"It's Okay If You Get Raped" Clause

[Chillhouse]

Woman goes to work overseas for a company. Woman gets gang-raped by a group of co-workers in Iraq. Woman gets locked in a box. Woman gets back to America, only to find out she can not sue the company due to the fine print on her contract which says she can not sue the company if she gets raped. Senator Al Franken proposes an amendment that would make sure the governement doesn't deal with companies that have that fine print.
Surely something like that would pass unanimously?

Nope.

It still passed, but it got 30 votes against. All from Republican senators.
Middle East Online
Can someone tell me what the fecks going on? I feel like I'm only getting one side of the story here, but the other side just seems to support rape.

There's too much bad news this week...

[gaarafan4]

heh heh, snowe voted against her own faction...

[zach]

Wow, thats what you call mormon. All those guys probably have 10 spouses, looking for an 11th one to please 'em.
^
I dont know about the above post. I just wrote what came to mind.(Not to start any religious fights)

[Diapered Rabbit]

No, rape may be considered a form of marriage from some religious conservatives - remember "One man + One woman = Marriage". Oh and the sexual union may result in a child, so pro-life ideology suggests that this child (God's Creation) should be allowed to become a future evangelical conservative.

[dcviper]

I think it had more to do with the Repubs "No way in hell will we ever agree with the Dems" policy; or their policy of making the world safe for business. It seemed to work so well for them during the K Street Years. It's not a problem though, I think the Democratic Congressional Committee will use this in 2010 to unseat as many "pro-rape" Senators as possible.

I think the solution to this particular situation is simple: extend the Uniform Code of Military Justice to contractors operating overseas at the behest of the Department of Defense. The reason no criminal case has been brought against the perpetrators, is because there is no juristiction that can or will. Federal Courts do no have juristiction over anything that goes on outside our borders, and the Iraqis could care less.

[Light]

I'm a hard-core republican (on some things) and even I think that that should be amended.

[satyrical]

Chillhouse, doesn't it make you glad our political system is just so uninteresting?

[dogboy]

Hey....no fair you guys making fun of us for being idiots...oh wait, we are idiots. There is a large contingency of Republicans that will do anything to protect big business, and big money interests. Since the Bush administration, only 3 percent of industries who have polluted our waters have been prosecuted. Money rules the world, and one day....Canada!

[Fire2box]

I'd like to see the bill/amendment on this issue which sadly isn't linked to anywhere. If nearly all the republicans voted no on it I figure there must be a reason why. There might be something bad in it too that was added in at a late stage. Im not saying there is, but it's a possibility.

this is sort of like I could write a report on all the great things Adolf Hitler did in his life, yet leave out his dictatorship and the holocaust and starting WW2.

Found SOME of it.

Office of Sen. Al Franken

Specifically, Sen. Franken’s amendment:

* Does not require contractors to change or modify existing employment contracts. It only bars funds to contractors who continue to use these mandatory arbitration clauses in their employment contracts.

So they can still do it, they just won't get any money from sugar daddy USA. Maybe if it made it to where they couldn't do it anymore then the republicans would of voted for it. But alas, it all happened outside of the US jurisdiction and the problem lies within another countries law. All Franken could do is help deny them any spending money granted to them by the US. He should be jumping down Iraq's throat so this shit can't happen.

[baconbit]

Um I can see how the companies would like to be able to have such a clause in their contracts. Not like the company should be responsible to what their employees do to one another. This is why most republicans were against that I bet. Regardless to what you believe Republicans are not pro-rape or anti democrat. They do side with business's 99% of the time while democrats side with the common person 99% of the time.

I honestly believe that making the company responsible is stupid and that is what they are doing. I also disagree with that amendment.