Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Judge Envisions ‘Rape License’ for ‘Right to Rape’
Eagle Rising ^ | 9/15/14 | Matt Barber

Posted on 09/15/2014 4:03:20 PM PDT by Impala64ssa

Judge Richard Posner, a federal judge with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, recently become a hero to the pro-”gay marriage” left when, by way of a “legal analysis” free from the troublesome constraints of logic, case precedent, biology, tradition and reality in general, he managed to somehow divine a long-hidden constitutional “right” for two dudes to get “married.” “How can tradition be a reason for anything?” an incredulous Posner demanded last month of attorneys defending marriage protection amendments in both Wisconsin and Indiana.

It would seem that Posner’s contempt for tradition extends to all things sexual, up to and including the puritanical presupposition that it’s always wrong for a man to rape a woman. This idea, according to Posner in his 2011 book “Economic Analysis of the Law” (8th edition), is evidently an equally archaic tradition that, like the institution of natural marriage, needs a significant overhaul.

Posner’s suggestion? Perhaps it’s time the government begin issuing “rape licenses” (I kid you not) since, and based upon an exclusively utilitarian and morally relative cost-benefit analysis, the “right to rape,” for some men at least, “exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain.”

(Excerpt) Read more at eaglerising.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: waronwomen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last
To: Impala64ssa; Lurking Libertarian
Posner is one of the leaders of the "Chicago School" that applies principles from economics to the law. Reagan appointed him and he is generally considered a conservative, but he is incredibly smart and knows it, which sometimes leads him to going off on a tangent because he can be so pedantic.

He also likes to pick fights with Scalia. It's pretty obvious he thinks he should be on the Supreme Court, but that would be a mistake for both parties.

21 posted on 09/15/2014 4:47:46 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

So, if he found the “right to rape exceeds the victims damages” then I suppose he might find the right to kill in the same light.


22 posted on 09/15/2014 4:49:02 PM PDT by CodeToad (Romney is a raisin cookie looking for chocolate chip cookie votes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

P.S. Forgot to add, no intended threat to him personally, but what my “Right To Kill” means if I find someone’s actions sooooooooo intolerable then I should have the right to kill the idiot to relieve my pain, according to his distorted way of thinking.


23 posted on 09/15/2014 4:50:43 PM PDT by CodeToad (Romney is a raisin cookie looking for chocolate chip cookie votes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
Posner is one of the leaders of the "Chicago School" that applies principles from economics to the law. Reagan appointed him and he is generally considered a conservative, but he is incredibly smart and knows it, which sometimes leads him to going off on a tangent because he can be so pedantic.

In business cases (breach of contract and securities lawsuits and the like), or cases involving government regulation of business (especially antitrust cases), Posner is an excellent judge, always trying to get the law to coincide with economic common sense. Reagan put him on the Court of Appeals exactly for that reason. But Posner's economics background gives him a strong libertarian streak, so he can be a big disappointment to social conservatives in cases involving abortion or gay rights.

24 posted on 09/15/2014 5:01:13 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30
Maybe we could put out a small varmint leg trap with a copy of the Constitution as bait, and when the squat to pee on it...

SNAP!!!

We'll have em by the short hairs!

25 posted on 09/15/2014 5:04:04 PM PDT by Theophilus (Be as prolific as you are pro-life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
“How can tradition be a reason for anything?”

Respect for tradition is the deference paid to generations of wise men who knew far more about real life than ivory tower relics like this butt hole.

He may be "incredibly smart," for a lawyer that is, but he rolls like what Thorstein Veblen identified as an "educated incompetent." I suspect he never made the high court for good reason.

26 posted on 09/15/2014 5:34:52 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

Your honor, stare decisis is founded in history.


27 posted on 09/15/2014 5:47:37 PM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
I suspect he never made the high court for good reason.

Your suspicion would be correct. He's a pretty good circuit judge who is good on business and regulatory cases, but should never be allowed anywhere near the Constitution.

28 posted on 09/15/2014 6:00:03 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

The progressives continuing the war on reason and common sense.


29 posted on 09/15/2014 6:15:52 PM PDT by bobo1 (progressives=commies/fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

I’d give all his gay neighbors those licenses, with a “one Posner” bag limit.


30 posted on 09/15/2014 7:17:24 PM PDT by ConservativeMind ("Humane" = "Don't pen up pets or eat meat, but allow infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Posner, whether you like it or not, identified the flaw(s) in the anti-homo marriage argument. So, you can complain, or adapt.

In all seriousness, could you please explain yourself? I am just not getting it, and am sitting here horrified that this makes sense somehow.

31 posted on 09/15/2014 11:02:05 PM PDT by mountainbunny (Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens ~ J.R.R. Tolkien)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

dig up ted “waitress sndwich” kennedy’s.


32 posted on 09/15/2014 11:39:16 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

How about Rapist Hunting Licenses based upon an exclusively utilitarian and morally relative cost-benefit analysis, the “right to justice,” for some men at least, “exceeds the rapists’ pleasures.”


33 posted on 09/16/2014 3:41:52 AM PDT by gitmo (If your theology doesn't become your biography, what good is it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mountainbunny

I only skimmed his opinion, but he says that the AG’s arguing against homo marriage made some weak arguments. All I’m saying is, when Richard Posner tells you that your argument is weak, you need to go back to the drawing-board and develop a better one.


34 posted on 09/16/2014 6:02:06 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa; wagglebee

Unbelievable ping.


35 posted on 09/16/2014 7:21:27 AM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

Well, throw him in general population in a prison where people he has tried are serving time and tell them they have a *right* to rape.

See if he enjoys it so much and if his physical and emotional pain is insignificant to the prisoners *right* to rape him.


36 posted on 09/16/2014 7:24:35 AM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I would prefer marriage between one man and one woman be the only “marriage” recognized, but I agree a Constitutional Amendment would be necessary for such to pass in this absurd legal climate.

Failing that, the government getting out of the marriage business is the only other option.

Marriage is a religious rite, same as a Bar Mitzvah or Baptism, and should have no more or less legal recognition to either.


37 posted on 09/16/2014 7:28:28 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

I agree completely. Getting government to “recognize” what should be private religious affairs is what lead to this mess.


38 posted on 09/16/2014 8:10:43 AM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-38 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson