An interesting idea

[HumblePi]

I guess that's the ONE good thing about these women being forced to have children they don't want and aren't prepared to care for -- there is almost no stigma to single motherhood anymore. Not in the general populace. Fundamentalist churches can still try to make the women feel like trash, but that's a minority.

So the vile people who are forcing the women to have the children probably can't also force them to feel guilty about it.

But that doesn't solve the problem of the suffering these women and children will be facing through forced birth into poverty in a state like Alabama.

Even in the case of rape, women will be forced to carry that pregnancy to full term. The rapist actually has more rights than the woman they rape.

 

[rocket88]

When did you think he "vociferously defended those who are against it"?

Every time anybody criticizes a Republican, you can count on him to jump in on their side.

 

[rocket88]

Even in the case of rape, women will be forced to carry that pregnancy to full term. The rapist actually has more rights than the woman they rape.

And abortion gets a bigger punishment than rape does. As I've seen some say, you might as well murder your rapist because you're already getting a life sentence.

 

[Amelia]

Even in the case of rape, women will be forced to carry that pregnancy to full term. The rapist actually has more rights than the woman they rape.

Yes. And the doctor who tries to help her could get more prison time than the rapist. [Edit: what rocket88 said]

The Alabama law is sick on so many levels, not the least that it's happening in a state which has shown it doesn't give a damn about actually living children.

 

[SoCal]

Yes. And the doctor who tries to help her could get more prison time than the rapist. [Edit: what rocket88 said]

The Alabama law is sick on so many levels, not the least that it's happening in a state which has shown it doesn't give a damn about actually living children.

True, under the new law, the doctor could receive a life sentence, while the average time served by a rapist is ten years.

Compassion for a fetus, none for a child living on welfare? Taking children from refugees as a punishment for seeking refuge? Conservatives have never applied logic to where and how punishment should be used and have a warped sense of priorities and compassion.

If a woman hires someone to murder her husband and they're caught with the body, does she walk or is she charged with murder along with the assassin? Punishing the woman is the logical end result of the belief that abortion is murder. Don said it himself, "women who have abortions should suffer some form of punishment". Yet they lack the courage of their convictions to follow through...

 

[Bullseye]

child support + pain and suffering?

Morning sickness. Lost sleep. Hemorrhoids. Lost work days, and resulting loss of status in one's profession. Loss of income attainment contributing to lower social security in old age. Et cetera.

If she's going to be forced to carry the child, she should be compensated for all of that.

Only if she could prove she didn't know sex can result in pregnancy.

 

[Simpletruther]

So with the new ultra-punitive laws about abortion, here's an idea. Require child support from the moment of conception. I mean, we want to equate the unborn with the born, so make the man's duty the same as the woman's.

Doubt this will gain any traction with the "pro-life" crowd, but I like it.

The merits of this idea are irrelevant to whether murdering unborn humans should stop.

 

[rocket88]

The merits of this idea are irrelevant to whether murdering unborn humans should stop.

Is it though? Don't like the idea of being called out on your party's hypicrisy?

 

[Simpletruther]

Is it though? Don't like the idea of being called out on your party's hypicrisy?

Yes it really is. If this is rank hypocrisy, and you are right, it still would not be relevant to whether the unborn humans have right to life.

 

[rocket88]

Yes it really is. If this is rank hypocrisy, and you are right, it still would not be relevant to whether the unborn humans have right to life.

It is relevant? Why shouldn't a man have to pay child support for these children?

 

[marke]

So with the new ultra-punitive laws about abortion, here's an idea. Require child support from the moment of conception. I mean, we want to equate the unborn with the born, so make the man's duty the same as the woman's.

Doubt this will gain any traction with the "pro-life" crowd, but I like it.

I'm OK with that idea.

 

[Felis Leo]

So with the new ultra-punitive laws about abortion, here's an idea. Require child support from the moment of conception. I mean, we want to equate the unborn with the born, so make the man's duty the same as the woman's.

Doubt this will gain any traction with the "pro-life" crowd, but I like it.

I think it is a good idea, rocket88. I certainly think it is consistent with the pro-Life position, though I would not presume to speak for them. If paternity can be established pre-birth, I certainly think men should be responsible for financial assistance of the mother-to-be.

 

[Simpletruther]

It is relevant? Why shouldn't a man have to pay child support for these children?

Whether he should Or not, is not relevant to whether an unborn child has a right to life.

 

[rocket88]

Whether he should Or not, is not relevant to whether an unborn child has a right to life.

So the men have nothing to do with the pregnancy? I'm pretty sure most pregnancies come with the involvement of a man. If a man gets a woman pregnant, shouldn't he be forced to support her?

