You are a bit behind in medical advances if you think pregnancy can only be the result of intercourse.
“No state should be empowered to do so at the point of a gun, just as no state should be empowered to kidnap a person and drain off pints of their blood so that someone else can get a transfusion.” This point is equivocal. The action of forcing someone to give blood is in no way the same as forcing someone to retain a heartbeat.
That's untrue. The courts can only get child support from a man if they can locate where he works. Because we live in a patriarchal (and very sexist) society, other men are more than willing to pay a deadbeat dad in cash (under the table). Currently, two of my neighbors are deadbeat dads. They both are in their early 60s and did NOT pay a dime for any of the children they sired. The only reason the state is getting any money from them NOW ("kids in their 40s) is because they each became disabled and qualified for disability. One guy gets $30/month taken out (7 kids) and the other gets about $40 (3 kids). Single mothers are more likely to live in poverty than single fathers. Children of single mothers are more likely to qualify for free lunch programs in schools (a friend works in the cafeteria at a local elementary school. She worked throughout the whole lockdown last year although the schools were not open for classroom time). She and her peers had to do it because breakfast and lunch were the ONLY food most of those children had every day. The only people that think it's a good idea to bring an unwanted child in the world has never set foot in a orphanage, foster home, court room, juvenile detention or prison. It's impossible to see the REAL FACES of unwanted children and think forcing somebody without ANY INTEREST in caring for a baby to bring that baby into the world. I am not big on forced sterilization but I'd settle for that than this absolute BS of stockpiling unwanted kids in often deplorable and disgusting and abusive situations. Why don't any of you people care about the kid once he or she is born? That's rhetorical. I know you all don't give a damn after they are actually alive and need care.
Right. Pre 1973 It was left up to the states as per the direction of our constitution. Things went upside down when a few judges decided at what point human life was disposable. Definitely not part of their job description. The left is fearful because they know Roe vs Wade was a shoddy ruling.
That’s not true. I’m okay with those safety nets and any father who is not paying child care should be punished. If you know of two why haven’t you reported them?
No state should be impowered to regulate men? Is that what you're saying? If not, what are you trying to convey? If so, does that make sense to you? It makes sense to you that states DO regulate women but shouldn't regulate men? No.
Please don't edit my posts when quoting me. If you had not done that or bothered to read it, I already stated that the state IS taking money from their disability payments, so what is there for me to report? Secondly, don't make assumptions about me. If you have a question, ask it. You have no way of knowing who've I reported and for what so don't come at me like that. I would appreciate the same level of respect that I've given you. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Fake News. Article seems very gender fixed. Rather than "women", "birthing people" is the preferred term. After all it's not just "women" who can get pregnant, were that the case there would be no need for tampons in the men's non-birthing person's restroom. Your angry gender heavy labeling is emotional rape. Further it's fake news. Name a birthing person forced to give birth against xer will in the last year.
Please don't edit my posts, Joe knows. So your comment with that quote is meant to convey what exactly?
Please don't edit my posts, Joe knows. You are saying that it's OK for states to regulate women but it's NOT OK for them to regulate men?
FoxHastings said: ↑ BS Abortion was common prior...it wasn't invented in 1973 ...LOLOHGAWDLOLOL ] No, judges ruled that women have rights, too...I know how Anti-Choicers hate that...and no matter how "shoddy" RvW was it's lasted 50 years
Yes, forcing women to use their body to sustain the life of another is against the right of bodily autonomy. If women lose that right then men should, too....and then we'll all be forced to "donate" a body part to those richer and more powerful.. You seem to want a ZEF to have more rights than BORN people....
Democratic Judges always favored the rapists, will the left push this next? Controversial Bronx judge releases alleged rapist without bail
seems to be the religious right that supports them, look at the church scandal, where was the right defending the victims?
the reality is, if the religious right really want to reduce abortions, they need to tell their own to stop having them "Religious school grads likelier to have abortions" https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heal...l-grads-likelier-have-abortions-flna1C9437875
Are you suggesting that in future, Govts should legislate according to 'urges'? IOW, construct laws which protect the right to indulge urges? Just take five minutes to consider what that would look like. What kind of society that would be.
That's not surprising to me at all. I went to Catholic school and a Catholic university. The media lies to the public constantly. Like this, drug abuse among white suburban kids is kept on the down-low while non-white people are sent to prison for the same offenses.
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, I mean men passing laws that force women to gestate...and dancing in delight as women suffer... Oh wowy gosh, what a brilliant observation...!!!
