By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Rapists can now sue victims seeking abortions

VGPolyglot on 04 February 2017
eva01beserk said:
VGPolyglot said:

The fetus cannot live without the mother. If the fetus becomes detached, and cannot survive, it's part an extension of the woman, and she should have the final say to what happens to her body. Also, it's not like the women are deciding to abort their children like they decide what to eat for breakfast: there is an extreme emotional response to their choices, and it's not like it's easy for them to decide.

The same could be said about conjoined twins where one holds some vital organ or even the entire body. Does the main body have the say in removing the parasitic one if is alive and conscious? I would say yes, but thats not the point. 

Im not pro life in any way, I say get rid of the fetus at any stage, but thats just me. I know some want the baby. and by that stage its alive, its completly dependent of the mother yes, but its not like ne borns are out there working and suporting themselfs either. 

You think is easy for a father to just cry in a coner completly powerles as his wife is about to go kill a baby he always wanted?

So, what do you think should be done about it? You think that he should be able to force her to have the baby? The woman is the one who has to live through months of pain while the fetus develops.



Around the Network
monocle_layton on 04 February 2017
eva01beserk said:
VGPolyglot said:

The fetus cannot live without the mother. If the fetus becomes detached, and cannot survive, it's part an extension of the woman, and she should have the final say to what happens to her body. Also, it's not like the women are deciding to abort their children like they decide what to eat for breakfast: there is an extreme emotional response to their choices, and it's not like it's easy for them to decide.

The same could be said about conjoined twins where one holds some vital organ or even the entire body. Does the main body have the say in removing the parasitic one if is alive and conscious? I would say yes, but thats not the point. 

Im not pro life in any way, I say get rid of the fetus at any stage, but thats just me. I know some want the baby. and by that stage its alive, its completly dependent of the mother yes, but its not like ne borns are out there working and suporting themselfs either. 

You think is easy for a father to just cry in a coner completly powerles as his wife is about to go kill a baby he always wanted?

 

VGPolyglot said:
eva01beserk said:

The same could be said about conjoined twins where one holds some vital organ or even the entire body. Does the main body have the say in removing the parasitic one if is alive and conscious? I would say yes, but thats not the point. 

Im not pro life in any way, I say get rid of the fetus at any stage, but thats just me. I know some want the baby. and by that stage its alive, its completly dependent of the mother yes, but its not like ne borns are out there working and suporting themselfs either. 

You think is easy for a father to just cry in a coner completly powerles as his wife is about to go kill a baby he always wanted?

So, what do you think should be done about it? You think that he should be able to force her to have the baby? The woman is the one who has to live through months of pain while the fetus develops.

it's a good thing adoption exists. look at the benefits:

1) the woman doesn't have to go through birth! 

2) No more fighting over abortions and other nonsense

3) You get to save a kid from being homeless the rest of his life (or dying if he/she is from a poor country)

 

Sounds neat, doesn't it? I honestly wouldn't mind adopting all my future kids. I'd happily ignore judgemental people and prefer to take care of one of the several billion kids already alive. My kids don't need to be made from me just to deserve love.



eva01beserk on 04 February 2017
VGPolyglot said:
eva01beserk said:

The same could be said about conjoined twins where one holds some vital organ or even the entire body. Does the main body have the say in removing the parasitic one if is alive and conscious? I would say yes, but thats not the point. 

Im not pro life in any way, I say get rid of the fetus at any stage, but thats just me. I know some want the baby. and by that stage its alive, its completly dependent of the mother yes, but its not like ne borns are out there working and suporting themselfs either. 

You think is easy for a father to just cry in a coner completly powerles as his wife is about to go kill a baby he always wanted?

So, what do you think should be done about it? You think that he should be able to force her to have the baby? The woman is the one who has to live through months of pain while the fetus develops.

there you go with the force. You think a man having a say has to be forcing a women. There are many reasons to have an abortion. And in most cases the mother should have the final say. But there could be times it should not be allowed. sometimes all a women needs is some councelling and shes good. maybe someone agrees to take care of the baby and adopts it.

Lets say a couple has planed this baby, and they both wanted it. in over the course of the pregnancy the mother just gets a promotion, or is about to get one, and  she decided "well now its not a good time to have a baby". You think thats fair to the father. He could be willing and able to still suport the family or even she leaving and he keeping the kid. theres defenetly a possible understanding to be had here.

ANd you keep saying its the womens body but you dont even consider the baby. Its not a parasity that you drink some medice in is craped out, its an almost fully developed human being by this stage in the pregnancy.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

HollyGamer on 04 February 2017
eva01beserk said:
fluky-nintendy said:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/rape-adultery.aspx

If there were no witnesses, the rape will count as adultery most likely or the rapist doesn't confess the crime. >And it happens in islamic countries, same countries sjws think the government shouldnt close borders and bring em all in instead.

Also cant leave out that even in rape cases, where is still consider adultery, women  and man could face jail time and even death penalty. While the man,  will have  the same penalty like the woman .

Fixed it for you, and please dont thank me. :)



Pineapple on 04 February 2017
Player2 said:
Acevil said:

It is poorly worded, A husband who can rape his wife can sue. (Which is still bad, but yes, the above is worse)

I can do better. If I've read it correctly, a father who raped his underage daughter can sue because neither rape nor incest are good enough abortion reasons in the eyes of the masterminds behind this bill:

(...)

