of "rape" or "incest", you might first start with the applicable South Dakota statutes, codified at SDC § 22-22-1 ("rape" defined)and 22-22A-2. In case these admittedly complex and intellectually challenging definitions should continue to plague you with difficulties, allow me to summarise:

"Rape" in the State of South Dakota consists of several basic characteristics or "elements", all of which must be present in order for the offence to exist. The first of these is an act of "sexual penetration", which must be done under certain specified circumstances. For example, one possible combination is an act of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 13. § 22-22-1(1). Another example is sexual penetration through the use of "force, coercion, or threats" (§ 22-22-1(2)), or any sexual penetration of a person who is incapacitated or otherwise unable to give consent.

"Incest", on the other hand, has been defined by your colleagues in the legislature as sexual intercourse between unmarried persons of a degree of consanguinity (blood relation) sufficient to render a marriage void.

If you find that your confusion is not relieved even by these simplified definitions, I would suggest that you seek out the assistance of one of the all too many women who fall victim to rape and incest every year. I am sure they will have no trouble defining these terms for you.

I wish you the best of luck with your lexicographical conundrum, and do hope you will reconsider your decision to further victimise these women by using State power to coerce them into carrying the pregnancies of their rapists.

Yours,

&c

I just wrote an email to Representative Dykstra with a link to this recent story about rape in South Florida:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_re_us/gang_rape_teens;_ylt=Aq3.cuNglP5EMD2E.EPYs3us0NUE

so that he may be enlightened about what constitutes rape, since there seems to be a question in his mind.

Perhaps he won't be so quick to use "buzzword" to describe such a heinous crime.