• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

An Interesting Thing About The Missouri Abortion Bill

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
In the news....
Missouri House approves near-total abortion ban, sends it to governor for signature
As onlookers in the gallery shed tears, some in elation, some in disgust, the Missouri House voted 110 to 44 Friday to ban abortions after 8 weeks of pregnancy, without exceptions for rape and incest.

The measure, the most restrictive in Missouri’s recent history, is on its way to Gov. Mike Parson’s desk for final approval.
The bill would criminalize any abortion beyond eight weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of medical emergencies. Doctors who perform abortions after eight weeks face five to 15 years in prison. There is no punishment for the mother.
If they really do believe that abortion is murder, & that it deserves a life
sentence, I wonder about the justification for punishing only one party to
the "murder", ie, the doctor. The mother's role as perpetrator is fundamental.
Anyone agree with this exemption?
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
In the news....
Missouri House approves near-total abortion ban, sends it to governor for signature


If they really do believe that abortion is murder, & that it deserves a life
sentence, I wonder about the justification for punishing only one party to
the "murder", ie, the doctor. The mother's role as perpetrator is fundamental.
Anyone agree with this exemption?
Interesting thought, after all, she did hire him to do it. It would be like hiring an assassin.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Interesting thought, after all, she did hire him to do it. It would be like hiring an assassin.
Perhaps in the south mothers are held in such
high regard that they're allowed to murder babies,
so long as they hire someone else to do it.

Reminds me of the Menendez brothers, who shotgunned
their parents. They should've tried this defense.....
"Your honor, we throw ourselves on the
mercy of the court. We're both orphans!"
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
The mother's role as perpetrator is fundamental.
Anyone agree with this exemption?

The Father of the child is copable as well as the Mother in my eyes.

I'm gonna catch flak over it, but I always though the Father of a child should be able to voice his opinion over the abortion of his child. Not that he could override the mother and force her to have the child. But yes if they both agree abortion. Then they both share culpability not only in creating that life, but then choosing to end that life.
 
Last edited:

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
The mother's role as perpetrator is fundamental.
Anyone agree with this exemption?

As already noted, if I hire a hit man to bump someone off I would be charged with a crime. If the "hit man" was a doctor, it should not be any different if someone truly believes that abortion is murder; if they really had the courage of their convictions.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Perhaps in the south mothers are held in such
high regard that they're allowed to murder babies,
so long as they hire someone else to do it.
Good thing you got your tax cuts.
Otherwise, from Iran to Missouri, voting for Trump would be a complete disaster.
Eh?
Tom
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The Father of the child is copable culpable as well as the Mother in my eyes.
Always?
Fathers often have no knowledge or say in the matter.

Btw, I fixed your post.
I'm gonna catch flak over it, but I always though the Father of a child should be able to voice his opinion over the abortion of his child. Not that he could override the mother and force her to have the child. But yes if they both agree abortion. Then they both share copability culpability not only in creating that life, but then choosing to end that life.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
As already noted, if I hire a hit man to bump someone off I would be charged with a crime. If the "hit man" was a doctor, it should not be any different if someone truly believes that abortion is murder; if they really had the courage of their convictions.
I don't think they lack courage....just rational thought & tolerance for other views.
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
Always?
Fathers often have no knowledge or say in the matter.

Btw, I fixed your post.

Thanks I fixed it, autocorrect strikes again, it tried to put in 3 different words when I just now tried to fix it. /sigh

I know Fathers don't, but I think they should. If the child is born they are responsible to the baby financially until the child is 18, so why does he have no rights in the say if the child is aborted or not?

Its ok if the mother can't afford the child. She can abort, this is an acceptable reason at an abortion clinic. But what if they father can't afford it, and she chooses to have the child? He's fooked!

Time for equal rights between men and women when it comes to pregnancy if you ask me.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I know Fathers don't, but I think they should. If the child is born they are responsible to the baby financially until the child is 18, so why does he have no rights in the say if the child is aborted or not?
I agree that if the father is liable for support, this
should confer some rights, not just obligations.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I don't think they lack courage....just rational thought & tolerance for other views.
"courage of their convictions" is doing what someone believes is correct no matter what others say. This is not always a good thing as terrorists have the courage of their convictions.

But in this case I agree with your tolerance point but not 'rational'. They don't follow the logic of their convictions "abortion is murder" to the conclusion that if murder is murder, then all murder should be treated the same. Someone can be rational but not logical.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
"courage of their convictions" is doing what someone believes is correct no matter what others say. This is not always a good thing as terrorists have the courage of their convictions.

But in this case I agree with your tolerance point but not 'rational'. They don't follow the logic of their convictions "abortion is murder" to the conclusion that if murder is murder, then all murder should be treated the same. Someone can be rational but not logical.
Religions often result in cognitive dissonance.
One might have both faith & courage, yet believe
in the most outlandish contradictory things.
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
I agree that if the father is liable for support, this
should confer some rights, not just obligations.

Perhaps a way to settle a disagreement.

Considering that a Father is responsible financially for the first 18 years of a childs life.

Let's say the Mother wants to abort but the Father does not. How to we solve that? Imo the Mother should have to buy out the Father. So she would have to pay the Father 18 years worth what would be child support. Considering right now the avg child support is $430 a month that equals out to a roughly $93,000 buy out from the Mother. That makes it fair.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Perhaps a way to settle a disagreement.

Considering that a Father is responsible financially for the first 18 years of a childs life.

Let's say the Mother wants to abort but the Father does not. How to we solve that? Imo the Mother should have to buy out the Father. So she would have to pay the Father 18 years worth what would be child support. Considering right now the avg child support is $430 a month that equals out to a roughly $93,000 buy out from the Mother. That makes it fair.
Not happening.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Oh I know.


That would be equality.


Can't have that.

Although the male does contribute half of the genetic code, he doesn't carry the child in his body nor give birth to it, so by nature it isn't equal; it's her body, not his, so of course she should get more say.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Thanks I fixed it, autocorrect strikes again, it tried to put in 3 different words when I just now tried to fix it. /sigh

I know Fathers don't, but I think they should. If the child is born they are responsible to the baby financially until the child is 18, so why does he have no rights in the say if the child is aborted or not?

Its ok if the mother can't afford the child. She can abort, this is an acceptable reason at an abortion clinic. But what if they father can't afford it, and she chooses to have the child? He's fooked!

Time for equal rights between men and women when it comes to pregnancy if you ask me.
The unavoidable reality is that the burden of childbirth does not lie equally on the father as it does the mother. In this unique situation to try to impose “equality of rights” would be an injustice.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
In the news....
Missouri House approves near-total abortion ban, sends it to governor for signature


If they really do believe that abortion is murder, & that it deserves a life
sentence, I wonder about the justification for punishing only one party to
the "murder", ie, the doctor. The mother's role as perpetrator is fundamental.
Anyone agree with this exemption?


Really? They need to pass a law making the man culpable too.

And require life insurance on the fetus.

And require immediate child support payments from the male-- or face arrest.

And if the fetus naturally aborts? Charge the male for manslaughter, due to delivering flawed sperm.
 
Top