(C) If the woman who received a dismemberment abortion in 35 violation of this subchapter is a minor or has died as a result of the 36 dismemberment abortion, the parents or legal guardians of the woman who 1 received a dismemberment abortion in violation of this subchapter. 2

(...)

I'm not terribly used to American legal language, but I think that is an incorrect interpretation. Your statement is a continuation of

"(b) A cause of action for civil damages against a person who has purposely violated this subchapter may be maintained by:"

Together, the two mean that if the person who had the abortion was a minor, the parents may sue the doctor.

 

I have no idea what's happening in this thread. People are following an utterly rabid interpretation of the law, and then assuming the lawmaker are idiots based on their strange interpretation.

This is a somewhat odd law, but it's by no means diabolical.



Around the Network
VGPolyglot on 04 February 2017
eva01beserk said:
VGPolyglot said:

So, what do you think should be done about it? You think that he should be able to force her to have the baby? The woman is the one who has to live through months of pain while the fetus develops.

there you go with the force. You think a man having a say has to be forcing a women. There are many reasons to have an abortion. And in most cases the mother should have the final say. But there could be times it should not be allowed. sometimes all a women needs is some councelling and shes good. maybe someone agrees to take care of the baby and adopts it.

Lets say a couple has planed this baby, and they both wanted it. in over the course of the pregnancy the mother just gets a promotion, or is about to get one, and  she decided "well now its not a good time to have a baby". You think thats fair to the father. He could be willing and able to still suport the family or even she leaving and he keeping the kid. theres defenetly a possible understanding to be had here.

ANd you keep saying its the womens body but you dont even consider the baby. Its not a parasity that you drink some medice in is craped out, its an almost fully developed human being by this stage in the pregnancy.

You say that it's not force, yet you say that it should not be allowed, which you would need to use force to enforce.  I'm saying it's the woman's body because it is part of the woman's baby. Also, if we're talking about in practice, it would be highly unlikely that a woman would choose to abort so late into pregnancy unless there was something drastic happening.



eva01beserk on 04 February 2017
HollyGamer said:
eva01beserk said:

Also cant leave out that even in rape cases, where is still consider adultery, women  and man could face jail time and even death penalty. While the man,  will have  the same penalty like the woman .

Fixed it for you, and please dont thank me. :)

The way you reworded it would make the last sentence redundant. Did you even proof read?

Edit: It dosent matter anyways, that the victim could sufer such actions is still barbaric.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk on 04 February 2017
VGPolyglot said:
eva01beserk said:

there you go with the force. You think a man having a say has to be forcing a women. There are many reasons to have an abortion. And in most cases the mother should have the final say. But there could be times it should not be allowed. sometimes all a women needs is some councelling and shes good. maybe someone agrees to take care of the baby and adopts it.

Lets say a couple has planed this baby, and they both wanted it. in over the course of the pregnancy the mother just gets a promotion, or is about to get one, and  she decided "well now its not a good time to have a baby". You think thats fair to the father. He could be willing and able to still suport the family or even she leaving and he keeping the kid. theres defenetly a possible understanding to be had here.

ANd you keep saying its the womens body but you dont even consider the baby. Its not a parasity that you drink some medice in is craped out, its an almost fully developed human being by this stage in the pregnancy.

You say that it's not force, yet you say that it should not be allowed, which you would need to use force to enforce.  I'm saying it's the woman's body because it is part of the woman's baby. Also, if we're talking about in practice, it would be highly unlikely that a woman would choose to abort so late into pregnancy unless there was something drastic happening.

This is excactly the point people dont get. If something drastic where to happen, then nothing a man can say would stand up in court, so its not an issue. This law would basicly be a formality by the doctors to have concent from both parents before the extraction. If the doctor does not get it, then they go to court and the woman should get it quite easy if something drastic did happen, even against the will of the father.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Ganoncrotch on 04 February 2017

That's just insane.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

JWeinCom on 04 February 2017
UnderstatedCornHole said:
FunFan said:

Fathers can sue women that murder their child. This is a matter of perspective of course, either pro-life or not. And in the instance of abortion the victim is the child.

This, and to expand to our resident lefties who are feigning outrage....

If abortion is wrong because of the killing of a foetus provided you see right to life stuff in that way. It doesn't suddenly become right if it was conceieved due to force.

I don't understand the left.

On the one hand they demand political correctness for unfathomable reasons but on the other are happy for a child's conception to have different values depending on how it was conceived.

So are you politically correct or not? You can't mix and match when it comes to law and governing of the masses. Or you can, but then your stance on being politically correct will never be respected by anyone except your mobile echo chamber passenger buddies. Because you will break whenever it suits you and apply the rule of law from your own perspective and never take opposing views into account.

I guess you don't understand the left, since the point of view you seem to attribute to them is so far off the mark it's rather unbelievable.

People on the left who are pro-choice tend to think that what happens to the fetus should be left to the mother, regardless of the situation.  If it is indeed a matter of perspective, then the most important perspective is that of the woman with the baby in her body.  They don't believe that a woman should only be able to choose in cases of rape or incest or whatever else.

Ideally it would be a woman's choice in pretty much any circumstance.  In situations where there is a republican controlled government that is determined to do anything they can to stop abortions, then they at the very least want to have an exception made for the most extreme cases where the childbirth is likely to be most physically or mentally damaging to the mother.  It's not about valueing life differently, it's about trying to do the best possible in a bad situation.

How you managed to turn this into an issue of political correctness is a truly impressive display of mental gymnastics.