Are there unseen problems with hart beat laws?

[apdst]

If you can not terminate a pregnancy due to a heart beat, can you turn off life support on a patient if they have a heart beat?

A heartbeat without artificial life support? Probably not.

 

[apdst]

Yet the doctor can not be charged

This is a response to laws legalizing post birth abortions.

 

[Lursa]

Maybe women who are concerned about becoming pregnant should take a test everytime they have sex or keep their legs shut

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I'm sure the men they want to have sex with will be happy to share the costs of testing after each time...or not having sex either.

 

[vegas giants]

This is a response to laws legalizing post birth abortions.

There is no such thing

 

[wolfsgirl]

A heartbeat without artificial life support? Probably not.

If a heart beat means alive, then removing life support form someone with a beating heart would be murder. Organ donations are taken from bodies in which the heart is still beating, would that be murder as well?

 

[bullseyelqcs]

The real problem becomes determining where one draws the line on the rights of that "person".

Consider this: A mother doesn't do everything in her power to ensure the health of the child while she is carrying it. Should that child make it to term and be born, would that child then have the right to sue mom for endangerment?

By definition, mom would at the moment of heartbeat being detectable be obligated to the potential wishes of that fetus that isn't present to invoke any of the rights that personhood would grant it.

Seems like an all around bad situation.

Not to mention that 1 in 5 children in the foster care system will age out every year, so I think its a tad heartless to fight for a child to spend its life as a ward of the state.

 

[Lursa]

The real problem becomes determining where one draws the line on the rights of that "person".

Consider this: A mother doesn't do everything in her power to ensure the health of the child while she is carrying it. Should that child make it to term and be born, would that child then have the right to sue mom for endangerment?

By definition, mom would at the moment of heartbeat being detectable be obligated to the potential wishes of that fetus that isn't present to invoke any of the rights that personhood would grant it.

Seems like an all around bad situation.

Not to mention that 1 in 5 children in the foster care system will age out every year, so I think its a tad heartless to fight for a child to spend its life as a ward of the state.

And 100,000 of those in the US are already available and waiting to be adopted.

 

[trouble13]

I'm sure the men they want to have sex with will be happy to share the costs of testing after each time...or not having sex either.

Im sure two consenting adults can work ot out among themselves

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Manc Skipper]

One problem with "Heartbeat" laws is that there's no heart beating. It's just a muscular node, the scaffolding, if you will, where the heart will eventually develop.

 

[jghiretire]

Maybe women who are concerned about becoming pregnant should take a test everytime they have sex or keep their legs shut

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Maybe all men should have vasectomies - or keep it in their pants.

 

[jghiretire]

This is a response to laws legalizing post birth abortions.

I hate to break it to you but there are no post birth abortions. You know very little about women's reproductive systems I'm guessing.
:roll:

 

[trouble13]

Maybe all men should have vasectomies - or keep it in their pants.

Thats generally what mrn are told when they object to any decissions women make for him. I see no reason to give eolither gender privileges that the other does not recieve.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[wolfsgirl]

Thats generally what mrn are told when they object to any decissions women make for him. I see no reason to give eolither gender privileges that the other does not recieve.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So it's ok for a group of men to decide with laws that women have to use their bodies as incubators against their will, but not ok for woman to suggest that men should get snipped to prevent pregnancy?

How about both men and women get to keep control of their own bodies and medical decisions? Radical I know, but it just might work.

 

[trouble13]

So it's ok for a group of men to decide with laws that women have to use their bodies as incubators against their will, but not ok for woman to suggest that men should get snipped to prevent pregnancy?

How about both men and women get to keep control of their own bodies and medical decisions? Radical I know, but it just might work.

When you start off your argument by demonizing men and accusing them of oppressing women for not granting them privileges just becsuse you feel they are entitled to them, you're building your argument on a false premise.

Men did not make women incubators, nature did and men are not forcing women to spread their legs. Women freely choose to risk getting pregnant. Women are well aware that if they have sex they can become pregnant. Women need to put their big girl pants on and take ownership of their decissions.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[vegas giants]

When you start off your argument by demonizing men and accusing them of oppressing women for not granting them privileges just becsuse you feel they are entitled to them, you're building your argument on a false premise.

Men did not make women incubators, nature did and men are not forcing women to spread their legs. Women freely choose to risk getting pregnant. Women are well aware that if they have sex they can become pregnant. Women need to put their big girl pants on and take ownership of their decissions.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Yep take ownership and get an abortion

 

[wolfsgirl]

When you start off your argument by demonizing men and accusing them of oppressing women for not granting them privileges just becsuse you feel they are entitled to them, you're building your argument on a false premise.

Men did not make women incubators, nature did and men are not forcing women to spread their legs. Women freely choose to risk getting pregnant. Women are well aware that if they have sex they can become pregnant. Women need to put their big girl pants on and take ownership of their decissions.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

The Alabama law was passed by all men. Not one woman voted for it, so it was a group of men that decided that women would be required to act as incubators against their will even if they were raped. Not a false premise, a fact.

Women have just as much right to make their own medical decisions as men. A man can get a broken bone fixed even if he was doing something wreckless to cause that broken bone. A man can get cancer treatment even if he smoked 2 packs a day and caused the cancer. Why can't a woman get medical treatment to return her body to original condition if she gets pregnant?

