[Godstud]

I think that is false

What you think is irrelevant, since you don't acknowledge facts and reality.

The fact that these absurd ridiculous lawsuits are not going on in all parts of the U.S. only weakens your argument, because your statistics are for all of America as a whole.

If you were raped you might find that money doesn't adequately compensate for the injury you suffer. You lack, however, human empathy, so you can't understand this.

A woman who makes an accusation, in order to get a gigantic amount of money, when there's no way to prove she is lying. And she knows it.

False. The Amber Heard case is one such example.

What a stupid argument, "trust women".

Strawman. No one has made that argument. You're really grasping for straws, aren't you?

Let me ask this: Do you understand the role a statute of limitations helps play in trying to ensure fairness? Yes or no?

I do, but the nature of evidence has changed, since they have DNA testing. You, obviously, do not.

Virtually every state in the U.S. had a statute of limitations on sexual crimes at some time. That was NOT just a coincidence.

It is no coincidence that these statutes of limitations are disappearing, too. It has nothing to do with lawsuits that give monetary compensation to victims of these crimes, either.

[Puffer Fish]

I do, but the nature of evidence has changed, since they have DNA testing.

DNA testing can't always prove rape.
(If police interview the alleged perpetrator and he tells them he had consensual sex, or in rare cases sometimes a woman can manage to obtain a DNA sample without the man's knowledge. There have been a number of cases in the African American community of conniving women having a rich famous basketball player's child and collecting big child support payments from them even though the man never had a sexual encounter with her)

I think it's also kind of irrelevant to the issue we are discussing, statute of limitations. If a woman waited longer than 2 years to report the crime, it's very likely that no DNA sample was collected.

(Unless you argue that the woman can take a sample from herself, keep it for 2 years in her refrigerator, and later claim a rape happened, and expect us to accept that sample as evidence, which I think is absurd. That would sound like an obvious setup to frame a man for rape)

[Robert Urbanek]

Extending the period you can sue is mostly a favor by lawyer-dominated legislators to raise the income of their fellow attorneys.