Punish Women For Having Abortions?

[Sean Renaud]

Yes, I waited three hour you dirty nigger, so you're lies won't work here.

And when I quoted you and saw you're wall of text, I replaced it with "...", so you're lie =s have been shot down again.

Yes, it took you three hours to read and then you called a fairly small statement a wall of text. It's okay that you need help sounding things out.

Our Constitution and all of our amendments to the Constitution do not mention women anywhere in it. It does mention people but if you study the history of that time, you find our that women were considered nothing more that chattel.

Our nation was founded by men, for men and against women.

The first part is two fold. First women while they really were not considered chattel at the time they certainly were not equals. However in English he and man are the appropriate neutral pronouns. As in you are not supposed to write he/she whenever you're referring to an unknown. They are male until proven otherwise.

This country was not founded against women. That's just crap. Just as it was not founded against blacks or even against Native Americans. Frankly with women you're giving the Founders far more credit than they merit.

You have to take time to think about something before you can be against it. I'm not against possums. . .at least not until they are in my trash.

 

[Hypoxia]

This country was not founded against women. That's just crap. Just as it was not founded against blacks or even against Native Americans.

Women were not extended the vote. Blacks were counted as fractional people, not full humans. Indians were not extended citizenship. USA was indeed founded to benefit white male property owners and nobody else.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't deny that. What I deny is that there was any effort whatsoever put into being "against" them. The founding fathers weren't against gays, there was no war with gays to be against.

You need an opponent to be against.

 

[Real_American11]

If a woman that does not want her baby but people like you want to force her to have it

If she doesn't want a child, she shouldn't get pregnant.

You are a faggot loser, a weak spineless sack of cow shit, you should be executed for your violent actions.

Yes, it took you three hours to read and then you called a fairly small statement a wall of text.

Like I said, I'm not going to read through a wall of text for each point, if you want to quote me and expect me to respond than you'll have to respond to each point individually.

If you don't like it than don't waste your time quoting me at all, I'll just tell you the same every time.

 

[RobDownSouth]

If men were so passionate about their reproductive health and discussed it on lit what?

Plan on finishing that thought?

Not to put words in the lady's mouth, but I presume she's remarking on the "Father Knows Best" white patriarchal thought process on display here.

 

[Sean Renaud]

If she doesn't want a child, she shouldn't get pregnant.

You are a faggot loser, a weak spineless sack of cow shit, you should be executed for your violent actions.

Like I said, I'm not going to read through a wall of text for each point, if you want to quote me and expect me to respond than you'll have to respond to each point individually.

If you don't like it than don't waste your time quoting me at all, I'll just tell you the same every time.

Some women however are going to get pregnant like it or not. It's human nature. I did respond to each point you made individually, I just didn't parse it out into a billion pieces because that shit gets annoying and it's worth the effort if there is no wall of text to dig through.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Not to put words in the lady's mouth, but I presume she's remarking on the "Father Knows Best" white patriarchal thought process on display here.

Other than Real Troll11 Where are you seeing that happen?

Women were not extended the vote. Blacks were counted as fractional people, not full humans. Indians were not extended citizenship. USA was indeed founded to benefit white male property owners and nobody else.

Yet in the last 150 years they have managed to go from that to being some of the most privileged, powerful and respected groups of non Royal/Imperial people in all of recorded human history. And even then...the average broke ass American has spent the last century living better than most royalty of history has.

Pretty amazing for a country that hates minorities and women so much it was designed specifically to victimize and oppress them......

 

[phrodeau]

The Equal Rights Amendment was presented to Congress in 1923. Fifty-four years later, it was within three states of being ratified. Now it is dead.

Only eleven states have ratified a similar amendment in their constitutions.

It seems clear that Americans don't want women to have equal rights.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Equal Rights Amendment was presented to Congress in 1923. Fifty-four years later, it was within three states of being ratified. Now it is dead.

Only eleven states have ratified a similar amendment in their constitutions..

That's because everyone was effectively granted equal rights by the 14th in 1868.