I bet there would be all kinds of screaming if the government decided that men no longer had a choice in their own medical decisions.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Every child shot at school had a heartbeat. Why no law to protect them?

 

[Lursa]

Thats generally what mrn are told when they object to any decissions women make for him. I see no reason to give eolither gender privileges that the other does not recieve.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

What decision did she make for him? If they used birth control, his 'decision' was pretty clear.

If they're married...absolutely she should share the decision with him but ultimately, it's her body at risk, not his.

If you want that to be equal, then the laws should reflect it...if she has kidney failure, he loses his kidneys. If she dies, he's killed. Otherwise it's not equal and hypocritical to ask for such when it's not biologically possible.

 

[trouble13]

What decision did she make for him? If they used birth control, his 'decision' was pretty clear.

If they're married...absolutely she should share the decision with him but ultimately, it's her body at risk, not his.

If you want that to be equal, then the laws should reflect it...if she has kidney failure, he loses his kidneys. If she dies, he's killed. Otherwise it's not equal and hypocritical to ask for such when it's not biologically possible.

Im very familiar with all the false equivalency arguments that feminists like to play like some sort of Trump card.

Alabama law is clear, if a woman does not want children she should not have sex. Thats the law.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[bullseyelqcs]

Im very familiar with all the false equivalency arguments that feminists like to play like some sort of Trump card.

Alabama law is clear, if a woman does not want children she should not have sex. Thats the law.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So can we expect that the next law will be to outlaw sex that doesn't come with the signed contract that pregnancy is an acceptable outcome?

 

[trouble13]

So can we expect that the next law will be to outlaw sex that doesn't come with the signed contract that pregnancy is an acceptable outcome?

Dont know, nor do i care.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Lursa]

What decision did she make for him? If they used birth control, his 'decision' was pretty clear.

If they're married...absolutely she should share the decision with him but ultimately, it's her body at risk, not his.

If you want that to be equal, then the laws should reflect it...if she has kidney failure, he loses his kidneys. If she dies, he's killed. Otherwise it's not equal and hypocritical to ask for such when it's not biologically possible.

Im very familiar with all the false equivalency arguments that feminists like to play like some sort of Trump card.

Alabama law is clear, if a woman does not want children she should not have sex. Thats the law.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So no answer to my question about "what decision she made for him?" I'm pretty sure that's because "she" didnt actually do so.

And that you dont really want equality on this issue because you'd recognize and support the true equality that I pointed out.

 

[trouble13]

So no answer to my question about "what decision she made for him?" I'm pretty sure that's because "she" didnt actually do so.

And that you dont really want equality on this issue because you'd recognize and support the true equality that I pointed out.

She makes the decission of whether or not he becomes a father away from him in lieu of her desire to maintain that privilege for herself. Now that women are faced with the same legal obstacle men race; feminist seem to believe thats is unfair and unequal. From where im standing, in the legal sense, it is a step toward treating both parents equally.

These new laws are in place to protect the innocent human life that both parents created. If women are not prepared to be mothers they should keep their legs shut. You know just like they tell men who are unprepared for fatherhood to keep the fly up.

Your continuing effort to reframe the argument into a false equivalency does not change the facts. I am unsympathetic to the selfish position that feminist are demanding.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Lursa]

She makes the decission of whether or not he becomes a father away from him in lieu of her desire to maintain that privilege for herself. Now that women are faced with the same legal obstacle men race; feminist seem to believe thats is unfair and unequal. From where im standing, in the legal sense, it is a step toward treating both parents equally.

These new laws are in place to protect the innocent human life that both parents created. If women are not prepared to be mothers they should keep their legs shut. You know just like they tell men who are unprepared for fatherhood to keep the fly up.

Your continuing effort to reframe the argument into a false equivalency does not change the facts. I am unsympathetic to the selfish position that feminist are demanding.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Again: if they were using bc when they had sex, which most couples, esp. unmarried ones do, then he made a clear decision. He didnt want and had no reasonable expectation of a kid.

Both parents are treated equally by the legal system. We've also discussed this. If it's not applied that way, blame the mostly male family court judges.

There are 'no parents' if there's no kid.

Being able to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will: to make that equal, then the man should be subjected to the same consequences as the woman...not just the good one, like having the kid. Lose a kidney, lose his life, etc. It does sound stupid...that's what your idea of equality means...I cant help it if it's stupid but at least you recognize it. It's not a false equivalency. Biology creates the inequality here, not law, and since you keep going on and on about making it equal anyway, then that is exactly what it means.

 

[trouble13]

Again: if they were using bc when they had sex, which most couples, esp. unmarried ones do, then he made a clear decision. He didnt want and had no reasonable expectation of a kid.

Both parents are treated equally by the legal system. We've also discussed this. If it's not applied that way, blame the mostly male family court judges.

There are 'no parents' if there's no kid.

Being able to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will: to make that equal, then the man should be subjected to the same consequences as the woman...not just the good one, like having the kid. Lose a kidney, lose his life, etc. It does sound stupid...that's what your idea of equality means...I cant help it if it's stupid but at least you recognize it. It's not a false equivalency. Biology creates the inequality here, not law, and since you keep going on and on about making it equal anyway, then that is exactly what it means.

Under alabama law both parents ate treated the same. Thats my point.

Woman has sex, she becomes pregnant, now she is leg1lly responsible for that lifes welfare.

Same as the father is.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk