#Original #Politics #Funny #Gaming #Tech #Interesting #Science #Creative #Comics #Memes #Quotes #Sexy


#News #Animals #Celebs #Photography #History #Space #Music #Movies #Sports #TVShows #SciFi #Ask

Disgusting Senate Vote? Your Opinions.

Sharenator.com Videos Disgusting Senate Vote? Your Opinions.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts
/>
What has the world come to?
Report this topic to moderators This post already reported
-3Remove
-2Remove
-1Remove
+9
+1Remove
+2Remove
+3Remove
Views: 1185
Posted: 2009-10-26 20:20:52

Responses (28) // Sorted by points

Psst.
  • avatar
    Armork66 - replied 2009-10-26 21:33:38
    +1
    Dude I saw this on TV and thats frickin retarded. Of course they should be able to sue the company because Rape is something that scars you for life. Soemtimes I am just disgusted by things that happen in this world, and this definatly pisses me off.
    Reply
    Report
  • avatar
    Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-19 19:47:24
    +1
    That is disgusting. Now we must keep in mind that congressional bills sometimes have other things added to them so maybe the other things were so bad that those congressmen could not vote for it. I hope that was it.
    Reply
    Report
  • avatar
    Dannyl - replied 2010-01-19 23:08:59
    +1
    The video isn't available in my country, can someone give me the basics?
    Reply
    Report
  • avatar
    Logos385 - replied 2010-01-20 05:33:22
    +1
    Essentially, a woman was raped by federally contracted employees while working in Iraq. She was 19, and was raped by multiple KBR workers, then locked in a crate when she tried to report them. When she was finally returned to the us, she was told she could not sue KBR because, in the contract, there was a section that said employees could not sue the company if they were raped.

    Al Franken proposed to remove the clause that disallowed suing for rape.

    The final vote was 68-30, and all no votes came from Republicans.

    People are crazy. Who votes for rape? Answer: Senate Republicans.
    Reply
    Report
    • avatar
      Dannyl - replied 2010-01-20 05:43:14
      +1
      Hmmm. As far as i can see suing is remarkably 'overdone' in the US, and now in the UK :(, why the hell would she sue? The people who raped her should go to prison. I don't see how money will make her feel better? As harsh as this sounds it strikes me that she might not even be that upset by the ordeal if she's only got money on her mind, rather than wanting those bastards to go to jail or, ideally, die.

      Sniff sniff, i smell an argument coming.
      Reply
      Report
      • avatar
        Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-20 05:49:34
        +1
        Wow i actually agree with dannyl.
        Reply
        Report
        • avatar
          Dannyl - replied 2010-01-20 06:05:40
          +1
          Amazing, the universe hasn't imploded :P
          Reply
          Report
          • avatar
            Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-20 18:43:00
            +1
            but logo you can't just say that they voted for rape. Like I said there might have been unessecary "pork" in the bill. I don't know got sure cause I haven't read the bill but that would take me days knowing congress these days. But they really should change that. But Dannyl was right people do sue way too much here.
            Reply
            Report
            • avatar
              Logos385 - replied 2010-01-20 19:36:59
              +1
              Maybe, but I read the bill. It was made by Al Franken, and had no "Pork." Their reason was that the senate shouldn't meddle in government contracts with private companies. When in reality, they are the only body that can.
              Reply
              Report
              • avatar
                Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-21 18:13:15
                +1
                That surprises me. But I do see their point on not meddling in the contract. But I don't nessecarily agree with what they did.
                Reply
                Report
                • avatar
                  Logos385 - replied 2010-01-21 19:00:19
                  +1
                  How can that point be valid? The contract is a government contract. Who evaluates/ edits government contracts? The senate. So when senators vote against what is known as the "Al Franken Anti-Rape Bill" because they think the Senate shouldn't do the Senate's job, there is no validity in the point.
                  Reply
                  Report
                  • avatar
                    Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-21 19:04:33
                    +1
                    But the senate doesn't regulate all govt contracts ex. CIA private security contracts/mercs. I do understand your point. They should have voted for it.
                    Reply
                    Report
                    • avatar
                      Logos385 - replied 2010-01-21 20:49:39
                      +2
                      But rape is not one of them
                      Reply
                      Report
                    • avatar
                      Logos385 - replied 2010-01-21 19:42:32
                      +1
                      It is part of their job though. And thanks : ).
                      Reply
                      Report
                    • avatar
                      Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-21 20:16:38
                      +1
                      Well there are some things organizations like the FBI, CIA, and millitary should keep secret from congress and not ask for approval.
                      Reply
                      Report
                    • avatar
                      Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-22 04:01:20
                      +1
                      Well yes I already agreed with you. Nice discussion though.
                      Reply
                      Report
      • avatar
        Logos385 - replied 2010-01-20 16:45:21
        +1
        The main deal is that the act occurred outside legal jurisdiction I believe. The suing would not only provide her money, but force the company to take action against the employees, change their policy/ general workings to prevent such happenings ever occurring again, and force an official investigation of the employees and any other case in any way similar to this.

