Strict Abortion Measures Enacted in Oklahoma
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/us...er=rss&emc=rss

Republican majorities in both houses, no surprise there. What do you expect from Oklahoma, isn't that where Sam Walton was from? :lol:

Funny I don't hear him complaining about people who decide not to have kids. After all they might have become "future leaders" as well :scratch:

I think he was from Arkansas.

I don't think this law goes far enough, they should also force those women to get a face tattoo that says, "I'm a baby murderer." Or maybe they should give them the abortion and then just put the mother to death too.

They might grow up to be serial killers too.

:lol: I was thinking, "Great, just what we need, more fucking cops."

Yep, Walton was from Arkansas.

Solid plan.

Or lawyers, or politicians, or terrorists..... lol the what-ifs are always the best parts of these discussions.

Key Message: Oklahoma Republicans want to intefere in the doctor patient relationship. They would support a doctor withholding significant medical information from you and provide protection (and therefore incentive) for a doctor to withold information from youin specific cases that will have a tremedous financial and emotional impact.

They are mandating extra services that are not medically nesessary. They are violating basic universally accepted notions of privacy.

Stupid people, stupid laws (with more stupid bills in the queue). I'm fine with them flexing their state rights but a sure sign of how fucked up a state is can be found in the laws that they fight so hard to put in the books. Every state has shit on the books, but there is a difference between unenforced crap from 100 years ago that everyone forgot about and modern day state laws\bills that seek to limit constitutional rights and priviledges afforded to all Americans.

These are probably the same assholes that fought a single payer system under the BS banner of "Keep the government out of health care".

Im gonna have to disagree on both.

I think post partum abortions should be allowed. I think we could start with left lane hogs.

lets just start aborting the parents since they are the problem

One of my pledge bros grew up in the same town and is good friends with some of the younger family members.

I've long been an advocate of retroactive abortions, for those teenagers who prove they don't deserve to live.

How appalling. Regardless of personal feelings on abortion, I can't believe they are pulling shit like this. What happened to having a choice? And making rape and incest victims subject to the same stuff? Horrid.

We are going to abort you for your lack of agreement.

Walton's pigs don't count as family members.

It's called lack of empathy and I used to see it all the time, when I was a teenager, and would walk past The Morgentaler Clinic in Toronto. There were always lots of protesters around, most of whom were middle-aged men and older women.

Its ironic that the folks that are the least educated or have never had to seriously consider something like this are often the ones screaming the loudest. Same kinda folks who picket the soldiers funerals.

/offtopic

Not to sound antagonistic...but...wouldn't the freedom to "choose" also apply before or during the act that leads to an unwanted pregnancy? (Excluding cases of rape and incest, obviously.)

Seriously...why is it only a "choice" once pregnant? Wouldn't it make more sense to make that choice PRIOR to the act that leads to pregnancy?

This argument always makes me think about standing around arguing about the cows getting out instead of just closing the gate. *shrug*

/ontopic

Having said that, I don't understand the purpose of this law. It seems like a fairly heavy handed attempt by the Southern Baptist style bible thumpers in OK to brow beat vulnerable girls. *shrug*

In regards to your off topic part- you're right, they should take measures and being stupid is no reason to have an abortion. Using Plan B or abortion is not birth control, its ridiculous and irresponsible.

But being stupid and getting pregnant at 12 or 13? Should they be forced to have a child that could pose a danger (childbirth) to them because they are themselves children?

Or what about birth control failure?

There are reasons someone could need an abortion that dont fall under their own stupidity.

Im surprised its Oklahoma thats doing it tho, I cant recall them being hard edged like this growing up in and around the area.

Its not about choice, its about privacy.

That and federal regulation of the female reproductive system.

< onofftopic >

Yes, that would make perfect sense. They call that "abstinence" and it is supported by much the same people who support measures like the one outlined in the story. It also works quite well, at least when people actually are abstinent, which it seems is not as often as its proponents would like. In fact it seems to be even less the case in their own back yards.

< offofftopic >

This... or, rather, these... :dthumb:
I am pro-choice (or as I call it, pro-death) but I don't believe that choice should be made lightly or used as an alternative to responsibility. It's not a bad thing for a young woman to understand the choice she's making and that it isn't just a reset button. However, I don't like the idea of re-traumatizing a rape or incest victim either.
Unless they require a patient to disclose if it is a rape or incest case, I guess there's no way to differentiate and therefore they either have to subject everyone or no one. :idk:

I'm not just pro-choice, I'm pro-abortion. I think every woman who thinks about having an abortion while pregnant should go get one immediately.

