• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If conservatives want to be draconian about abortion, then they should go full measure.

J

Jason Warfield

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Messages
4,212
Reaction score
3,347
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So far, the GOP has sent out bills in various levels of government to restrict abortion by insisting on punishing women and doctors. I say this only solves two-thirds of the problem if they are serious in getting rid of abortion in this fashion.

Men have to be punished, too.

First, we would need to abolish pre-martial sex. Outlaw it. No, a woman would be punished as well, but a man would also need to be punished for violating abstinence. If he has sex with a consenting woman who is of age, his punishment should be a year of helping to provide care for babies 24/7 in orphanages and hospitals. A second offense lands him a year in jail. A third offense would require chemical castration as clearly he cannot control his urges. A woman would undergo similar punishments.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant before marriage, upon completion of whatever sentence he gets, the two will be forced to marry and raise the child until the child is 18.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant outside of his own marriage, he is responsible for the care of that child on top of whatever sentence receives. The wife cannot file for divorce until the child of that marriage is 18. IF the wife is a willing participant with a man not her husband, then she has to undergo the sentencing as well, and if a child is conceived, she must also care for that child as well.

If a man rapes a woman of age, he gets chemically castrated. If he gets the woman pregnant, all of his assets will be seized and sold to support the woman, and 50% of all earnings both in and out of prison go towards the care of the child and the child's education until the child hits 18.

If a man rapes an underage girl...death.

If a man rapes an underage girl and gets her pregnant, death AND his surviving family picks up the cost to help raise the child until the child is 18.

Obviously, there would be more to this overall, but I think you get the idea.

Even more obvious is that I am being sarcastic, because I truly doubt anyone wants to live a Snake Plisken world....
 
Jason Warfield said:
So far, the GOP has sent out bills in various levels of government to restrict abortion by insisting on punishing women and doctors. I say this only solves two-thirds of the problem if they are serious in getting rid of abortion in this fashion.

Men have to be punished, too.

First, we would need to abolish pre-martial sex. Outlaw it. No, a woman would be punished as well, but a man would also need to be punished for violating abstinence. If he has sex with a consenting woman who is of age, his punishment should be a year of helping to provide care for babies 24/7 in orphanages and hospitals. A second offense lands him a year in jail. A third offense would require chemical castration as clearly he cannot control his urges. A woman would undergo similar punishments.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant before marriage, upon completion of whatever sentence he gets, the two will be forced to marry and raise the child until the child is 18.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant outside of his own marriage, he is responsible for the care of that child on top of whatever sentence receives. The wife cannot file for divorce until the child of that marriage is 18. IF the wife is a willing participant with a man not her husband, then she has to undergo the sentencing as well, and if a child is conceived, she must also care for that child as well.

If a man rapes a woman of age, he gets chemically castrated. If he gets the woman pregnant, all of his assets will be seized and sold to support the woman, and 50% of all earnings both in and out of prison go towards the care of the child and the child's education until the child hits 18.

If a man rapes an underage girl...death.

If a man rapes an underage girl and gets her pregnant, death AND his surviving family picks up the cost to help raise the child until the child is 18.

Obviously, there would be more to this overall, but I think you get the idea.

Even more obvious is that I am being sarcastic, because I truly doubt anyone wants to live a Snake Plisken world....
Click to expand...

I like the plan except for the 'chemical castration'. I think we should go old school and just lop it off surgically, old fashioned style. :lamo
 
Some of the things you mentioned are already laws in some form, or at least they should be (raping a minor etc), and there are good reasons for this.

Obviously, I agree that making all those laws is super silly, but if we could somehow get men and women to practice them willfully, without forcing them, we can reap the benefits without infringing on people's freedoms.

That is where the Conservative Party sees the issue. While the Left is happy to justify, glorify, and even encourage sexual deviancy and immorality, the Conservatives are pushing for laws and discussions which raise awareness about the risks, responsibilities, and integrity of sex aside from treating it like a cheap thrill which you can engage in at the expense of civility and human decency.

Another example is alcohol consumption - we put laws in place to mandate who can and can't drink it. Whether or not these laws are 100% effective is irrelevant. The point is, when the government treats alcohol consumption like a serious issue, so does the public. That is why we're seeing a lot of people avoid alcohol even though they're legally allowed to consume it. It's because decades of government policy has given people the idea that drinking alcohol is a serious and dangerous issue which shouldn't be taken lightly.

