a very perceptive conservative suggested this if abortion were banned, I thought it was very interesting.
2006-09-27 09:16:43 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Why should they go to jail if they have a baby out of wedlock but woman who have abortion after abortion be free. They can ban abortion [which abortion is wrong] but there will always be someone still doing it in dark alleys or in private homes. A woman who has an abortion should go to jail. So if a woman has a baby out of wedlock and goes to jail where does the baby go. If that were to happen the jails would be full. I have six kids 4 out of wedlock. I am really breaking this law. But I take care of my kids without the man, and without welfare. You can't help it if the man don't want to be a man and take care of his kids. But you as the woman do everything you can to raise them right. If a men had to have the babies they would think twice before opening there mouths. Or their legs. I love all six of my kids. and they are a blessing to me. If I went to jail for this it would be worth having 12 more to get a point across. without moms there woukd be no men to make up stupid laws.
2006-09-27 09:42:26 · answer #1 · answered by justdoinmyjob 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who is the "very perceptive conservative"?
And why should the woman go to jail?
Oh, wait...I get it...the fundamentalist Christians believe that all pregnant, unwed women underwent Immaculate Conception.
Am I right?
Look - whomever bozo made that lame statement is probably someone who believes that women should be married, barefoot, pregnant and work ONLY at home.
The reality is that it takes TWO to get pregnant.
Why in the hell aren't more "perceptive conservative's" DEMANDING that the sperm donor be thrown into the poky for not helping out el preggo Chiquita?
Here's what I also find interesting:
Latest statistics here in the blood-red conservative state of Oklahoma (just check out or elected officials, from the federal to the state level), of the 55% of births covered by Medicaid, 35% were by unwed mothers.
This, in a state that prides itself in far right, Christian fundamentalism, neo-conservative ideology.
What's up with that?
We've got a ton of POOR people popping out babies at taxpayer’s expenses.
AND a third are from the unwed set.
Go figure!
Our prisons are ALREADY overcrowded.
So now you think it might be "very interesting" to pack the jails with preggo babes who don't or won’t confess who the daddy is?
Here's my suggestion for pregnant, unwed babes:
Part One
If the mom-to-be is (a) an adult and (b) financially able to support a baby (assuming she wants to keep it), fine.
Leave her alone.
Part Two
If the mom-to-be is (a) an adult and (b) is unable to support the baby and (c) it is her first child, offer medical, nutritional and educational support for that child until that kid is school-age.
And offer Norplant to keep her from getting preggo again, with the added mention that future births will NOT receive support from the state.
Part Three
If the mom-to-be is (a) under age, she has three choices and one mandate:
1. abortion.
2. adoption.
3. confess the name of the sperm donor and make him pay for half the child support until said child turns 18.
And she would have mandatory birth control (i.e., Norplant or something similar) until she turns 18.
2006-09-27 09:40:06 · answer #2 · answered by docscholl 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Where do you get this.
First 90% of the population of the earth is living in mud huts, eating United Nations rice. Not only do they not know what wedlock is they don't live long enough to find out.
If you so up set over babies maybe you should set an example and go to the Vet and get spayed.
Stop condemning everyone South of the Ivory Tower.
2006-09-27 09:41:10 · answer #3 · answered by Skull&Bones 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Of course not and pointing fingers at conservatives is very shallow minded on your part. Let's have the name of this conservative. BTW shouldn't killing unborn babies through abortions be a federal offense?
2006-09-27 09:30:49 · answer #4 · answered by Yankee Dude 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What would be the point of that? The person that suggested that was an idiot, not a conservative. Killing a baby is a crime, being an idiot is not.
2006-09-27 09:27:38 · answer #5 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. Being immoral in ways and making some poor choices in life isnt and shouldnt be against the law; unless we dont want freedom anymore.
2006-09-27 10:02:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Should men go to jail if they have a baby out of wedlock? Yes!!!
2006-09-27 09:21:55 · answer #7 · answered by shoot.bang 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. But if she and the father cannot afford to take care of the child, I know many fine people who would love to adopt the baby.
2006-09-27 09:42:25 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
One small step for conservatives, one giant leap towards theocracy.
Haven't we had enough with the government regulating ever aspect of private life? Are we really at the point where the government gets to decide not only if we marry, but when and whether we can have children?
2006-09-27 09:19:01 · answer #9 · answered by coragryph 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Come on. Adortion in never going to be out lawed in all 50 states.
2006-09-27 09:28:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