Fewer people in the world FTW.

Pro-choice here too. The only limits I agree with as far as choosing is how far along in the pregnancy it should be allowed.

Abstinence is the ONLY choice available to prevent an unwanted pregnancy?

Really?

That is certainly an interesting view point...one not based in reality...but interesting.

RIF. Please reread my post.

Um, you can only have an abortion once you ARE pregnant. :nee: Though, if you knew how many times I wanted to get an abortion after walking through a picket line to get to my doctor's office for a regular annual appointment...

This. I'm right there with you.

I'm walking away from this thread...

Agreed....the only point I was trying to make was that there are A LOT of opportunities to make choices PRIOR to pregnancy too.

Who gives a flying fuck why the woman got pregnant, whether it was her fault or not? It does not benefit society to have unwanted babies that will in turn produce more unwanted babies.

And when it fails? And you just don't want the kid? Step up and be "responsible" and give some kid a terrible childhood because you didn't want them?

Yes. this. this a thousand times over THIS!

I still think we need an abortion option for men. It's a woman's body and she gets the choice, that's all fine and dandy. If you want to keep it and the man doesn't, it's your body, so you get to raise it and keep it yourself without any financial or any other responsibility from the man.

Choice for everyone!

100% AGREED !!!! I've always thought this. Why should the guy have to just stand on the sideline and wait for her to make the decision ? Before you jump in and say "but it's her body"...then fine...if you want it and he doesn't...then YOU pay. Funny how people like to throw out "well it takes two to tango"...but funny how "two don't have say so in the matter".

I mean looking from the other side what if the guy wants the baby and she doesn't...feck him...no choice BUT if she decides to...boy you gots to pay !! I've always thought this was BS.

100% truth. Women are given so much slack in this country it's ridiculous. "Oh we must protect women and their feelings!!! They are the fairer sex, so whatever they ask for should be granted" :bs:

I sincerely hope you are being funny. If so, you fail, but surely you arent suggesting that women havent had to fight tooth and nail to even be CONSIDERED possibly an equal to man. And in still arent.

Come back and make that argument when women are getting equal pay for the same jobs, the opportunity for certain jobs and much more in the way of equal rights. You should have been born in the 1800's with that retarded viewpoint, at least hen you're woman wouldnt talk back and couldnt vote you off the island.

How ridiculous.

You can't honestly think that abortion isn't a one sided opinion. Either it's your body or it's a two person decision. Make up ya'll fucking minds.

The act of sex is a consent form stating that you agree to be held responsible for the product. If you sign the dotted line (spooge being the ink and the dotted line being located up her whoo-ha), you agree.

The State feels that it is in everyone's best interest to hold both parents accountable when it comes to caring for a minor. Traditionally it is assumed that the women is best suited as primary caregiver. If you want to eliminate favoritism towards woemn in family court. Start proving that men are equal at raiing young-ins (which they are).

I can't wait until the last bastion of pay BS dissapears in this country because 99% of the time I hear some women complaining about pay bullshit, it is totally unsupported nonsense spouted only because they "heard about it". I understand that historically it occured and in certain regions\professions sexist bs sprouts up but in the vast majority testimony I have heard it has been total bs.

It's a one sided contract that she can opt out of signing. It's completely retarded. I like tigger's approach to be honest, but I understand not everyone wants to snip their nuts.

It may be a contract, but it's an unequal one when it comes to real responsibility and risk. The person who takes the most risk and bears the brunt of the responsibility is the one with the biggest say. That's how it is. That's how it should be.

If she decides to see it through term, she takes on that responsibility on her own. Birth control and Plan B are both low risk options and abortion isn't anywhere near the risk of a pregnancy. That doesn't hold water.

Birth control doesn't always work and no medication is without risk, especially when it involves hormones that may lead to other health issues.

That's why I said low risk, it's not high risk as millions of women do it without any issue. Yes, a small part do have issue, but that is few and far between. Pregnancy is a much much much higher risk than any of these. If she wants to shoulder that risk, let it be on her own head.

Then the man gives up the "right" to cry about not wanting his "child" aborted. There has to be give and take with the woman maintaining the greatest amount of control, as her life is the one most likely to suffer.

I wasnt talking about whether its only the womans choice dork, I was talking about Homie's ignorant post.

As far as risks for taking brith control go, why dont you get on it and see what it does to YOUR Body before preaching that a woman needs to put a foreign chemical in her body so that you dont have to worry about getting her pregnant.

Why dont you risk all forms of cancer, weight gain, heart disease, hormonal imbalances and a 100 other side effects of borth control before deciding what a woman shoud and shouldnt do.

Well said, sir. Well said.

In order to be "fair",
Two people enter a contract (also known as fucking)
One party wishes to disolve the contract.
If the women wishs to disolve the contract, she has two options.
One is to disolve the contract immediately (abortion) - All parties free and clear. The other is to fulfill a portion of the contract (deliver product and sign copyright over to another party aka adoption) Man is off free and clear, women puts in considerable resources.

Both cases, all parties are free and clear if the women is to disolve the contract.

If the man wants to opt out, what are the ramifications.
Women left having to hold up her end of the contract even though the man decided to walk.

Is that fair?

A women is forced top honor her end of the bargain, meanwhile the man could walk away and pretend it different happen if it were not for the government.

Geez...are all women this whiney?
I can definitely understand the gay thing.
No risk of pregancy
no fucking whining.

I agree, if the man wants the right to say "I want nothing to do with this baby", he has to give up any idea that he has a say in abortion at all. He will have to fully recognize that it's a woman's body, but in doing so a woman will lose the right to forcibly include the man as a participant (financial donor) in a baby that could of been destroyed.

I take all sorts of medicines that have side effects and wreck havoc on what I can or can't do and could cause all sorts of sideeffects. That's part of life.

I have already stated I support the Tigger snip the balls option for men. It's the responsibility of both parties to attempt to stop a pregnancy if they are both not committed to having a child. If it's one sided option, then it's not fair to the other party. I understand accidents happen, but there are acceptable options for woman to control it after the fact. If she doesn't want to control it and he wants no part of it, tough shit.

Society, as a whole, has an interest in that sort of thing. That's why we have laws that force the man to support a child that he has sired. I have no children and I can tell you for damned sure that I don't want to be paying for what you created, because the mother is on welfare and you're a deadbeat.

You see more than just two people are involved, no matter how things started.

How is mine the only "ignorant" post, when I was simply agreeing with what a couple other people said?

The whole point was, if society says that men can't have a choice in whether a women has the baby, then they shouldn't be forced to pay for one either.

And as far as your statement about equal pay for equal work.......Yes, I know there have been tons of studies confirming that there's a pay gap between men and women, but that doesn't prove there's a conspiracy to hold women down. In my experience, men are simply more aggressive about their careers than women are, especially when it comes to asking for promotions and raises.

I understand the practicallity in this society is impossible. However, it's my opinion on the matter. I don't agree with welfare either. I think it should be voluntary, like charity.

All the more reason to make sure that a man pays his part for the child that he created. I also don't want to have to step over dead women and children to get into the supermarket.

Yep...again.

I do, babies are exceptionally soft. Dead baby shoes would rock.

Paul, great first post, Im just going to ignore the second one.

Trip, I think you are just arguing to hear yourself arguing.

Paul summed it up perfectly in his post about the responsibilities involved. If a woman makes the choice and the guy disagrees then decides to walk, whats fair about that? If a woman is 100% sure she doesnt want to do it and pretty sure the guy is gonna walk later anyway, why should she have to suffer so he can change his mind later.

Nobody can have it both ways. Guys dont want to worry about a woman making the choice for them? 1)Dont fuck everything with breasts. 2)Get snipped 3)Abstinence

My response was aimed at your attitiude that women obviously shouldnt have rights. Thats all.

What exactly are we given that has anything to do with our fairer sex. History shows that the "fairer sex" has had to fight to get what we have today, we werent "given" anything.

I brought up the pay and equality in response to your statement as a general example of how obviously women do not get whatever they want because we're women.

Really.........Please point out where I said anything like that.

Funny, aren't you the one who accused Smittie of putting words in your mouth last week?

Well first of all....obviously these women are fecking too or they wouldn't be getting pregnant...so it's not just the men.

I still feel it's just not fair/right that the guy has NO say so...he just has to stand on the sideline until the woman makes the choice. Like I said earlier...what if he does want the baby and she doesn't...he's heartbroken and she can just say too bad so sad I'm aborting...BUT if she wants the baby and he doesn't...he is forced in to it and has to write a check every month for 18 years...I still say that's BS. Give the baby to the guy and you write the check every month for 18 years.

Oh and by the way I've been snipped...wasn't falling in to this chit.

Why cause I don't agree with your opinion? No, actually I have a strong opinion on the matter.

If she wants the baby and the guy wants nothing to do with it, she gets to shoulder the responsibility. If she can't shoulder it, get rid of the baby. It's not that hard.

It's better than if the guy wants the baby and she doesn't, tough shit; and if she wants the baby and the guy doesnt, tough shit. Guys suddenly get a say in the process and suddenly it's unfair...

He wouldn't be able to change his mind later, if he abandoned the child, that's it he's out of the picture. He has no parental rights or connection to the child. If you are going to set up child support payments, it's a load easier to sign a paper in court to say you waive parental responsibility.

BTW, women are just as much of whores as guys and can also get their tubes tied or burn up their vag or not fuck.

One issue regarding pay equity is frequently glossed over in surveys and studies; pregnancy. When a woman takes maternal leave, she essentially puts her career development on hold. She's still technically employed by the company, in whatever capacity, but isn't rising through the ranks. While she may have been with the company for 10 years, two+ of those may well have been effectively eliminated by maternal leave. This impacts income, when compared to a man in the same job and with the same perceived seniority.

With the advent of "parental leave" this may change, but it's going to take decades more before anything like parity is possible.

Yea...so...it's kind of like the guy not having any choice about abortion...just doesn't seem right does it ? :lol:

If she doesn't want this to happen...practice abstinence or have her tubes tied or don't feck everything with a fertile d!ck...isn't that how Chi put it to the guys ? :rofl:

plus billion :lol:

I think my option brings the abortion debate to everyone. Some women would never consider abortion, but want the option there. If unwilling partners were allowed to abandon the women who want to be able to trap their partners instead of using abortions, the issue would hit much closer to home for a lot of women.

Fuck. I had a good post all typed out and it disappeared.


Nice try Homie. :lol:

Trip - FYI- You find a doc that will allow a woman to permanently remove her ability to bear children before she has them and even when it could cause harm to her to bear a child and I'll pay you $20. Not gonna happen. Dr's refuse to allow a woman of childbearing age to get "snipped" burned or remove our guts in the event that we might change our minds. Ask me how I know.

You guys want to bitch about having a choice in the matter? You do. Read my previous post or put a condom on. Want to make double sure, use a spermicide cream AND a condom.

Its your job just as much as a womans to make sure she doesnt get pregnant. I never said it wasnt and I never said it was only the guys responsibilty. You guys are just the ones bitching about a female getting knocked up like its all her fault.

That should be changed if that's the case. Women should be allowed to get snipped.

You keep repeating the same tired argument, one I have already agreed to. We both have options preconception, that's understandable, completely.... It does not have to be reiterated anymore. This would give both parties equal footing post conception.

Abortions would have to be a reasonable option and easily available for this to work though. Women who like to trap their men, would no longer find this easy. Men could easily walk and abortion would have to be an easy choice so those women could get rid of it and attempt to trap their prey another way.

I knew I shouldn't have re-entered this thread :lol:

The ONLY way for either party to be considered not part of the decision is to have a contract prior to fucking in the first place. Don't put your dick in the hole and you won't be any part of the equation. That is the ONLY way to be 100% sure. OK, so if you have it snipped there is a .00000002% chance. It's still a chance.

For women it's a bigger decision than to raise a child. There are mental and physical ramifications that should be considered.

You're right. Sadly there is no RIGHT way to do any of this.

As far as the whole getting a woman snipped, its pretty much impossible. Women dont have the right to make that decision for themselves, otherwise I'd have done it as soon as I became a legal adult.

"They" say they dont do the procedures because a woman could change their mind and that when a woman reaches 25 they will consider it, but Dr's still refuse to do it until a woman is well beyond her child bearing years, making it often redundant. If you already have a child or 2, they will do it because you've had your children annd apparently its not until you have one that you know you dont want any. Or anymore.

I've purposefully not read some of the responses just to keep my sanity. :lol

There are mental ramifications to men, we have emotions and our experiences effect us contrary to popular stereotype.

This is all a power game, it's that simple. No one actually wants it to be "fair."

It's the same reason abortion isn't really a viable solution, but this debate would need to be shifted to the war room for me to continue.

No, I understand that.

But, you have ZERO physical ramifications. That is why it's skewed.

Why is it never don't put your hole near a dick? You are just continuing the sexual inequality when you always refer to it in such a manner.

If chics didn't want to have to deal with different physical ramifications then they should've been born with dicks.

You're not exactly correct Trip. The mental and physical ramifications on a woman on choosing whether or not to have a child a FAR MORE than they are for a man. This isnt something you can even argue as you pretty just wont ever know.

I was wondering why someone would make a post about abortion and NOT put it in the War Room.

:lol:

So what kind of risk would you give abortion? Is it only an option when life is at risk or is it an option whenever you just decide pregnancy just doesn't fit you? Either it is a viable solution with minimal risk or it is a destructive practice....

And thats the crux of it right there. You have summed almost the whole argument in that very last sentence.

The problem isnt when its used as a viable solution, its when its used SOLEY as a destructive practice that is the real issue with abortion. Sadly, too many use is only as the latter.

Even when viable however it is still a horrible decision to have to make and the repercussions are long ranging.

There are no physical ramifications, but a man will have to deal with a lot of mental ramifications of refusing to be part of a childs life. However, you have now just put weight on ending a child's life instead of just birth control. Abortion is either viable option of birth control or it's something more.

I'll give you that one. Really. It is possible for women to rape men. Highly unlikely, and quite improbable. But, possible.

The destructive process is something that would be considered by a pro lifer, not a pro choice person. I can't go into that debate here. It's a viable solution of birth control to a pro choicer.

Very possible and there are many court cases to prove it.

There is a physical risk to even carry a child to term... you understand that, right? So even if a woman decides to have the child and raise the child alone - she's still physically changed forever. So, the option for a man to decide he wants the child after birth but the mother does not - her body is changed [at the very least], and childbirth could kill her.

The decision process IS skewed. I didn't say it was fair, or that it should or should not be a certain way. All I know is my own personal experience - both through an abortion and raising children. *shrug* YMMV

Where did I say anything about the reason for the abortion? I didnt. I simply stated it can be a viable option, I didnt give reasons as to what that might be, as that would depend on the individual. What you see as a bad reason may not seem like one to me.

As far as the mental, Im not denying a man wont have mental ramifications, I am simply stating they will (typically unless she's a callous whore who uses it as birth control) be NOWHERE near what a woman will go through.

One thing is for sure..
This thread gave me a hard on.

I agree, that's why I went this way. The man doesn't have a choice if the baby is kept or not, because "it's the mother's body." His choice is if he wants to be involved or not if she decides to keep it. "It's her body."

Why does she have to be a callous whore to use it as birth control? You don't have to be a callous whore for it to be a viable option. This is where that train of thought turns to that which belongs in the war room. It isn't a viable option if you feel that way.



This should be more accepted by women, this would reveal if the person you fucked is a douche or not. Do you really want to have a child or be with a man that will run from a pregnancy? Do you really think the relationship will be a good one?

Think of all the needless marriages that end in ugliness that would be saved by allowing the man to run and make your decision to terminate the pregnancy easier and spare all the pain that comes with all these fucked up situations.

A lot of women complain about all these dicks they have relationships and children with, well guess what, here is an opportunity to spare that.

But then what would they bitch about at the hair salon?

Not in the US. They only get 6 weeks mat leave.

that varies by state - there are leaves that extend beyond the 6 (or 8 for a c-section) for "bonding" in some states that are paid. CA and NJ are big ones and many companies have some form of Parental Leave that is paid.

I call bullshit on that. I don't see how it would be at all possible for a woman to rape a man into orgasm if he was truly unwilling to have sex with her.

Nice try on what? :idk: I never advocated any limits on women's rights.

I was only making a statement about how women are allowed to "get away" with many things just because they're the fairer sex. For example, Zsa Zsa Gabor slaps a police officer and doesn't get shit.....What would happen if a man did that? Or, a woman launches a tirade against their boss or against a customer, but isn't fired. What would happen to a man who did that? "Well she's a woman, and women are emotional" is the usual excuse......I've seen it all the time.

Or all the new drunk driving and sexual predator laws, where a woman who lost a child petitions to get a new law passed, and everyone votes yes, not necessarily because they think the law's great, but because they're afraid of the backlash from society (or their voters) if they argue against a grieving woman.

Or how courts are more likely to award custody to mothers...........Things might have changed, but it still seems like that's true.

You don't have to make a man orgasm for it to be rape.

It does happen

Very well said.