Well before 1923 it was rather obvious that's exactly what it was doing as SCOTUS case after SCOTUS case was re-shaping the legal/political landscape of this country. And it's still going on to this very day.

It's simply not needed.

It seems clear that Americans don't want women to have equal rights.

No it didn't happen over night, yes it took nearly a century for most of the biggest kinks to be ironed out but all things considered it's done a pretty fuckin' awesome job. Fucking incredible actually.

Plus we continue to cause sweeping changes in favor of equal rights on a GLOBAL SCALE and at an unprecedented rate via our cultural, economic and military influences.

It seems clear that you and the rest of the 'America is the worst thing to ever happen to women and minorities' crowd are completely full of fuckin' shit despite the blowing off of the superfluous warm fuzzy amendment. Y'all and the rest of the 'USA = worst thing ever!' need to get out.....go on a world tour and get some perspective on how fucking amazing the USA is.

I say that because as a minority who's been all over the world I can tell you right now the list of places I'd rather be off than ballin' the fuck out in NorCal is extremely short. From how I've seen women treated around the world I doubt womens list of places it's better for women is about as short.

 

[Real_American11]

Some women however are going to get pregnant like it or not. It's human nature.

And they must deal with the consequences of their actions.

You do not get to start a life and then kill it because you want to. That is murder.

There are only two situations that abortion is acceptable:

1) If the mother's life is in real danger AND there is no option to transplant the fetus to a surrogate or artificial womb.

2) The baby has tested positive for serious mental or physical impairments.

In both situations the consent of both parents is needed, or grandparents if minors are having a child.

I did respond to each point you made individually, I just didn't parse it out into a billion pieces because that shit gets annoying and it's worth the effort if there is no wall of text to dig through.

Well if you want me to respond, then either quote it properly or use something like "1), 2), etc." to mark your points so I can easily see which of my points you are responding to.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

And they must deal with the consequences of their actions.

You do not get to start a life and then kill it because you want to. That is murder.

There are only two situations that abortion is acceptable:

1) If the mother's life is in real danger AND there is no option to transplant the fetus to a surrogate or artificial womb.

2) The baby has tested positive for serious mental or physical impairments.

In both situations the consent of both parents is needed, or grandparents if minors are having a child.

Well if you want me to respond, then either quote it properly or use something like "1), 2), etc." to mark your points so I can easily see which of my points you are responding to.

You seem to be confused as to what constitutes murder. No surprise, you're confused about a great number of things. Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another human being. Abortion is not illegal and a fetus is a potential human being.

Your list of acceptable situations is more than a little off as well, no surprise. Artificial wombs? You're simultaneously living in the 1700's and far in the future.

Transplant the fetus to a surrogate? Not possible... A woman's body grows a placenta alongside the fetus, so there wouldn't be anywhere on a regular body to put a fetus. You'd have to transplant the entire setup - placenta, fetus, and probably parts of the uterus. Also, a pregnant woman's body is a cocktail of hormones. Without those hormones, the baby dies. Even if you got the host on the exact right hormones, it would still attack the new placenta and fetus because the DNA wouldn't match. Immunosuppresents would probably kill the baby.

No exceptions for rape or incest?I'm sure you adhere to that "legitimate rape" fallacy that if a woman becomes pregnant from rape then she really wanted it huh?

 

[Sean Renaud]

And they must deal with the consequences of their actions.

You do not get to start a life and then kill it because you want to. That is murder.

There are only two situations that abortion is acceptable:

1) If the mother's life is in real danger AND there is no option to transplant the fetus to a surrogate or artificial womb.

2) The baby has tested positive for serious mental or physical impairments.

In both situations the consent of both parents is needed, or grandparents if minors are having a child.

Well if you want me to respond, then either quote it properly or use something like "1), 2), etc." to mark your points so I can easily see which of my points you are responding to.

Forcing them to deal with the consequences of their actions is detrimental to them and worse to society. That's the bottom line, if you wish to define it as a life fine, so be it.

