"Men Must Approve Abortion, Women Are Hosts"

[The One True Benxboro Empire]

Not allowing a woman to kill her son or daughter without the father's consent and women actually being treated as property by the law are basically the same *nod*

I too would want to have to get written permission from my rapist to get an abortion for a baby I can't support

So what happens if the father refuses consent even when there is a clear medical need for the procedure?

GOTO Slut Had It Coming

*unwritten exception counterargument goes here*

[Crockerland]

Not allowing a woman to kill her son or daughter without the father's consent and women actually being treated as property by the law are basically the same *nod*

I too would want to have to get written permission from my rapist to get an abortion for a baby I can't support

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
Thanks for wasting everyone's time complaining about a position no one supports. If you can't support a child then just put it up for adoption.

[Alvecia]

I too would want to have to get written permission from my rapist to get an abortion for a baby I can't support

GOTO Slut Had It Coming

*unwritten exception counterargument goes here*

Didn't think laws allowed unwritten exceptions.

[Alvecia]

I too would want to have to get written permission from my rapist to get an abortion for a baby I can't support

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
Thanks for wasting everyone's time complaining about a position no one supports. If you can't support a child then just put it up for adoption.

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

[The One True Benxboro Empire]

*unwritten exception counterargument goes here*

Didn't think laws allowed unwritten exceptions.

They don't.

[Crockerland]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
Thanks for wasting everyone's time complaining about a position no one supports. If you can't support a child then just put it up for adoption.

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

[Alvecia]

Didn't think laws allowed unwritten exceptions.

They don't.

Well, there we have it.

[Urarenge]

Wow... a body as a host... that's a new one. That's some creative imagery of a kid as a parasite and a woman as a... vessel? Seems abysmally denigrating to a woman's self-worth... would men put up with that kind of a label?

[Alvecia]

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

[The One True Benxboro Empire]

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

It's highly unlikely most people score zero on psychopathy tests.

[Gauthier]

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

As opposed to letting that very life enjoy the theme park experience of growing up in poverty and possibly crime and not giving a shit about it after it was squirted out of the Slutty Harlot.

[The One True Benxboro Empire]

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

Make that 400 million lives.
Every time you have a baby you kill 399,999,999 innocent people

[Gauthier]

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

Make that 400 million lives.
Every time you have a baby you kill 399,999,999 innocent people

Remember, every lonely geek is a Holocaust in the Hand waiting to happen.

[Ifreann]

And you know, this isn't even going to stop abortions. It'll just make them more dangerous. This law can't stop women from buying abortifacient pills online. It can't stop women from "falling" down some stairs until they miscarry. You can't actually make women stay pregnant unless you're going to chain them to the wall from their first missed period until they've delivered.

[Vassenor]

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

"Every sperm is sacred..."

[Crockerland]

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

No, it's obviously not. Ending the life of a single cell (or a large group of single cells) is not the same as ending a multi-cellular organism's life, especially when that multicellular organism is a human being at an early stage of development.

[Alvecia]

And you know, this even going to stop abortions. It'll just make them more dangerous. This law can't stop women from buying abortifacient pills online. It can't stop women from "falling" down some stairs until they miscarry. You can't actually make women stay pregnant unless you're going to chain them to the wall from their first missed period until they've delivered.

"Abortion Outlawed"
"Wire Hanger Sales Skyrocket"

[The One True Benxboro Empire]

Make that 400 million lives.
Every time you have a baby you kill 399,999,999 innocent people

Remember, every lonely geek is a Holocaust in the Hand waiting to happen.

One trillion times over.

And you know, this even going to stop abortions. It'll just make them more dangerous. This law can't stop women from buying abortifacient pills online. It can't stop women from "falling" down some stairs until they miscarry. You can't actually make women stay pregnant unless you're going to chain them to the wall from their first missed period until they've delivered.

And most pregnancies fail without deliberate intervention.

[Ashmoria]

Or abort it and save all that time lugging it around.