 

[Simpletruther]

So the men have nothing to do with the pregnancy? I'm pretty sure most pregnancies come with the involvement of a man. If a man gets a woman pregnant, shouldn't he be forced to support her?

Again, the answer to that doesn’t matter as to whether the unborn have a right to life.

 

[Lursa]

So with the new ultra-punitive laws about abortion, here's an idea. Require child support from the moment of conception. I mean, we want to equate the unborn with the born, so make the man's duty the same as the woman's.

Doubt this will gain any traction with the "pro-life" crowd, but I like it.

I try to look at these things from a practical, enforceable point of view.

How do they determine the father before late in the pregnancy? DNA testing is dangerous for the unborn at anytime, period.

Personally, since child support will skyrocket if any of these red state laws go into effect, I believe the next step will be for the states to force the father to marry the mother.

It costs a fortune in bureaucratic/administrative costs to track down dead beat parents, charge them, get the $, not to mention public assistance and possibly foster care.

Gonna be very expensivo! Much cheaper for the states to not only force motherhood on women, but to force 'familyhood' on parents to save on many of those costs.

 

[Lursa]

I'm all for that idea fletch. 'If' women get to say what gun measures they want and the gun owners get no say in the women's decision.

Win-win for me!

and all my women friends who carry and I compete with.

And takes so many of the conservatives right out of women's medical decisions.

 

[Lursa]

Here's the problem that I see. Any kind of gun control is by definition unreasonable, ask and most gun owners will say they agree because if you give in one time, what's next? Never give an inch. Secondly there are reasonable restrictions on abortion. Unlike the myth the right likes to spread abortion is not done 'at will' in all cases. I would just about bet my life if it were men giving birth, abortion would assuredly be legal.

Many states have no restrictions on abortion. ANd many would remain that way even after the moronic proposals by these red states.

 

[Lursa]

My niece had twins a few years back and they were delivered early. I cant remember exactly but 22 weeks or somewhere in that area. They were in an incubator for over a month and you wouldnt believe how tiny they were. But the fact remains that at 22 weeks, they were living human infants. Period. Had she chosen to abort them at that stage, she would have been ending viable human life. As a defender of rights, I cant support that.
.

The unborn have no rights.

And why would your sister have aborted a perfectly healthy pregnancy? Women dont. There are no elective abortions that take place that late certainly not of healthy viable fetuses. If they do, please post the data. There are only 3 places in the US that will do them, and all are medically necessary.

Not only that...it doesnt happen in Canada or any of the US states that have zero restrictions on timeframe for abortions.

 

[Lursa]

Because I dont find most liberal regulations on guns to be reasonable, but many on abortion are.

Which ones?

Edit: never mind, takes us off-topic. My bad, apologies to the OP.

 

[rocket88]

I am not for taking away anyones rights. But you are familiar with the maxim: your rights end where mine begin? The problem with abortion is what we are really talking about is ending a human life. You for example, did not become a living human being the moment you left your mothers womb. You were a living human being long before that. To be clear, I am not against abortion. Truth be told, I actually drove a woman friend to an abortion clinic and waited in the car for her to come out and drove her home. To this day, to the best of my knowledge, she and I are the only people who know it happened. But this abortion took place very early on 6 weeks maybe. As soon as she discovered she was pregnant she took steps to end it. That, I believe is every womans right. The dificulty is that what she did, in fact, was end a human life and she is well aware of that.

My niece had twins a few years back and they were delivered early. I cant remember exactly but 22 weeks or somewhere in that area. They were in an incubator for over a month and you wouldnt believe how tiny they were. But the fact remains that at 22 weeks, they were living human infants. Period. Had she chosen to abort them at that stage, she would have been ending viable human life. As a defender of rights, I cant support that.

Yeah, I dont think I would have a problem with that.

Was your niece raped? I'm guessing not.

That's my problem is that there are zero exceptions, and now Alabama has a stronger punishment for being raped than they do for the rapist.

 

[year2late]

I am ok with support starting at birth. That way retains full control over her bodily autonomy

 

[Scrabaholic]

So with the new ultra-punitive laws about abortion, here's an idea. Require child support from the moment of conception. I mean, we want to equate the unborn with the born, so make the man's duty the same as the woman's.

Doubt this will gain any traction with the "pro-life" crowd, but I like it.

Let's also make him wear a "pregnancy suit" for the duration, and when she's in labour, put a labour simulator on him.

 

[Scrabaholic]

How would they determine who the father was?

There are 3 ways, including doing a blood test Paternity Testing - American Pregnancy Association (about halfway down the page)

 

[ocean515]

There are 3 ways, including doing a blood test Paternity Testing - American Pregnancy Association (about halfway down the page)

But that means the father would have to be found. Sure, DNA and other tests can be performed. But without the other side of the equation, nothing could proceed.