There is no reason at all for both parents consent to be necessary at all.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The Equal Rights Amendment was presented to Congress in 1923. Fifty-four years later, it was within three states of being ratified. Now it is dead.

Only eleven states have ratified a similar amendment in their constitutions.

It seems clear that Americans don't want women to have equal rights.

I remember that proposed amendment quite well. Even if it had picked up those last three state ratifications, there was some question as to whether or not it would have been valid.

We all know an amendment must pass both houses of Congress by a super majority and then be ratified by 3/4 of the states. Originally, the ERA had a seven year deadline. When that deadline was almost reached, the amendment was not close to 3/4 of the states, so the deadline was extended. However, only a simple majority of Congress passed this change NOT the required super majority. This lack probably would have shot it down. In addition, some states had voted to ratify but subsequently changed their minds. Other states voted to ratify but later rescinded their vote. At no specific time was the ERA all that close to having the required number of ratifications by states.

At that time, the draft was in effect, and the ERA would have meant women would have been drafted into the Army. Most of the laws that made a distinction favored women, and that would have changed. Since then, the ERA has become mostly redundant.

 

[Real_American11]

You seem to be confused as to what constitutes murder.

No you're just under the assumption you have morals... you don't.

Killing a child six months after it is born and six months before it is born is still murder.

Your list of acceptable situations is more than a little off as well, no surprise. Artificial wombs?

Transplant the fetus to a surrogate? Not possible... A woman's body grows a placenta alongside the fetus, so there wouldn't be anywhere on a regular body to put a fetus.

Science is always marching forward, these things will be possible.

No exceptions for rape or incest?

No. Also I assume the incest is also rape, or are you advocating for the forced abortion of any pregnancy resulting from incest?

Anyway, the only two exceptions are listed above. However, if the pregnancy could be proven without a doubt to be rape, than the consent of the rapist is not required... but the prior two stipulations are still in effect.

1) If the mother's life is in real danger AND there is no option to transplant the fetus to a surrogate or artificial womb.

2) The baby has tested positive for serious mental or physical impairments.

Forcing them to deal with the consequences of their actions is detrimental to them and worse to society.

Why is it detrimental to hold people accountable and have them learn valuable character building lessons?

Also, what about all of the millions of Americans and people outside the US wishing to adopt?

There is no reason at all for both parents consent to be necessary at all.

Why should the mother have all the rights when the father shares the responsibilities?

If it is born he has to pay, but he has no say if the mother wants to kill it?

It's his child as well, you're a fucking monster if you advocate murdering a father's child.

But I shouldn't be surprised, Lefties like you are how Hitler and Stalin gained power.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Why is it detrimental to hold people accountable and have them learn valuable character building lessons?

Also, what about all of the millions of Americans and people outside the US wishing to adopt?

Why should the mother have all the rights when the father shares the responsibilities?

If it is born he has to pay, but he has no say if the mother wants to kill it?

It's his child as well, you're a fucking monster if you advocate murdering a father's child.

But I shouldn't be surprised, Lefties like you are how Hitler and Stalin gained power.

1. Because it doesn't teach them anything it just screws up their lives and then screws up the rest of our lives.

2. I've personally never heard anything about people outside the US wanting to adopt US born children. Usually I've heard the opposite, US families wantitn to adopt foreign kids. That doesn't even seem to be driven by a lack of kids in the US but rather because we got tired of giving kids to monsters and some nations are so hard up that it's better for a kid to be in the US with a monster than stuck in their home nation. Regardless I give zero shits about those people one way or the other.

3. The father does not share in the responsibilities to the same extent. There are tons of deadbeat dads. Additionally lots of men simply don't know. AT the end of the day it's not his body and he doesn't get a formal say. If you want to call it murder so be it, but I advocate it.

And you know by any rational measure Hitler was one of yours.

 

[Real_American11]

1. Because it doesn't teach them anything it just screws up their lives and then screws up the rest of our lives.

So you think it's better to let young people have no consequences? That we should teach them to do whatever they want? Isn't that basically the excuse that afflenza kid used to get away with murder?

