Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I would add "availability" just to be sure. A poor person that cannot afford contraceptives quite often would become a mother or father against his or her will.
-
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
- Thread starter Revoltingest
- Start date
Even if the "man" opposed the abortion, he gets punished along
with the doctor who performed it?
But the mother (who sought out the abortion) gets off scot free?
I read through the bill, and it is more about "regulating abortion" and providing funding for "pregnancy resource centers" (known as "fake clinics" in these parts.) Murder is not mentioned anywhere in the bill. It seems more like the state subsidizing the adoption business and doing what it can to drive women to them.
If the state tried to imprison the women for seeking an abortion, then the state might be liable for human trafficking for the adoption services. State funding for the "Pregnancy Resource Centers" runs out in 2020, and this bill would extend that funding longer.
Last edited:
I'm not sure, but couldn't the clinic or facility where the abortion took place also be sued for wrongful death? The mother could have an abortion, and then sue the place for killing her baby.
But surely the Missouri state legislature has better things to do, such as a proposal to change the state's spelling to "Missoura," which is how they pronounce it.
LOL! "Consensual Rape" says Missouri lawmaker regarding this bill:
Missouri Lawmaker Cites 'Consensual Rapes' as House Passes Abortion Bill
Missouri Lawmaker Cites 'Consensual Rapes' as House Passes Abortion Bill
Altfish
Veteran Member
I think the most startling (although unsurprising) thing is that this bill was voted for by 25 white, male, GOP, Christians ...
All 25 White Male GOP Senators Who Voted for the AL Abortion Ban Are Christian
All 25 White Male GOP Senators Who Voted for the AL Abortion Ban Are Christian
joe1776
Well-Known Member
The missing urge to punish the wrongdoer, ought to tell us that the argument that abortion is murder has gone off the rails.
Punish the accomplice but not the wrongdoer?What kind of logic is that?
Can anyone think of another serious crime on the books that allows the wrongdoer to go unpunished while the accomplices are severely punished?
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
The authors of the bill assume that the mother is like a drug addict, in terms of a compulsive need for abortion. She is being treated as though she is sick and needs help.
The drug dealer analogy is connected to all those, including doctors, who encourage this irrational behavior for profit. Abortion is big business. The drug pusher gets a worse sentence than the drug addict. Once the supply is diminished, the abortion addicts will have to go cold turkey and/or seek help to get healed.
If you spoke to a group of pro abortion women, about stopping abortion, they would react like you are trying to take the last cocktail from a drunk. This is not rational behavior, but shows a level of additive compulsiveness. If the reaction was less defensive, the women would have held more accountable. Instead, they have decided to take the pusher men/women to court; political and economic pushers who benefit by this industry and power mongering.
[satire] Oh yes, women are just too hysterical to be able to make rational decisions about their own bodies. Instead those decisions must be made by men who speak about "consensual rape."
[/satire]
Anyone can sue anyone else for anything.
But the odds of winning a wrongful death suit
against the "hit man" one hired are quite low.
Perhaps they see mothers as solely victims.
You know...mothers are flooded with hormones & emotions,
& being women, they can't really think straight anyway.
They just cannot be held responsible for their own actions, eh.
So what you are saying is that men and women are not equal biologically. Therefore men naturally have certain advantages women don't, and vice versa.
You'll make a fine anti-sjw after all.
Oh ok I didn't know making exceptions was allowed. I guess justice isn't blind.
Yes, but if this is to be a business enterprise, the mother will need to be compensated for the use of her womb and for supplying nutrients, as well as compensation for any discomfort or inconvenience due to carrying a fetus to term and delivering it.
What's a baby worth to this potential father-to-be? I say let him raise and support the baby without the mother's financial help. The use of her womb was contribution enough by the mother if she was willing to have an abortion, but didn't at the request of the father..
No.
