Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on April 06, 2017, 11:55:36 PM
-
With extra added avoidance of voting
Story is out of date because this sort of thing isfine under the current govt. Note it got through by a procedural measure, based on the govt lying about what was happening. Now law. Anyone who voted Tory, any justification?
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39325257
-
Insane. There's no defence for this horrific legislation. Mind you, it's Tory, so I suppose it's a good plan in thier world.
-
Front page of the Daily Record today (a Scottish tabloid for those unfamiliar with this title) has a headline 'Ruth sticks up for brutal rape clause', where the story notes the Scots Tories describe this clause as being the 'most sensitive way' of dealing with the welfare cut.
-
And if the rape is marital rape?
-
Front page of the Daily Record today (a Scottish tabloid for those unfamiliar with this title) has a headline 'Ruth sticks up for brutal rape clause', where the story notes the Scots Tories describe this clause as being the 'most sensitive way' of dealing with the welfare cut.
-
They don't call her "Ruth the mooth" for nothing.
(Mind you, she has also been called "Tanky McTankface......)
-
And if the rape is marital rape?
then if you are still living with the rapist you get nothing
-
Slightly off topic, if I remember rightly one didn't get child benefit for the first child when my children were young in the 70s.
-
You are right about that, remember people telling me same.
-
then if you are still living with the rapist you get nothing
I know this isn't an ideal solution or 100% effective but wmen can go on the pill, and then tell the police...
-
I'm sorry I don't understand why people are conflating the two issues here. Are children conceived during a rape more financially burdensome than children conceived in happier circumstances? Isn't the real issue having the two child limit at all?
-
I'm sorry I don't understand why people are conflating the two issues here. Are children conceived during a rape more financially burdensome than children conceived in happier circumstances? Isn't the real issue having the two child limit at all?
pretty much, it's the idea that proving rape for financial advantage and following the rules is unpleasant in the extreme.