The Supreme Court, and abortion.

[PeterMP]

21 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I'm not sure why you keep bringing this up like nobody cares, people do.  I recommened civil because you'll need a burden of proof that may be impossible to get.  Itll be he said she said with no rape kit because it was consensual sex, jus not consentual conception.  You want to throw people in jail for that, how?

 

I will point out that I'd be completely for leaving whether it is something that is prosecuted up to people's whose job it is to prosecute crimes.  At least, it sounds like it should be sexual assault to me (and if we need to pass some new laws to make that at least the case, I'd be happy to vote for people that will), and I'd absolutely encourage people to report it to the police.  From there, career prosecutors can make the decision as to whether there is enough evidence to prosecute.

[Larry]

19 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

What are you doing? Are you really going the whole ignore and hope it goes away route? You know damn well what you and me were "discussing".

Are you really that weak, that you can't apologize for saying some terrible ****?

 

 

I'm quite aware of the things you're working very hard to claim that I said.  

 

And yes, I'm trying to improve the quality of this discussion, by 

 

1)  Not continuing a hijack of the thread that feels like it's been going on for a day, and which the original person and I seem to have moved past.  And in which I feel I've already made my point multiple times

 

2)  And not lowering myself to the level you've been inhabiting.  For example, by flying into outrage and claiming that you called me a weak rapist and child molester.  

 

11 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I will point out that I'd be completely for leaving whether it is something that is prosecuted up to people's whose job it is to prosecute crimes.  At least, it sounds like it should be sexual assault to me (and if we need to pass some new laws to make that at least the case, I'd be happy to vote for people that will), and I'd absolutely encourage people to report it to the police.  From there, career prosecutors can make the decision as to whether there is enough evidence to prosecute.

 

To avoid jumping to false conclusions, exactly what is it that you'd be fine with leaving local officials to decide whether to prosecute?  

Edited May 17, 2019 by Larry

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I will point out that I'd be completely for leaving whether it is something that is prosecuted up to people's whose job it is to prosecute crimes.  At least, it sounds like it should be sexual assault to me (and if we need to pass some new laws to make that at least the case, I'd be happy to vote for people that will), and I'd absolutely encourage people to report it to the police.  From there, career prosecutors can make the decision as to whether there is enough evidence to prosecute.

 

I can understand this. 

 

If it's obviously malicious in an attempt to get someone pregnant without them knowing, I can see attempting criminal.  It jus feels like the collateral damage will be the precident set for people having sex without contraceptive and the father getting blamed and charged if she gets pregnant just because she said she didn't want to have a kid even when not malicious.

 

It's like Russian roullet when you have sex raw, you shouldn't be able to go to the police if you do that hoping you don't get pregnant and do anyway, that's my concern with starting that conversation with criminal charges.  We really going charge someone for not pulling out? You can get pregnant off of precum.

[Cooked Crack]

Quote

Missouri’s Republican-led Legislature has approved a ban on abortions at eight weeks of pregnancy, and GOP Gov. Mike Parson is expected to sign it.

House lawmakers gave the sweeping abortion bill final approval Friday.

The proposed ban allows exceptions only in medical emergencies, not cases of rape or incest.

 

[bearrock]

5 minutes ago, Larry said:

1)  Not continuing a hijack of the thread that feels like it's been going on for a day, and which the original person and I seem to have moved past.  And in which I feel I've already made my point multiple times

  

 

Best way to keep the thread on topic would be for you to say a mea culpa for the terrible joke/phrasing in your response to greatbuzzette.  I doubt you meant anything near what you said, but it was still terrible phrasing at the very least.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

5 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Yeah, I mean, it's nowhere near as strong as "my mother didn't abort me, therefore I support taking that decision away from all pregnant women, from here on out".   

 

What is your point? Stupid arguments are ok as long as everyone is making them?

[Fresh8686]

11 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

I'm quite aware of the things you're working very hard to claim that I said.  

 

And yes, I'm trying to improve the quality of this discussion, by 

 

1)  Not continuing a hijack of the thread that feels like it's been going on for a day, and which the original person and I seem to have moved past.  And in which I feel I've already made my point multiple times

 

2)  And not lowering myself to the level you've been inhabiting.  For example, by flying into outrage and claiming that you called me a weak rapist and child molester.  

Wow.

Claim? I quoted you.

Lowering yourself to my level? Are you really trying to pull a victim card now. Do you think I'm attacking you by telling you to apologize and show you have some decency and integrity.

When a person asks are you xyz, that does not equate to calling you xyz.

How hard is it to apologize?

You disgust me.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Fresh8686

[Larry]

1 minute ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

What is your point? Stupid arguments are ok as long as everyone is making them?