2. I've personally never heard anything about people outside the US wanting to adopt US born children.

I'm sure there are couples that want a child, maybe their country has to much red tape.

Maybe the children available for adoption in their countries are unhealthy.

Usually I've heard the opposite, US families wantitn to adopt foreign kids.

The only couples in the US adopting foreign babies are either 1) celebrities and others that wish to seem like Jesus for 'rescuing' children from other countries or 2) couples that were tired of red tape in the US.

Regardless I give zero shits about those people one way or the other.

So not only do you support murdering babies, and raising a generation of narcissistic sociopaths with no idea of personal responsibility and consequences for their actions, but you also want millions of couples unable to produce children to remain childless?

3. The father does not share in the responsibilities to the same extent.

Yes, he share's the greater burden.

The mother can choose to abort, keep, or put up for adoption... all without the father's consent.

Yet, the father must support the child and the mother (depending on other factors) until the child reaches 18, and in some cases into their mid 20s...

There are tons of deadbeat dads. Additionally lots of men simply don't know. AT the end of the day it's not his body and he doesn't get a formal say. If you want to call it murder so be it, but I advocate it.

It's not her body, it's the child's.

If a mugger stabs a pregnant woman, and kills the child but not the mother should he be charged with murder?

And you know by any rational measure Hitler was one of yours.

Hitler and the rest are all cut from the same clothe, all liberal progressives.

You big government, collectivist, socialists, I'm a supporter of limited government, individual sovereignty, and capitalism.

 

[Sean Renaud]

So you think it's better to let young people have no consequences? That we should teach them to do whatever they want? Isn't that basically the excuse that afflenza kid used to get away with murder?

Yes, I think it is better ultimately to let our young avoid this particular consequence. That really has nothing to do with teaching them to do whatever they want or that affluenza kid.

I'm sure there are couples that want a child, maybe their country has to much red tape.

Maybe the children available for adoption in their countries are unhealthy.

The only couples in the US adopting foreign babies are either 1) celebrities and others that wish to seem like Jesus for 'rescuing' children from other countries or 2) couples that were tired of red tape in the US.

In this case the red tape is preventing pedophiles and pimps from picking up children. If the children in their country are unhealthy odds are pretty close to 100% they are in no position to be adopting anybody.

Yeah some of them are avoiding red tape and some of them do feel it makes a difference. Who cares?

So not only do you support murdering babies, and raising a generation of narcissistic sociopaths with no idea of personal responsibility and consequences for their actions, but you also want millions of couples unable to produce children to remain childless?

Yes, he share's the greater burden.

The mother can choose to abort, keep, or put up for adoption... all without the father's consent.

Yet, the father must support the child and the mother (depending on other factors) until the child reaches 18, and in some cases into their mid 20s...

It's not her body, it's the child's.

If a mugger stabs a pregnant woman, and kills the child but not the mother should he be charged with murder?

Yes if you want to use the term murder I support it, raising a generation of narcissistic sociopaths (who have overwhelmingly come out as socialist with huge hearts and morals so . . .yeah) with out being penalized for being human to a degree that destroys their lives. I don't want or care about these "millions of couples" unable to produce children on their own. They do not enter into the equation at all.

Actually in many states the father can give up parental rights and responsibilities if he so chooses.

It is her body, the child isn't a person yet. No a mugger who stabs a pregnant woman killing her child but not her should not be charged with murder. Given we don't have a justice system but a vengeance and punishment system he most likely would but that doesn't make it right.

Hitler and the rest are all cut from the same clothe, all liberal progressives.

You big government, collectivist, socialists, I'm a supporter of limited government, individual sovereignty, and capitalism.

Yeah, the moment you think they are all cut from the same cloth you've shown how terribly litter you understand.

Limited government and pro life are by definition opposed to each other. Except limited government doesn't really have any meaning. Individual sovereignty is utterly undefinable and capitalism is so bad an idea nobody has ever really tried it.

 

[Real_American11]

Yes, I think it is better ultimately to let our young avoid this particular consequence.

Yes if you want to use the term murder I support it, raising a generation of narcissistic sociopaths (who have overwhelmingly come out as socialist with huge hearts and morals so . . .yeah) with out being penalized for being human to a degree that destroys their lives.

No a mugger who stabs a pregnant woman killing her child but not her should not be charged with murder. Given we don't have a justice system but a vengeance and punishment system he most likely would but that doesn't make it right.

So you are a monster, you have no morals.

Actually in many states the father can give up parental rights and responsibilities if he so chooses.

What? Show me this, show me a state were a man can simply walk away from his responsibilities without the woman allowing it.

It is her body, the child isn't a person yet.

I say it is person enough to be murder.

Yeah, the moment you think they are all cut from the same cloth you've shown how terribly litter you understand.

I understand monsters like yourself love to put different groups into boxes and claim they are unrelated.

Limited government and pro life are by definition opposed to each other.

Wrong, pro-life is simply anti-murder which we can all agree is a legitimate function of limited government.

Except limited government doesn't really have any meaning.

Yes it does, it is a limited government... what don't you understand?

Individual sovereignty is utterly undefinable

Tell that to our Founding Fathers.

capitalism is so bad an idea nobody has ever really tried it.

Capitalism is the best system. It is superior to mercantilism, corporatism, fascism, socialism, communism, etc.

 

[Sean Renaud]

If you think I have no morals I have no qualms with that. Just be aware that the monster is striving for and has achieved a functional world with minimal suffering and your plan is simply bad.

The woman can chase him all she wants but it's ultimately going to be more trouble than it's worth in most cases.

Call it murder. I don't care. Not once have I argued with your terminology.

People do come in different groups with different methods and motivations that set them apart. It's not all the same even if the outcome is similar.

No, prolife is not small government. For starters because it's not murder but more importantly without a large government you have no way whatsoever of pursuing these cases. Real murders leave bodies and involve people who will be missed.

I don't understand what a limited government is because there is no such thing that can be defined. Certainly not by "real Americans".

Our Founding Fathers knew it well and bound us together. PErhaps not as tightly as they ought to have but that's a detailed subject that requires lots of history research.

It capitalism was superior someone on the planet would have made it work. Nobody has ever even truly tried. Corporatism is what America currently has and has had since at least the Industrial Revolution.

 

[Real_American11]

Just be aware that the monster is striving for and has achieved a functional world with minimal suffering and your plan is simply bad.

Wrong on both counts.

The woman can chase him all she wants but it's ultimately going to be more trouble than it's worth in most cases.

Nonsense, the court will garnish his wages and cease his assets.

Call it murder. I don't care. Not once have I argued with your terminology.

Because you are a murderer without morals.

People do come in different groups with different methods and motivations that set them apart. It's not all the same even if the outcome is similar.

It doesn't matter how you get there, if you're end goal is the same you are just as bad.

No, prolife is not small government. For starters because it's not murder but more importantly without a large government you have no way whatsoever of pursuing these cases. Real murders leave bodies and involve people who will be missed.

It is small government, the father will miss his unborn child.

You do not need a large government, you do not need a nanny state, a police state, etc. to deal with murder. Small towns with small sheriff's departments can solve a case.

No reason why local law enforcement can handle murder investigations.

I don't understand what a limited government is because there is no such thing that can be defined. Certainly not by "real Americans".

Real Americans like the Founding Fathers built this country on limited government.

Our Founding Fathers knew it well and bound us together. PErhaps not as tightly as they ought to have but that's a detailed subject that requires lots of history research.

Individual sovereignty is one of our corner stones.

The government, society, and culture of modern America is an abomination that should be razed to the ground and burn from the Earth.

It capitalism was superior someone on the planet would have made it work. Nobody has ever even truly tried. Corporatism is what America currently has and has had since at least the Industrial Revolution.

Wrong, America has Fascism masquerading as capitalism under the guise of crony-capitalism.

America is more a mixture of fascism and socialism with a thin coat of capitalism for appearances.

Capitalism is one of the main reasons America was the greatest and freest nations on the planet...

We may as well be the USSR now!


