The sorry you weren't really raped ~ Republican Bill

For years we all agreed that rape was when a woman was forced to have sex against her will. But now the anti choice crowd in Congress want to redefine rape. (H.R. 3)

"We are seeing more and more anti-choice lawmakers who are willing to deny survivors of rape and incest access to abortion care," NARAL president Nancy Keenan told Raw Story. "If they can't block access altogether, they will work around the edges. Rep. Smith's 'Stupak on Steroids' bill is an example of this piecemeal strategy because it seeks to make the narrow exceptions for public funding of abortion care for rape and incest survivors even more restrictive."

Wasserman Schultz also said the bill contradicted the GOP's core political philosophy.

"Even though Republicans say they want government out of our lives, this is the most intrusive governmental act that we've probably seen to date in the personal lives of women," she said.

Exclusive: Dem calls GOP rape-redefining bill ‘a violent act against women’

For a party that claims it wants less intrusion into our lives, the Republicans seem determined to intrude on a woman's right to choose.

Sign a petition to stop H.R. 3 here.

Other bills dealing with a woman's right to choose in the House H.R. 105, H.R. 165, H.R. 212, H.R. 217, H.R. 358, H.R. 361, H.R. 364, H.R. 374, H.R. 397, H.R. 593

But setting aside that issue what about the legal precedent it would set. As Oonagh McQuarrie put it.

My issue is about the precedent this bill still has the potential to set. When that type of language is written into a bill, it is representative of a mood, of a general feeling in the country. If Congress redefines rape and characterizes it by the level of force that occurs, the door is opened for date-rapists and people who take advantage of women but don’t break any bones or leave any bruises.

Rape is a hard enough crime to prove without redefining it in terms of the level of violence. According to the 2005 National Crime Victimization Study, 60 percent of rapes go unreported. The Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network did the math. Even if the rapist is arrested and goes to trial, there is only a 16.9 percent chance he will actually serve jail time. Fifteen of every 16 rapists walk free. What will happen when only violent rapes count?

Counterpoint: Redefining rape sets dangerous precedent

I too wonder what will happen IF only violent rapes count? If women don't fight back even with a gun held to their head will they be told sorry your weren't really raped you didn't put up a fight? Will women whose assailants used date rape drugs be told sorry you weren't really raped because you were too out of it to know what was going on.

Federal bills aren't the only bills attempting to trivialize rape.

Jennifer White, attorney for legal programs at the Family Violence Prevention Fund, said that even when victims do come forward, prosecutions and convictions are still often incredibly difficult to get."Changing, just for these particular crimes, the word 'victim' to 'accuser' really buys into an outdated and disproved myth about victims who come forward with these kinds of allegations," said White. "I think it's a sad reality that for some reason, it's easier for society, in some respects, to believe that a victim would fabricate this type of crime than to believe that a person is capable of committing certain atrocities. And it really has a chilling effect for victims who already have an extremely difficult time coming forward."

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee writes, "To diminish a victim's ordeal by branding him/her an accuser essentially questions whether the crime committed against the victim is a crime at all. Robbery, assault, and fraud are all real crimes with real victims, the Republican asserts with this bill."

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'