        A lawsuit does more than just win money: that is not in question ; P.
        Reply
        Report
        • avatar
          Dannyl - replied 2010-01-20 23:25:30
          +1
          But the company shouldn't take action against the employees, the police should. Rape is a crime and is punishable with life imprisonment here (though that rarely happens because prisoners are expensive and we like to let them out after they've served about 10% of their sentence ><). Getting money won't help her with her psychology scars and that's all she gets. The other effects of a lawsuit, such as being punished by your employer, are pathetic when these people should have just gone to prison. Ironically to be raped.
          Reply
          Report
          • avatar
            Logos385 - replied 2010-01-21 05:10:47
            +1
            I did some more research, and not only does the contract restrict a lawsuit, it in fact restricts employees of the contracted companies of seeking any kind of public arbitration (going to court). The raped employees can, in fact, be fired and sued themselves for reporting the rape.
            Reply
            Report
            • avatar
              Dannyl - replied 2010-01-21 05:55:39
              +1
              Haha that'd be a shit week wouldn't it?

              I concede victory on this debate to you good sir.

              Congratulations.
              Reply
              Report
              • avatar
                Logos385 - replied 2010-01-21 18:10:20
                +1
                Haha, no victory necessary. And yes, a shit week.

                More like now that I did the full research necessary, I was able to articulate information on the subject correctly.

                All we did then was agree.... surprise ; ).
                Reply
                Report
                • avatar
                  Dannyl - replied 2010-01-21 23:16:40
                  +1
                  I've always loved the saying, i think of it whenever i debate (if i think i'm right)

                  'But if i agreed with you then we'd both be wrong'
                  Reply
                  Report
                  • avatar
                    Dannyl - replied 2010-01-22 03:41:05
                    +1
                    Reply
                    Report
                    • avatar
                      Logos385 - replied 2010-01-22 05:29:46
                      +1
                      Does that saying apply in this case?

                      And that's horrific. Simply horrific.
                      Reply
                      Report
                    • avatar
                      Dannyl - replied 2010-01-22 05:38:08
                      +1
                      No, it's just the frame of mind i have when i start a debate, when i'm right i'm right. But then when someone shows me otherwise i accept that. And i just liked the saying

                      And yes it's horrid isn't it? Thought you'd want to see that, this world is falling apart.
                      Reply
                      Report
                    • avatar
                      Logos385 - replied 2010-01-22 15:41:11
                      +1
                      Completely understandable : ).

                      And that's very possible. : (
                      Reply
                      Report
  • avatar
    Inzanepiratical - replied 2010-01-22 09:05:35
    +1
    Wow...This takes mental retardation to a whole new level.
    Reply
    Report

Leave a reply

Upload files