We need to do the same with sex. That doesn't mean outlawing it. It means treating it as a serious issue in our politics instead of brushing it off as an innocent and meaningless activity which people should be encouraged to do freely and unconditionally.

No right is completely free of conditions or responsibilities. Free even our Constitutional rights have stipulations and exceptions. Every right comes with a limit to ensure it is practiced responsibly and fairly. The Left seems to think sex should be the world's only exception to this structure. Sure, let's put restrictions on people's Constitutional rights, but sex? 100% free, easy, unconditional, consuquence free with a complimentary get-out-of-parenthood free card. Go nuts!
 
Last edited:
Crusader13 said:
No right is completely free of conditions or responsibilities. Free even our Constitutional rights have stipulations and exceptions. Every right comes with a limit to ensure it is practiced responsibly and fairly. The Left seems to think sex should be the world's only exception to this structure. Sure, let's put restrictions on people's Constitutional rights, but sex? 100% free, easy, unconditional, consuquence free with a complimentary get-out-of-parenthood free card. Go nuts!
Click to expand...

Sex has consequences???? Really??? That's interesting coming from the same person who wants to opt-out of child support for a child he conceived. The same person saying sex has consequences is the same person whining and complaining that they don't have equal rights as women after conception. Surely you are not demanding consequences for everyone but yourself?
 
weaver2 said:
Sex has consequences???? Really??? That's interesting coming from the same person who wants to opt-out of child support for a child he conceived. The same person saying sex has consequences is the same person whining and complaining that they don't have equal rights as women after conception. Surely you are not demanding consequences for everyone but yourself?
Click to expand...

No, women cna opt out of parenthood after conception so men should be able to do so as well. This doesn't completely eradicate either party of potential consequences but it gives them equal rights under the law to plan their parenthood. I'm sorry you're against men having the same rights as women - an absurd notion indeed.
 
Crusader13 said:
That is where the Conservative Party sees the issue. While the Left is happy to justify, glorify, and even encourage sexual deviancy and immorality, the Conservatives are pushing for laws and discussions which raise awareness about the risks, responsibilities, and integrity of sex aside from treating it like a cheap thrill which you can engage in at the expense of civility and human decency.
Click to expand...

So you/Conservatives consider sex between consenting adults deviate and immoral? Ugh. How repressive, to demonize the intimacy and pleasure of consensual sex.

And you are wrong about solutions...Conservatives are the party that endorse teaching abstinence only in schools...and failed strategy that they continue to stand by merely to 'look' like they are taking the moral High Ground.

Liberals are the ones that support facilities like Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide free/subsidized birth control options, birth control counseling, pregnancy & couples counseling, pre-natal Dr. referrals, pre-natal vitamins, etc etc etc.
 
Crusader13 said:
No, women cna opt out of parenthood after conception so men should be able to do so as well. This doesn't completely eradicate either party of potential consequences but it gives them equal rights under the law to plan their parenthood. I'm sorry you're against men having the same rights as women - an absurd notion indeed.
Click to expand...

Off-topic.

Just refer to the actual topic on that subject and see that it has been cleanly wrapped up & dismissed...you can do a quick catch up starting at post 1406.

Male Post-Conception Opt Out
 
Jason Warfield said:
So far, the GOP has sent out bills in various levels of government to restrict abortion by insisting on punishing women and doctors. I say this only solves two-thirds of the problem if they are serious in getting rid of abortion in this fashion.

Men have to be punished, too.

First, we would need to abolish pre-martial sex. Outlaw it. No, a woman would be punished as well, but a man would also need to be punished for violating abstinence. If he has sex with a consenting woman who is of age, his punishment should be a year of helping to provide care for babies 24/7 in orphanages and hospitals. A second offense lands him a year in jail. A third offense would require chemical castration as clearly he cannot control his urges. A woman would undergo similar punishments.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant before marriage, upon completion of whatever sentence he gets, the two will be forced to marry and raise the child until the child is 18.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant outside of his own marriage, he is responsible for the care of that child on top of whatever sentence receives. The wife cannot file for divorce until the child of that marriage is 18. IF the wife is a willing participant with a man not her husband, then she has to undergo the sentencing as well, and if a child is conceived, she must also care for that child as well.

If a man rapes a woman of age, he gets chemically castrated. If he gets the woman pregnant, all of his assets will be seized and sold to support the woman, and 50% of all earnings both in and out of prison go towards the care of the child and the child's education until the child hits 18.