Ending another human being's life to avoid moderate inconvenience for a few months sounds like something a sociopath would do.

easy for you to say

[Frenequesta]

Didn't think laws allowed unwritten exceptions.

They don't.

Well, that's always a matter of interpretation. The classic example is an ordinance that says "no vehicles in the park" that might not in fact be intended to cover baby strollers.

But to say that there is an exception here for rape etc. seems hardly grounded in the purpose of this law.

[Alvecia]

It's ending another human life the same way me jacking off into a tissue is ending another life.

No, it's obviously not. Ending the life of a single cell (or a large group of single cells) is not the same as ending a multi-cellular organism's life, especially when that multicellular organism is a human being at an early stage of development.

The difference is negigible and ultimately irrelevant. Said organism is about as much of a human as my hair. I got no issue giving that a cut if it's inconveniently long.

[The Grande Republic 0f Arcadia]

New law would require man’s approval for partner’s abortion because women are only “hosts,” and pregnant women’s bodies are not their own.
Oklahoma state legislator Rep. Justin Humphrey is sponsoring a draconian bill, HB 1441, that would require a woman to get written permission from her sexual partner if she wants to have an abortion.

The Intercept reports:
The legislation would require a woman seeking an abortion first to obtain written permission from her sexual partner. It would also require her to provide his name to her doctor and would forestall the procedure if the man wanted the opportunity to challenge paternity.
Attempting to justify the despicable legislation Rep. Humphrey told The Intercept that women have no right to bodily autonomy once they are pregnant because they are merely “hosts”:

"I understand that they feel like that is their body. I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant."
Rep. Humphrey continued:

"So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in."

Rep. Humphrey also said his intent behind the legislation was to let men have a say, declaring:
I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions.

Commenting on the despicable legislation, Amanda Allen, senior state legislative counsel for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said:
I would say it’s certainly a new low for Oklahoma. This is, to my mind, a fruitless effort to shame and stigmatize women who are seeking abortion care and it is completely and unequivocally unconstitutional.

Allen is right, if passed the law would certainly be unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a similar provision in 1992.

She is also right to note that the legislation is ultimately a mean-spirited attempt to shame and stigmatize women who are seeking an abortion.
Bottom line: For Rep. Justin Humphrey, and conservatives like him, pregnant women’s bodies are not their own: Women are merely “hosts” – and the man must give his approval for abortion to take place.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressiv ... men-hosts/

So if you were looking for something to make your vision turn red this morning look no further than Rep. Justin Humphrey (R).
The R stands for reptilian.

That's called equality right there, besides the father who is another reason why the fetus is there should have a say on it.

[Proctopeo]

He should be allowed to weigh in. Perhaps required - no right to block the decision, but might as well let him have a say.
And then let men opt out of parenthood, and all is rosy.

I don't believe the bloke should have a say in whether or not she has an abortion, but I do think he should have the ability to opt out without legal consequences.

Nothing wrong with letting him share his opinion.

He should be allowed to weigh in. Perhaps required - no right to block the decision, but might as well let him have a say.
And then let men opt out of parenthood, and all is rosy.

so just to make it even harder on him you would call him into the doctors office, let him beg her to keep the pregnancy, and have it be a useless appeal since its her decision and she wouldn't be there if she wasn't sure?

seems a bit cruel.

Not quite what I was saying, although with "required", "perhaps" is the important part.

[Aethrys]

Live for the swarm?

[Ashmoria]

They don't.

Well, that's always a matter of interpretation. The classic example is an ordinance that says "no vehicles in the park" that might not in fact be intended to cover baby strollers.

But to say that there is an exception here for rape etc. seems hardly grounded in the purpose of this law.

even f there is an exception for rape it would only work (for the author's purpose) if the definition of rape is a very strict one--reporting it to the police at a minimum.

it wouldn't cover the 15 year old who was pushed by her boyfriend to go farther than was wise, eh?