-edit-

Also, this is the last reply I'll give to an improperly posted response.

 

[LadyVer]

If men were so passionate about their reproductive health and discussed it on lit what?

Plan on finishing that thought?

I seriously want to see men speak about their repro health issues. Why is it OK for men to blather on about women's repro health? Do you men have a fucking vagina? Ovaries? Hemorrhaged due to pregnancy complications? Delivered a dead bàby because your womb said sorry, no can do? Had an abortion? And had to listen to the family values party tell you all about birth control while they screw around and advise their gf's to get an abortion. Ànd Trump, who is an ass, has the audacity to say what many on the right want: put women who have had an abortion in prison, because women and their repro health and choices mean Jack shit.

 

[Sean Renaud]

1. Not wrong at all. Crime has fallen since the legalization of abortion. Infanticide (killing a child under 12 months of age) has fallen off as well. One of them MAY be a correlation the other. . .well to be fair you think both are morally equal but most people disagree.

2. The court can try that's for sure. That's of course assuming she can even prove who it is but lets just count that as a point for you and be done with it.

3.It matters very much how you got there when the subject is categorizing people. If anti-vaxxers give us an outbreak that kills 150 million people. Well that's liberals being liberals and it sucks but we don't get to evade blame. If Trump lowers the rules of engagement and our military carpet bombs a Syrian city off the map with ten thousand souls lost Republicans/Conservatives don't get to pretend that that is the same. Labels matter.

4. The father won't miss what he never had and lets face it, he may not even know it existed in the first place depending on when the decision is made and if someone bothers to give him a phone call. Right there you're requiring an expansion of government because any woman can say "I don't know who the father is" and you're gonna have a helluva time proving otherwise.

5. Large government, nanny state are also words that don't really have meanings. We do have a police state but Republicans like it that way. And want to expand it. You're trying to expand it here. And maybe you're the one conservative who things drugs and prostitution aught be legal but that makes you The One. And lets face it, liberals are at absolute best paying lip service to decriminalizing various drugs and/or changing the laws. Small towns can't actually solve shit and besides there is more to government than who stole my cattle.

There is a very good reason why local law enforcement can't be trusted to completely handle murder. It's not the only crime on earth. I mean I guess if your only concerned about murder then yes they could if for no other reason than most murders are incredibly obvious (look for the significant other) and they are crimes of passion (so they aren't complex and more importantly are unlikely to be repeated. I mean OJ managed to never murder anybody after some guy touched his ex wife. Not saying he shouldn't have gone to prison for it. I'm saying so long as I wasn't fucking a woman he'd fucked I'd be 100% comfortable binge watching Dexter while he lay plastic wrap down on the floor.

6. The Founding Fathers did build it on limited government. It immediately collapsed and then they fixed it with big government. The end.

Individual soveriegnty is a myth someone told you not a real thing that exists. I get that you look at Somalia and think 'gee why cant I have it that good' but msot of us don't.

You do realize that what you are advocating as a Conservative and using the name Real American is facism right? Like it's okay to be a fascist but don't pretend we're any different.

We are a mix of socialism. It's necessary to having a SOCIETY.

7. Except again capitalism was dead before America was born. It was THAT dysfunctional.

You cannot reply to an improperly posted response. What you mean is that you demand I format my response the way you like it. Because you're a bitch. It's fine if you ignore me but lets be clear I'm one of the easier to get along with posters. If you can't handle me you should just hang up your hat hoss.

 

[akatrex]

IMHO . . .

Any women that cannot figure it out and make a decision in the first 90 days are a FUCKING ID10T's !

 

[LadyVer]

IMHO . . .

Any women that cannot figure it out and make a decision in the first 90 days are a FUCKING ID10T's !

Generally, that might be true, but we do not have superhuman powers, and neither do our doctors. Shit happens at 6 weeks, and at 8 months.

 

[akatrex]

Generally, that might be true, but we do not have superhuman powers, and neither do our doctors. Shit happens at 6 weeks, and at 8 months.

As they say Indecision KILLS!