If a man rapes an underage girl...death.

If a man rapes an underage girl and gets her pregnant, death AND his surviving family picks up the cost to help raise the child until the child is 18.

Obviously, there would be more to this overall, but I think you get the idea.

Even more obvious is that I am being sarcastic, because I truly doubt anyone wants to live a Snake Plisken world....
Click to expand...

From 9/03/19

Male Birth Control: Where Is It? - Male Contraceptive

When men have a pill or injection to prevent conception, we will eventually leave these kinds of discussions to history.

And that male BC pill is on the way.

Until then, I dont recall if it was Dave Chappelle or Chris Rock who said that if men dont have a say in the issue of abortion, then men shouldnt have to pay child support, but it was ONE of them.

And he is right.
 
weaver2 said:
Sex has consequences???? Really??? That's interesting coming from the same person who wants to opt-out of child support for a child he conceived. The same person saying sex has consequences is the same person whining and complaining that they don't have equal rights as women after conception. Surely you are not demanding consequences for everyone but yourself?
Click to expand...

You are seriously conflating the issues...
 
Lursa said:
So you/Conservatives consider sex between consenting adults deviate and immoral? Ugh. How repressive, to demonize the intimacy and pleasure of consensual sex.
Click to expand...

And there's the problem. Lefties/Democrats want restrictions on every basic human right there is, whether it's speech or guns, but when it comes to sex they want it to be 100% free and unconditional. It's a blatant and callous double standard.

Yes, sexual acts can be still be wrong and unhealthy even if they're consensual. Incest, dacryphilia, coprophilia, urophilia, menophilia - you name it. Every psychologist agrees that even regular porn and masturbation is harmful. These things are taboo for a reason. Aside from the potential physical/health impacts, they create an addiction to sexual pleasure. It's not a healthy or constructive way to live and we shouldn't be encouraging it.

And you are wrong about solutions...Conservatives are the party that endorse teaching abstinence only in schools...and failed strategy that they continue to stand by merely to 'look' like they are taking the moral High Ground.
Click to expand...

Abstinence education is a good idea in theory. I'll admit it doesn't work, but Conservatives had their intent in the right place. We should be teaching kids to reserve sex for meaningful encounters only, instead of teaching them to chase their deepest and wildest fantasies by using someone else's body for a cheap thrill. The rise in sexual immorality has led to unimaginable rates of depression, suicide, STD's, broken marriages, objectification and mistreatment of women, orphaned children, and more. These aren't good things.

Liberals are the ones that support facilities like Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide free/subsidized birth control options, birth control counseling, pregnancy & couples counseling, pre-natal Dr. referrals, pre-natal vitamins, etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

Liberals support quick-fix solutions which only treat the symptoms, not the actual problem. Sure, we can offer free abortions to women on demand. That doesn't actually solve anything - the real problem with abortion is why are women continually sleeping with untrustworthy men, and why are the men being such deadbeats in the first place? They're both victims of a sexually deviant culture that has taught them to give away their bodies for an easy thrill. That's going to cause more problems for them in the long run.
 
Last edited:
weaver2 said:
How so? If sex has consequences, as you said, who are the consequences for if males don't have to pay child support for children they conceive?
Click to expand...

If sex has consequences, as you said, who are the consequences for if women don't have to give birth to children they conceive?

This works both ways, and the discussion has already been through multiple repetitive cycles in the last thread. We get it. You're against giving men equal ability to plan their futures.
 
Crusader13 said:
If sex has consequences, as you said, who are the consequences for if women don't have to give birth to children they conceive?

This works both ways, and the discussion has already been through multiple repetitive cycles in the last thread. We get it. You're against giving men equal ability to plan their futures.
Click to expand...

You already know this...and just because you dont like that women have more options as consequences doesnt mean we're forced to do what's convenient for you or others. Most of ours are controlled by biology and health consequences we can even control.

A woman who gets pregnant cannot escape consequences, and there are only 4 scenarios:

--she has a kid
--she has a miscarriage
--she has an abortion
--she dies during pregnancy/childbirth.

And she can die or end up with severe and permanent health consequences from the 1st 3 too.

Women know all this, and we dont whine about it. We know the risks and cannot avoid consequences if a pregnancy occurs. Men escape consequences in all but one of those...and still they complain! They act like 'it's all so unfair to men!' :roll:
 
Crusader13 said:
If sex has consequences, as you said, who are the consequences for if women don't have to give birth to children they conceive?