The "callous whore" statement places such judgment and disdain on everything and really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Not only that but the whole "what a woman goes through" argument or point of view, is not necessarily supported by actual experiences. Everyone assumes that women are basically traumatized by an abortion. It's just not like that for everyone, and there's been a lot of research to show that it's a myth. Sure some might go through it, but for most it was a well thought out choice that was the right decision for them and they have absolutely no regrets about that. And it doesn't make them a callous whore.

I'm calling double bullshit on you guys and triple bullshit if you count Zoomie.

An erect penis doesn't just happen by accident, and it certainly doesn't happen when a man doesn't want it to. Teenage boy? Sure....but not a man who's been properly introduced to the ways of the female.

The only way to rape a man is through his back door...I need some kind of proof otherwise cause I ain't buyin.

4 people raped and murderer a young couple in knoxville. One of the murderers was a girl. She was able to get him in her. They had already Raped him with a broom in the butt and all sorts of other shit. Its possible.

The rape I was referring to would result in a pregnancy, making it relevant to an abortion discussion. Last time I checked, sperm is required for that soup.

yeah that would be hard to do, never heard of such a thing

only thing I have ever heard of that would be close, it's probably urban legend, is a girl getting the stuff out of a condom after its been used.

Sure, you can "get" a flacid penis into a very lubricated coochiecoo...maybe. But you can't force an erection and you can't force a pregnancy.

Exactly.

Bad examples. They didnt get away with that because they are women, they got away with it because they are celebrities.

As far as the women going on tirades, where is a good example? Any person I know who has acted unprofessionally like that was fired, regardless off sex.

As far as the other items, thats politics, and has nothing to do with sex. It could be a grieving father or mother that "assists" a politician in allowing a law to get passed. I cant recall specific cases and while the females do typically outweigh the males on that matter, I can think of a couple of cases where a grieving father was the one who got laws passed. Not because of sex but because of whatever crime was committed.

Definitions of callous on the Web:

emotionally hardened; "a callous indifference to suffering"; "cold-blooded and indurate to public opinion"
make insensitive or callous; deaden feelings or morals

callously - in a callous way; "he callously exploited their feelings"

callosity - unfeelingness: devoid of passion or feeling; hardheartedness

callousness - The quality of being callous; emotional hardheartedness or indifference

Why would you find that judging? Was it aimed at you? Does it strike some cord within you makes you think it was? Try not taking things personally. Nowhere did it say "I think Kel or someone she knows is a callous whore".

Your argument is invalid btw. If even one person is scarred or emotionally damaged from an abortion, its not a myth.

Now boys and girls, lets see it used in a sentence. Or several.

If someone doesnt at least feel something after having an abortion I would definitely call them callous. Whether they are scarred or not depends on the person, but having to end a life, whether its because of a flaw in mother or baby, it being life threatening to the mother or simply because its not something the parents can do, it is still a very hard and serious decision and if someone doesnt give that thought or think about it in the years to come, I would stand by by statement that they are callous. No matter how you look at it, its still the taking of a life whether its necessary or not.

As far as the callous whore statement, if you read what I was stating, it refers to those women are stupid as we already discussed. The ones who go out, make bad decisions, sleep with a guy, get pregnant and have an abortion because its the easier way of dealing with it because they were too stupid, lazy and yes CALLOUS to use protection which would have negated the need to abort in the first place.

I grew up with girls whose only method of BC was going to the abortion doctor and getting rid of an unwanted pregnancy when they could have avoided it. Public health clinics, free condoms, ANYTHING would have at least made steps toward preventing. In other words, they "callously" disregarded the fetuses life (whether the fetus has a right to life is a whole different argument) and they often disregard the feelings of those involved, often the father of the fetus as Trip loves to argue.

I know women today who have had them done for their necessary reasons.

(No persons reason will be exactly the same and what one person feels is necessary may not be something you agree with, but its not your decision on what is reasonable for another person, and trying to judge another or make that decision for them like these laws are trying to do is not yours or the govts right.)

The stupid irresponsible girls and women who used it as birth control never gave a thought to anything other than themselves, which lends weight to Trips argument about the guys not having a choice. The women who had to make the decision for something other than stupidity and selfishness never forget what they had to do or how it made them feel i.e. it was not made "callously".

I mistook it for a man couldn't get raped, yeah it would be really hard to rape and man and get yourself pregnant. You would need a lot of time and help.

These are the same girls it would impact by allowing the douches to run off. Honestly, we don't need more welfare babies, letting the douchebags run off and leaving the girls responsible would hopefully result in more abortions of more potentially worthless individuals.