 

Nope.  It's that there's lots of stupid in this thread.  

 

(That's why, if you'll look back, I've been calling out what I think are the most stupid arguments made by both sides, in here.  Which, in case you can't tell, is what I did in the post you quoted.)  

[MartinC]

Just a general warning here. There have been no rule violations to this point  - but we are starting to wander in that direction. Lets keep this respectful and not personal.

 

This is an emotive issue and reasonable people will disagree and some people will have had deeply upsetting personal experiences around this (and related )subject - to them it's not an abstract discussion its a defining experience in their life. Let's be mindful of that

[Larry]

10 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

Wow.

Claim? I quoted you.

Lowering yourself to my level? Are you really trying to pull a victim card now. Do you think I'm attacking you by telling you to apologize and show you have some decency and integrity.

When a person asks are you xyz, that does not equate to calling you xyz.

You disgust me.

 

Yep.  You quoted me.  

 

You quoted me saying that the notion that existing law makes it legal for me to impregnate women without consent, and specifically by rape, was a stupid suggestion.  And in which I included something that was such obvious sarcasm that it should be obvious with even a two digit IQ.  

 

And then claiming that I said something which I did not say.  

 

And then using the false mental image of me that you created, to launch a series of attacks against me, personally.  And then, ran with it from there.  

 

But, just in case there are more people out there who are that far removed from reality:  

 

No, I do not think that rape is fun.  

 

(Although I'm now really tempted to insert a Blazing Saddles clip.)  

 

No, I am not a rapist.  

 

No, I am not a child molester.  

 

If you still somehow believe that I am one (or more) of those things?  It's a free country.  Hope you're happy in that world.  

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

20 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

Wow.

Claim? I quoted you.

Lowering yourself to my level? Are you really trying to pull a victim card now. Do you think I'm attacking you by telling you to apologize and show you have some decency and integrity.

When a person asks are you xyz, that does not equate to calling you xyz.

How hard is it to apologize?

You disgust me.

I recommend letting it go at this point.  It's obvious he is not going to apologize and he doesn't see anything wrong with describing rape as fun.  

[Fresh8686]

4 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I recommend letting it go at this point.  It's obvious he is not going to apologize and he doesn't see anything wrong with describing rape as fun.  

I feel you. I wanted to give him a chance to step up, but he's shown how he operates. I'm bowing out and making use of the ignore function.

[thegreaterbuzzette]

I could make a very worthy case to both sides of this argument. And I very easily could belong to both groups.

 

I repeat, this issue here is fixing the PROBLEM, not the solution.

 

Dump money into sex education in schools and community. Remember when community health departments were a real thing? 

 

Fix the welfare system to not encourage more kids = more money. So that people aren't incentivized to stay unemployed because they lose needed benefits by crossing some figurative line that is still well below a living wage.

 

Teach family health and have community programs for youth in need so they can learn and be mentored to live a fulfilling life.

 

Crap.....when did I become a Democrat?!

[PeterMP]

51 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I can understand this. 

 

If it's obviously malicious in an attempt to get someone pregnant without them knowing, I can see attempting criminal.  It jus feels like the collateral damage will be the precident set for people having sex without contraceptive and the father getting blamed and charged if she gets pregnant just because she said she didn't want to have a kid even when not malicious.

 

It's like Russian roullet when you have sex raw, you shouldn't be able to go to the police if you do that hoping you don't get pregnant and do anyway, that's my concern with starting that conversation with criminal charges.  We really going charge someone for not pulling out? You can get pregnant off of precum.

 

If you agree to have sex with some conditional requirements and you can't be sure that you can meet those conditions, then that's on you.

[tshile]

7 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

 Crap.....when did I become a Democrat?!

 

join the club.

 

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, PeterMP said:

 

If you agree to have sex with some conditional requirements and you can't be sure that you can meet those conditions, then that's on you.

 

That feels not taking my last paragraph seriously at all.  If two adults agree to have consensual sex without contraceptive but neither want a kid and she gets pregnant anyway, should the guy get charged?  That feels different them someone taking the condom off without saying anything, which is wrong as hell.

[tshile]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

That feels not taking my last paragraph seriously at all.  If two adults agree to have consensual sex without contraceptive but neither want a kid and she gets pregnant anyway, should the guy get charged?  That feels different them someone taking the condom off without saying anything, which is wrong as hell.

 

It is different, and I think what we're seeing right now is a result of how vague the permise is. The truth is that the situations you all are describing can vary quite a bit; especially if the context is whether or not something is a crime.

 

Just like you outlined. Those two are very different. It's reasonable (to me) to argue criminal charges might apply to one but not the other.

[thegreaterbuzzette]

7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

That feels not taking my last paragraph seriously at all.  If two adults agree to have consensual sex without contraceptive but neither want a kid and she gets pregnant anyway, should the guy get charged?  That feels different them someone taking the condom off without saying anything, which is wrong as hell.

1 - majority people here seem to be forgetting condoms aren't actually fail proof. In fact, under typical use they are only 85% effective. 

 

2 - I was not trying to suggest that I would support a law that put a man in jail for impregnating a female who claimed non-consent. The logistics of that alone make that not practical. The point of me posing that question was to provoke discussion and to allow men to have even the slightest view of what these laws feel like when they are aimed at your body.

Edited May 17, 2019 by thegreaterbuzzette
Typo

[NoCalMike]

The problem is assuming people acting irresponsibly, resulting in a child, will magically turn them into responsible people/parents.  

 

Also another big issue is that a large amount of the Pro-Life crowd are also against wider access to birth control, sexual education, etc etc.....so like I said way back 100 pages ago, to them banning abortion is just one of the steps in turning the clock back on society

 

Hell, yesterday Tomi Lauren of all people tweeted her opposition to the Alabama bill and one of the replies actually mentioned "Quarter between the knees" as a remedy.

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

The problem is assuming people acting irresponsibly, resulting in a child, will magically turn them into responsible people/parents.  

 

That's probably my biggest issue with the pro-life people.  Abstinence preaching and sex ed  is great and I wouldn't say those two should go away, but there's an obvious gap with the problem that those two don't, can't, and will not ever solve. 

 

I don't know that it's justification for supporting abortion though. I think it's completely reasonable to recognize all that, and still not be ok with abortion being an option for being irresponsible.

 

[Dan T.]

16 hours ago, Larry said:

 

I'm pretty sure that impregnating women without their consent is called "rape", or something like that.  

 

Pretty sure it's illegal.  In all 50 states.  

 

If not, then I've been missing out on a lot of fun, over the years.  

 

So I've been playing catch-up on this thread.

 

Dang, Larry,  this was a really bad post. Sarcasm? To what end? You torpedoed any argument you were trying to make and you genuinely hurt and offended people.  

[Renegade7]

9 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

1 - majority people here seem to be forgetting condoms aren't actually fail proof. In fact, under typical use they are only 85% effective. 

 

No one is assuming that.  I argue most people i know talk about a 98% success rate, which I'm seeing online, and your 85% number comes from incorrect usage.

 

9 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

2 - I was not trying to suggest that I would support a law that put a man in jail for impregnating a female who claimed non-consent. The logistics of that alone make that not practical. The point of me posing that question was to provoke discussion and to allow men to have even the slightest view of what these laws feel like when they are aimed at your body.

 

Thanks for clarification, but I'll be honest I didnt realize that was your point.  Felt more like a grenade in a minefield.

[thegreaterbuzzette]

10 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

No one is assuming that.  I argue most people i know talk about a 98% success rate, which I'm seeing online, and your 85% number comes from incorrect usage.

 

 

Thanks for clarification, but I'll be honest I didnt realize that was your point.  Felt more like a grenade in a minefield.

Yes, the 85% is an overall statistic based upon average use. Sadly most people do not actually know the correct way to use a condom. I would be interested if most men here do. 98% effective when worn correctly is pointless when most don't.

 

Yes, I was purposely not clear about the intent of my post. As it would have skewed the response. Instead, most responses were dead on to my expectations that men would be completely appalled at the idea of having criminality tied to their child bearing capabilities. I feel my point was proven, even if others disagree. I would have pointed out early but this went way sideways with the "fun" comment for me (which I'll leave alone as to not rehash)

[tshile]

6 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

I would be interested if most men here do.

 

Well unrolling the whole thing putting it on the first inch  and letting the excess just dangle takes a while to get used to. I don’t really blame anyone for not liking it. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by tshile

[TheGoodBits]

30 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

1 - majority people here seem to be forgetting condoms aren't actually fail proof. In fact, under typical use they are only 85% effective. 

 

 

This is a big part of sex education I feel is lacking... actual statistics about effectiveness of contraceptives during real use and what that MEANS. 

 

For teenage girls, the pill is only an average effectiveness of 75% in real world use. That means if you relied on just the pill for a year, 25 out of 100 girls would get pregnant. It's advertised as 99.9% effective. That's false (or at least misleading) advertising to me. 

 

Condoms, same thing if you don't know how to use them like you mentioned.

 

So teach kids the reality of the situation, encourage them to double or triple protect themselves (condom plus pill/IUD for instance) and make sure they have ACCESS to all of these forms for contraceptives. If GOP was serious about reducing abortion they wouldn't refuse to educate kids about preventing pregnancy. They are more interested in trying to legislate morality than preventing abortions.