Texas towns make it illegal to use roads to travel out of state for an abortion.

Exactly.

From the party that claims to care about "babies" using their own language "before and after birth".
House Republicans’ Agriculture Appropriations Bill Would Cut WIC Benefits for 5 Million Participants, Put SNAP Benefits at Risk for 1 Million Older Adults

 

From the article:

The laws allow any private citizen to sue a person or organization they suspect of violating the ordinance.


It's the same system they used before to evade review, and to incentivize overzealous private individuals, including disgruntled men in the life, etc

 

It's not that many Republicans really care that much about the abortion issue. It's that they feel like they have to be this way on the abortion issue to ensure the Evangelical Christian vote they've relied on for decades. They feel like if they aren't this way on the abortion issue the Evangelical Christian vote stays home. Disregard the fact that Evangelical Christianity has been on the decline for awhile here in the U.S. along with all organized religion.

Not saying I like that or that I think that's a good thing but it's reality. I think the lack of religion causes loss of community and is a big reason why you are seeing skyrocketing rates of depression and other mental health issues. But even for those who are under 40 and religious (like myself), abortion isn't the issue it is for older religious Americans. As I've said many times, allow abortion in the first trimester (12 weeks/3 months) with abortion being illegal after that except for rape, incest and health of the mother. I think that would get support for most Americans including most religious Americans. Americans by and large don't want either extreme. They don't want abortion completely banned (like what many Republicans want) but they don't want abortion up until birth allowed either (like what many Democrats want).

Republicans should see that and be trying to expand the base, especially with Hispanics who will eventually be the biggest population in the U.S. Alas while I typically vote Republican that doesn't mean I don't think the Republicans establishment aren't idiots.

I personally don't agree with abortion except in extreme circumstances and think the solution is simple. Stop having one night stands with every man or woman you're attracted to. Be much more careful about who you have sex with and use protection. I don't think it's as hard as we make it and doing those three things would cause unwanted pregnancies to drop dramatically. But it also means people (both men and women) taking personal responsibilities and our current society believes in not taking responsibility for any of their actions.

I also think if you really want to see men really get on the pro-abortion side you allow an 8 week financial abortion. One of the arguments for abortion is that a woman might not be ready to be a mother and having a kid would harm/destroy their life as they know it. You can make the same argument for men. Condoms do break/fail and many of those times a man might not be ready to be a father and having a kid would harm/destroy their life as they know it. Yet women up until now have had the ability to decide they aren't ready to be a mother. Men have had no similar ability to decide they aren't ready to be a father.

I don't feel sorry for the guy who doesn't use a condom but both sides should be able to get out of it. There is a certain part of me that says if a man has to have their life ruined by an unexpected pregnancy after using protection that a woman should also have to suffer the same fate.

I know that might sound cold but it's really about equality. I would be on the front lines side by side with women fighting abortion bans if the men were also given protections. Heck if a Democrat offered protections for men and would fight for men half as much as they do for women when it comes to abortion/financial abortion rights I'd probably vote for that Democrat. As long as men aren't given protections though, while I disagree with full abortion bans, I'm not going to particularly fight it, I won't be on the front lines side by side with women and I will not vote for a Democrat. Best case for Democrats I end up voting third party but I don't vote for the Democrat.

It's always ironic when women mention things like sex strikes. I'm honestly surprised they haven't tried that with the abortion issue. Ironically though it's men who should probably be doing the sex strike. It's long since time that a broken condom doesn't ruin the life of the man or woman involved.

 

Among other things that won't fly, this part is never going anywhere:

"I also think if you really want to see men really get on the pro-abortion side you allow an 8 week financial abortion. One of the arguments for abortion is that a woman might not be ready to be a mother and having a kid would harm/destroy their life as they know it. You can make the same argument for men. Condoms do break/fail and many of those times a man might not be ready to be a father and having a kid would harm/destroy their life as they know it. Yet women up until now have had the ability to decide they aren't ready to be a mother. Men have had no similar ability to decide they aren't ready to be a father.

I don't feel sorry for the guy who doesn't use a condom but both sides should be able to get out of it. There is a certain part of me that says if a man has to have their life ruined by an unexpected pregnancy after using protection that a woman should also have to suffer the same fate."

If the man "opts out" and the woman decides to have the baby, who should be supporting that child, the sperm donor or the State? The man knows "going in" that a pregnancy might result with the woman opting to keep the baby.

 

That's why you give the man 8 weeks and the woman 12 weeks. So the woman can make the most informed decision possible. You aren't taking away their right to have the child or to have an abortion, that is still up to the woman. You are simply saying the man will opt out of paying for it.

Answer this question for me, why should a man have to have their life ruined by an unexpected pregnancy but a woman gets a choice? Again this isn't even about abortion, this is about the right to decide when you want to be a father or a mother.

Until that happens you will see most men stay on the sidelines, myself included, on the abortion issue. And until that happens you will continue to see the majority of men (maybe not a huge majority but still a decent majority, probably 60/40 or 65/35) continue to vote for Republicans who will continue to wage war against a woman's right to an abortion.

Does it not make more sense to give the man a relatively equal right an exchange for them being on your side and getting the woman's right to an abortion back in many areas where it is now essentially banned?

 

A woman also knows that consenting to sex can result in a pregnancy. So by that argument the woman should be forced to take the child to term since she knew the risk. So why is it the man has to take responsibility but the woman gets to take no responsibility?

You're literally making the point for men to be the ones who go on a sex strike.

 

There are no excuses for laws like these, just as there are no excuses for the extreme abortion positions taken on a rape victim, especially those who are young minor children. People thought Reagan was ultra conservative, but he would have frowned upon these sorts of activities by states and local governments. It’s extreme to punish the women for having an abortion after the fact, but now they’re doing it before the abortion takes place for simply leaving the state? If that is accurate, it’s crazy and we should push back on that no differently than we would infringement on 2nd amendment rights.

 

Maybe you should stop voting for the people that make this stuff possible.

 

No, you are. Your quote, "Stop having one night stands with every man or woman you're attracted to. Be much more careful about who you have sex with and use protection." No form of birth control is 100%. Unwanted pregnancies do happen.

I'm talking about supporting the child, not the mother. If the mother doesn't have the means to support the child and the father opts out under your scenario, what happens to the child? Taxpayers or child does without? Under Florida's child support guidelines, both parents have an obligation to support the child. Your proposal would NEVER see the light of day in a legislative session, frankly it is ridiculous.

Uhmm, maybe because it's the woman's body and her choice. You are off in bizzaro land someplace.

 

So you admit no form of birth control is 100% and that accidental pregnancies do happen but you’re okay with the double standard. Women until now could largely end the financial burden during the pregnancy by having an abortion. They have a get out of jail free card. Men have no way to get out of the financial burden.

Let’s use Tim as an example. Sorry Tim you used a condom and tried to have safe sex but accidentally got Lauren pregnant. Your life is over. Pay up.

Now say we have Courtney. Courtney you had sex with Jimmy who didn’t use a condom and got pregnant. No biggie, you get an abortion early, maybe even just take a pill and continue on with your life.

In no world is that remotely fair.

Thus isn’t even about abortion. It’s about equal rights. Women get to choose when they are ready to become mothers. Men should get to choose when they become fathers.

The only person in bizarro land is you. You can bet it would become law if all or even most men stopped having sex until it passed. You really think the government is going to risk a population collapse? How long do you think most women would be able to go without sex?

 

Biology isn't fair. If it was, men could get pregnant too. But a man can have sex on night, walk away never to be seen again, and never know the woman he had sex with is pregnant. The woman doesn't have this ability if she gets pregnant. Is that fair? If the guy walks away and she wants to abort, that financial burden is all on her. Is that fair?

 

The man's financial obligation is to the child, there will never be a law that allows the man to "opt out" of that responsibility as that will shift the financial burden from the responsible party (the sperm donor) to the taxpayers. If you don't think that's right/fair, don't have sex or get a vasectomy, wear a condom and pull out early.

I have no double standard...I want a child brought into this world to be supported by both responsible parties, the parents.

So go on and get your friends to refuse sex until your ludicrous law gets passed. See how well that works out.

 

So men are the real victims in all this?

 

It's kind of melodramatic to declare a man's life is "over," because of an unplanned pregnancy. Sure, the child support payments will be a new item on the budget, but courts determine amount based on income. It's not like he has to marry the woman, or take a child into his home. Who knows, maybe he would even love and welcome the child after the shock wore off.

Regarding your protest of unfairness, when men suffer the pain, restrictions, and possibility of death from pregnancy, we'll talk about fairness.

 

They are if the baseline premise is that women are chattel.

 

what about the pain, suffering and certain death of the fetus? You make no mention of that.

 

Oh look, our friend is back after being banned a million times.