This works both ways, and the discussion has already been through multiple repetitive cycles in the last thread. We get it. You're against giving men equal ability to plan their futures.
Click to expand...

Do men know the risks and consequences before they have sex? Yes or no?

Are men capable of making a good decision in their own best interests regarding sex? Yes or no?

If the answers are yes, then how are you blaming women or the law or anyone else? Why shouldnt men be held accountable for their knowing decisions?

Otherwise, you are just advocating for men to still be able to have sex without consequences, like that have been thru almost all history. Times and society have changed.

Women have never been able to have sex without consequences and still cannot.

So now neither are guaranteed sex without consequences...that sounds perfectly equal to me. Can you explain how it's not?
 
Lursa said:
Do men know the risks and consequences before they have sex? Yes or no?

Are men capable of making a good decision in their own best interests regarding sex? Yes or no?

If the answers are yes, then how are you blaming women or the law or anyone else? Why shouldnt men be held accountable for their knowing decisions?

Otherwise, you are just advocating for men to still be able to have sex without consequences, like that have been thru almost all history. Times and society have changed.

Women have never been able to have sex without consequences and still cannot.

So now neither are guaranteed sex without consequences...that sounds perfectly equal to me. Can you explain how it's not?
Click to expand...

:doh eh now you're just repeating the same old nonsense that has already been rebuked.

If a woman has sex and gets pregnant, she can have an abortion to avoid parenthood. That means she avoids the consequence. How can you say otherwise?

Two of your 'consequences' are actually favorable outcomes which women choose. If a woman wants to be a mother and carries to term, having the baby is not a consequence - it's an outcome (and a good one for her). The same goes for women who want an abortion and have one - you can't call something consequence if you willfully chose it.

This is like saying men have consequences from a pregnancy because they ejaculated. Right.
 
Crusader13 said:
If sex has consequences, as you said, who are the consequences for if women don't have to give birth to children they conceive?

This works both ways, and the discussion has already been through multiple repetitive cycles in the last thread. We get it. You're against giving men equal ability to plan their futures.
Click to expand...

I'm not against anything. I'm just curious how you can state in one thread that sex has consequences that everybody men and women, have to deal with and in another thread state that men shouldn't have to deal with any consequences for sex. You don't see that both statements can't be true? Either everybody deals with consequences or nobody does. You can't say everybody deals with consequences except for men.

FYI pregnancy is a consequence, or outcome, for sex.
 
Crusader13 said:
:doh eh now you're just repeating the same old nonsense that has already been rebuked.

If a woman has sex and gets pregnant, she can have an abortion to avoid parenthood. That means she avoids the consequence. How can you say otherwise?

Two of your 'consequences' are actually favorable outcomes which women choose. If a woman wants to be a mother and carries to term, having the baby is not a consequence - it's an outcome (and a good one for her). The same goes for women who want an abortion and have one - you can't call something consequence if you willfully chose it.

This is like saying men have consequences from a pregnancy because they ejaculated. Right.
Click to expand...

But she ends up with one (at least.) She has no choice. And if she doesnt want a kid and doesnt believe in abortion, she's stuck with having a kid. And it can kill or harm her in doing so. (This is all irrelevent if the couple wanted a kid, so an unplanned kid is no gift) Every single pregnancy is a risk to a woman's life.

And you miss the point that miscarriage and abortion can also kill, or more commonly, leave her infertile or with other health damage.

They are all unpleasant consequences...you are just mad that men cant control them in their own favor.
 
Lursa said:
But she ends up with one (at least.) She has no choice. And if she doesnt want a kid and doesnt believe in abortion, she's stuck with having a kid. And it can kill or harm her in doing so. (This is all irrelevent if the couple wanted a kid, so an unplanned kid is no gift) Every single pregnancy is a risk to a woman's life.

And you miss the point that miscarriage and abortion can also kill, or more commonly, leave her infertile or with other health damage.

They are all unpleasant consequences...you are just mad that men cant control them in their own favor.
Click to expand...

He's just mad because women have one option that men don't have. Just one option he doesn't have sends him into a frenzy of demanding equality.
 
weaver2 said:
He's just mad because women have one option that men don't have. Just one option he doesn't have sends him into a frenzy of demanding equality.
Click to expand...

And it's the only one they care about...they dont give a damn about the other consequences, all of which have a higher risk of harm or even death.

But yes, women must confront their consequences of their decision...and I dont see any women posting and creating 'issues' out of them. We must accept them.
 
Lursa said:
So you/Conservatives consider sex between consenting adults deviate and immoral? Ugh. How repressive, to demonize the intimacy and pleasure of consensual sex.

And you are wrong about solutions...Conservatives are the party that endorse teaching abstinence only in schools...and failed strategy that they continue to stand by merely to 'look' like they are taking the moral High Ground.

Liberals are the ones that support facilities like Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide free/subsidized birth control options, birth control counseling, pregnancy & couples counseling, pre-natal Dr. referrals, pre-natal vitamins, etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

Funny. If God had wanted sex between adults to be a sin, he'd have made the hymen with a safety lock to be opened by the preacher upon completion of the ceremony. Instead he made both sexes ready, willing, and able to do the deed at somewhere around 11 or 12. But he didn't.
 
Jason Warfield said:
So far, the GOP has sent out bills in various levels of government to restrict abortion by insisting on punishing women and doctors. I say this only solves two-thirds of the problem if they are serious in getting rid of abortion in this fashion.

Men have to be punished, too.

First, we would need to abolish pre-martial sex. Outlaw it. No, a woman would be punished as well, but a man would also need to be punished for violating abstinence. If he has sex with a consenting woman who is of age, his punishment should be a year of helping to provide care for babies 24/7 in orphanages and hospitals. A second offense lands him a year in jail. A third offense would require chemical castration as clearly he cannot control his urges. A woman would undergo similar punishments.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant before marriage, upon completion of whatever sentence he gets, the two will be forced to marry and raise the child until the child is 18.

If a man gets a woman of age pregnant outside of his own marriage, he is responsible for the care of that child on top of whatever sentence receives. The wife cannot file for divorce until the child of that marriage is 18. IF the wife is a willing participant with a man not her husband, then she has to undergo the sentencing as well, and if a child is conceived, she must also care for that child as well.

If a man rapes a woman of age, he gets chemically castrated. If he gets the woman pregnant, all of his assets will be seized and sold to support the woman, and 50% of all earnings both in and out of prison go towards the care of the child and the child's education until the child hits 18.

If a man rapes an underage girl...death.

If a man rapes an underage girl and gets her pregnant, death AND his surviving family picks up the cost to help raise the child until the child is 18.

Obviously, there would be more to this overall, but I think you get the idea.

Even more obvious is that I am being sarcastic, because I truly doubt anyone wants to live a Snake Plisken world....
Click to expand...

many right wingers would love a Gilead type world where they can murder non believers and people of other races and rape women
 
jimbo said:
Funny. If God had wanted sex between adults to be a sin, he'd have made the hymen with a safety lock to be opened by the preacher upon completion of the ceremony. Instead he made both sexes ready, willing, and able to do the deed at somewhere around 11 or 12. But he didn't.
Click to expand...

:rofl
 
Lursa said:
Do men know the risks and consequences before they have sex? Yes or no?

Are men capable of making a good decision in their own best interests regarding sex? Yes or no?

If the answers are yes, then how are you blaming women or the law or anyone else? Why shouldnt men be held accountable for their knowing decisions?

Otherwise, you are just advocating for men to still be able to have sex without consequences, like that have been thru almost all history. Times and society have changed.

Women have never been able to have sex without consequences and still cannot.

So now neither are guaranteed sex without consequences...that sounds perfectly equal to me. Can you explain how it's not?
Click to expand...
Crusader13 said:
:doh eh now you're just repeating the same old nonsense that has already been rebuked.
Click to expand...

Btw, I notice that you didnt answer the questions above...why not? They are simple and direct, is there a reason you cant answer them the same way?
 
It's always absurd men whining complaining that women have the upper hand in one thing, child birth. Men have dominated and gotten their way over women throughotu most of history, they get paid more, they have more power, etc etc etc.

And they don't have to go through 9 months of unpleasantness, sacrifice, and risk to health to develop the baby. So spare this unfair nonsense. Women are the ones who sacrifice to have children.

So stop with this "its not fair". it's completely absurd
 
jimbo said:
Funny. If God had wanted sex between adults to be a sin, he'd have made the hymen with a safety lock to be opened by the preacher upon completion of the ceremony. Instead he made both sexes ready, willing, and able to do the deed at somewhere around 11 or 12. But he didn't.
Click to expand...

If god thinks sex is a sin yet gave humans a huge, natural instinct to want to have sex, than he's a sadistic bastard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom