-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Victim of a marital rape in Arkansas? Your rapist can now sue you if you try to abort
- Thread starter stilgar
- Start date
- Status
No. That's not how it should work. The law should at no point get involved in what should be a private personal decision. If a woman does not want to look after a child but the father wants to, they can come to an agreement. If she does not agree to carry the child to term, that's her choice. Anything else is literally forcing a woman to carry a child to term by the justification that once a man manages to get his sperm into an egg, he has some right over a woman's body. Nope.
psychowave
Member
Are you talking about surrogate mothers? Because those freely decide to have a child, are actually informed of the consequences, and they get something out of it. Very different from an actual unwanted pregnancy.
It's not just getting fat and hormones, that's an incredibly shallow and ignorant view of pregnancy. For 9 months, you can't eat whatever you like, you can't move freely, your body changes completely. If it's a risk pregnancy you better be ready to do nothing but lie down in bed for 9 months straight, and that's not even counting the excruciating pain that comes with giving birth. And pray that you don't need to get a C-section because the post operative care is hell on earth. Oh, and get ready to not be able to piss and shit correctly for weeks after the fact. Don't like having your vagina torn and sewn shut? Too bad, that's often a necessity when giving birth. And that's not counting the fact that you might bleed like hell after giving birth, blood clots included (you thought you wouldn't get your period for a few months? Think again!). There's also the risk of postnatal depression, and even PTSD for women who get C-sections.
Women shouldn't have to be forced to go through all that just because a man wants his kid.
Women die during childbirth. America doesn't even have first world maternal survival rates. Taking the chance on a wanted pregnancy is one thing, I know because I've done it and no, my body has never been the same since. Telling a woman to risk death because YOU want a baby is the height of selfishness.
everyday math
Banned
👏👏
I'm just gonna save this and use your quote whenever something like this appears again. Cool?
Im not saying the law should forbid the woman from aborting if the father wants the child. Im saying the father is going through suffering because of the woman's decision, and should be able to file a lawsuit.
The man wont have any right over the woman's body for sure, but that living being inside that woman is his too.
Every single free decision that a person makes that damages others (moral damage well being can be sued, I dont see why this should be any different.
It's absolutely necessary so there is no blurred lines here, no defense for rape victims. The author of this bill is a special kind of scumbag that literally cares nothing about the mental health, safety, and concern for women in such terrible situations as they do the unplanned and undesired fetus.
Okay.
Nops. The final say need be always the women.
Why?
Because you saying someone can leech the body of other people just because you want that leech after it had its food for 9 months. And every pregnancy carries its risks to the mother. You are just saying... nah. I don't care about her health, what I want is more important than that.
openrob
Member
Not sure where I stand on this, and completely understand your point, however the argument is that you 100% deny the child's life.
everyday math
Banned
You're contradicting yourself. The baby relies on the mother for 9 months. If you file a lawsuit stating she needs to carry that child, because the father wants it. You take away the woman's right she has to her own body.
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
Sane people leave, true believers stay, Republican hold gets stronger, Democrat/Independent power shrinks.
Skellig Gra
Member
It's more than that too. Pain, unwanted medical procedures, likely loss of income/advancement at work, etc
Not trying to sound condescending, but I feel like you don't really fully understand the risks of pregnancy or the removal of bodily autonomy.
You are acting on the belief that its simply "because a man wants hid kid". I honestly believe theres a actual life, and its happy future being saved.
Like I said before, if its a risk pregnancy, its not worth it putting the woman in risk. Im just giving weight to suffering, and in my opinion, a normal pregnancy is less suffering in this specific case.
SerTapTap
Member
This is why people talking about Calexit/etc are idiots at best, assholes at worst. Leaving and letting these people run the place helps no one but the worst of them.
everyday math
Banned
So you really aren't pro-choice then. Also did you even read that post? At all...
The argument that the FETUS has the same rights as a child doesn't works. If we say the fetus has the same rights... it has the same responsibilities too. It doesn't have the right to inflict its desires/needs on other people without the other person consent.
Edit: Following that logic: You are 100% denying the life to every person that would need a transplant because you are not donating your organs to people that need it even if you could live without these organs. And we know that such logic is bullshit.
Go look up what pregnancy does to a woman's internal organs. Every pregnancy is suffering.
psychowave
Member
Haha, I'd be honored. It's baffling how ignorant people are about pregnancy. I lived for some time with a family member who was pregnant and she hated every single second of it, even though the kid was 100% wanted and it wasn't even a risk pregnancy. That's when I realized I never, ever wanted a woman to go through that unless she was 100% sure she wanted to be a mother.
Pregnancy isn't just getting fat and being moody and craving cake. It's fucking torture even if you want the kid. I can't even begin to imagine having to go through it without wanting to.
Did you, like, read my post? Your opinion is factually untrue. It seems like you got all your knowledge of pregnancy from romcoms. A "normal" pregnancy isn't less suffering than wanting a kid and not being able to have it. Too bad.
TenCentCoast
Banned
Yeah, I'm getting out of this state as soon as I can after college. Jesus.
Yeah, I think you are right there. Im not saying im not selfish, I am. I really believe the babys life is more important.