If you cut off access to safe and legal abortions in America, American girls and women with unwanted pregnancies will either be traveling abroad for their abortions, go to American underground clinics or back alleys for their abortions, find effective abortifacients to induce miscarriage, put a baby up for adoption, or raise an unwanted baby
Hold on to you rights and freedoms, Americans. Here come the theocrats to take them away and convert gravid American wombs into church-state incubators.
This won't look good on the world stage, as progressive Western democracies click their tongues and roll their eyes as America inches closer to a Handmaid's Tale-like dystopia. Iran and Saudi Arabia, however, will probably approve.
And then the boycotts. Sure, you're free to hold your religious views, but if you intend to impose them on others outside your religion, expect blow back as the Colorado bakers got. Regressive states with theocratic tendencies like Georgia, Alabama, and now Missouri, can just take the economic hit. Liberals and progressives will spend their money elsewhere. No conventions in these states. No new manufacturing starts in regressive states.No tourism to them. Don't stay in their hotels or patronize their restaurants. No mail order purchases from regressive states. And so on.
And do you know who's getting those abortions?
70% of Women Who Get Abortions Identify as Christians, Survey Finds
America really needs to separate into two countries like the Czechoslovakians did. It comprises two populations that don't seem to have much in common any more, not to mention mutual animosity and contempt, and no reason to treat one another with more deference than they do non-Americans. Less, actually. I have no beef with Canadians, but I do with conservative Christian America.
The blue states could form two countries in a confederacy, one comprising the western states (Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, and California), and one the eastern states (Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and New England).
They could see themselves as one country, or two that were allied.
The military could be divided, as well as the national debt, with each state assuming 2% of it. Yeah, I know that that means more debt per capita for anybody coming from a state ending in Dakota than Californians and New Yorkers, but they also have had more senators per capita, which has tended to make and keep the Senate Republican. They were disproportionately represented, and so owe more.
The American federal government would be disbanded. Two new Constitutions would be drafted and two new governments formed.
Neither's taxes would be used to underwrite the ideology of the other. Conservatives won't have to pay taxes that are spent on abortions or welfare that they find reprehensible, and liberals wouldn't have to pay for border walls they don't want or cages for children that they find reprehensible.
And you wouldn't have the non-stop investigations, mutual impeachments, or presidents undoing what the last one just accomplished. The two nations could trade if they like, and travel between them would still be an option for somebody that prefers Disneyland to Disney World or vice versa, or the Met to the Grand Ol' Opry or vice versa, or Emory to Columbia or vice versa.
Then the liberals can get abortions without fear of prison if they like, and the conservatives can ban them if they like. Why be constantly bickering when there is no love left between the two?
That depends. If she waves her rights completely as the Mother after the child is born. A number will have to be determined. I estimate this number to be about $50,000, but negotiating still needs to happen so it's not a "hard" number.
That's quite barbaric.
You can't put a value on a child in that sense. You can only determine how much the child would cost to support based on child support avg.
The only problem with this is that it's the House which is responsible for holding the pursestrings. So, the debt should be incurred proportional to state populations. So, Californians would get over 12% of the debt, since that's their approximate percentage of the US population. Arizona would only get about 2% of the debt.
Shad
Veteran Member
A common theme I read is that the medical industry, specific abortion, are lying and/or conning the women. Legal code-wise it is borrowing and projecting malpractice laws into the abortion Bill. Ergo abortion itself become malpractice with malicious intent. It would be like a doctor advising a parent to treat their 5 year old with poison resulting in death of the child. The parent does not know it is a poison but the doctor does. The doctor has full knowledge the treatment results in death of the patient. The parent is merely an unwitting proxy due to accepting the medical authority and expertise of the doctor as sound and legal advise/treatment. The parent is absolved as government is the one certifying the doctor as an expert and fit to legally practice. Oversight becomes the responsibility of government not the parent.
Last edited:
And they were elected by their constituents, AKA both men and women in high numbers. It doesn't matter what your demographics are. The demographics of the people who elected you are what tell the story.