Its a tad bit different, it would be a lawsuit for damages because of the suffering I would've been put through losing my child.
Im not particularly savy with the law in the us, but here where I live, we have a principle of "danger situation". You can break someones' rights if you are trying to protect yours. However, if the right you broke is more important than the one you were trying to protect. (say, killing a man because he was scratching your car, killing life over property), you can be sued for damages.
I had to lay in bed for 4 months because of an appendicitis that blew up inside of me, I felt excruciating pain and had my heart stop through surgery, couldnt walk for a couple months, couldnt eat decent for a year. I stil feel great pains to just poo and have internal intestine bleedings frequently.
I know what suffering is. If I had to go through all that again to save a baby with a happy future life, I would. I believe life to be the most amazing gift in the universe, and I want to protect it.
Agreed, but like I said, you are acting on the belief its simply just the father being upset here. You are free to believe the baby is not a life, but I dont.
A normal pregnancy could be more suffering than wanting a kid and not having it, but in my opinion it sure aint less suffering than killing an individual, and depriving someone of living with their offspring.
But it's not about you guy what don't you understand?
He already acknowledged that what he wants/thinks is more important than other people's rights.
Shake Appeal
Member
No one owns a "living being."
Funyarinpa
Member
I *can* see the idea that the fetus is something that, in part, belongs to the father. I can relate to it. However, does that 'ownership' allow the husband to force the woman to carry the baby to term? I don't think so. I guess I'd say that the woman has the right to decide to carry it or not, because she has to carry it if she wants the child (unlike the father, who never will carry).
So if you don't want to have to abort a child you want to have, you talk things over with your wife beforehand.
So if you don't want to have to abort a child you want to have, you talk things over with your wife beforehand.
The US is rapidly becoming a third world country now.
I'm so sorry Americans.
Exactly.
I'm so sorry Americans.
Exactly.
No, but a child is represented by their parents, and they together have a say legally about the kid. I personally dont differentiate between a 3 months old fetus and a teen.
It is about me if its my living children.
What I said is that the right to live a happy life is more important than the right of not suffering for 9 months. But sure, be condescending
BrutishMrFish
Member
The right to live a happy life is more important than the right not to suffer?
Do you seriously not see how contradictory that is?
SlaughterX
Banned
Should a man be able to make a woman have an abortion if he doesn't want the child. It could cause 18 years of pain and suffering to the man, but we don't carry the child in our bodies do fuck how we feel right?
BrutishMrFish
Member
Get a divorce or break up if you can't come to an agreement, for fuck's sake.
LegendofJoe
Member
A lot of people think a baby (which is what they perceive it to be) is more important than the risks to the mother. I don't agree with that, but it's not difficult to understand. Their primary concern is not the mother, it's all about the baby.
I moved to Northwest Arkansas a year ago. And my wife and I are expecting a baby girl in about 6 weeks. It will be our second and last child, but I worry about how this will effect families with daughters old enough to conceive. If you couple that with rolling back access to birth control and insurance this is going to ruin lives. Great way to keep the poor down though, which is really what this shit is all about.
Perhaps men who feel this way should, instead of forcing women to be pregnant as some kind of fucked up tit-for-tat, lobby the appropriate government to allow unilateral termination of one's parental rights if they don't already.
I should have been more clear, 9 months of suffering, in my opinion, pales in comparison to a much longer happy life.
Is it against the rules now to believe a baby should live? Taking a look at the TOS that says "or otherwise in violation of any law" shows that im not the one breaking any rules here, since im not the one advocating for this law to be broken.
But hey, if you want to ban me for believing babies are alive, maybe change the TOS first to include that?
Man what is this post...
LegendofJoe
Member
True, but as someone who recently moved to Arkansas I'll say that it's not all bad. There are some liberal towns in the Northwest part of the state with a good job market. And the Ozark Mountains are beautiful (look up Eureka Springs). The area is the only hope the state has to become more than an afterthought.
If the man doesn't want the baby, he gets a divorce. Which is in no way a simple decision, but he still gets to choose if he wants part in the child's growth or not.
Vital Tundra
Member
They should just be more transparent with what they want and have the husbands legally own their wives. Fuck This! What the hell is this shit?
It is a couple's prerogative to decide to have a child and how they wish to raise that child.
It is a woman's right to decide what the terms of creating that life are or if they even wish to do so in the first place.
Period.
Anything else is saying you have rights over a woman's body simply because it is busy creating life. It is saying your perceived "rights" are more important than them.
I.e., the chicken is involved, the pig is committed.
It is a woman's right to decide what the terms of creating that life are or if they even wish to do so in the first place.
Period.
Anything else is saying you have rights over a woman's body simply because it is busy creating life. It is saying your perceived "rights" are more important than them.
I.e., the chicken is involved, the pig is committed.
TenCentCoast
Banned
I'll second this. Leaving NWA is like entering an entirely different, terrifying state.
You're willing to force that potential pain and suffering and everything else a pregnancy imposes on women for your own happiness. It's supremely fucked.
MannyToons
Member
As a woman who never wants children, I'm terrified and tearing up at how cruel this is...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked