Bill that bans abortions 20 weeks into pregnancy passes House

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/house-vote-abortion-after-20-week-ban/index.html

Long story short, if this bill passes in the senate, abortions will not be allowed 20 weeks into a pregnancy unless the mother's life is endangered or the child was the product of rape or incest. Quick question, in a lot of red states it's legal to marry your cousin, does that count as incest by this bill?

I just find it funny. GOP Congressmen loves to talk about how much they care about these children, and how they want these kids to be able to experience life. Yet the second the kid gets out of the womb, they give zero fucks about them. Abortions are common among the poor after all, and the GOP is very much against even the most basic of support for poor families. Between this, Trump cutting foreign abortion aid, and that little bill in Arkansas that requires a raped woman to get a permission slip from her rapist in order to get an abortion, I really feel like this country isn't treating women very well on this issue.

So, because it's depressingly relevant.

Isn't that like more than halfway into the pregnancy? Pretty sure if someone doesn't want the kid they would have come into decision by then.

Anyways the OP post conveniently sidesteps the issue that people find people are gainst abortion because they consider it murder, so to make a comparison: It's like calling people who are against police violence against black people hypocrites if they are also against more government benefits for black people because they "obviously" don't care about black people.

erttheking:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/house-vote-abortion-after-20-week-ban/index.html

Long story short, if this bill passes in the senate, abortions will not be allowed 20 weeks into a pregnancy unless the mother's life is endangered or the child was the product of rape or incest. Quick question, in a lot of red states it's legal to marry your cousin, does that count as incest by this bill?

I just find it funny. GOP Congressmen loves to talk about how much they care about these children, and how they want these kids to be able to experience life. Yet the second the kid gets out of the womb, they give zero fucks about them. Abortions are common among the poor after all, and the GOP is very much against even the most basic of support for poor families. Between this, Trump cutting foreign abortion aid, and that little bill in Arkansas that requires a raped woman to get a permission slip from her rapist in order to get an abortion, I really feel like this country isn't treating women very well on this issue.

So, because it's depressingly relevant.

Sometimes I wonder if someone such as yourself understands just how much Carlin would have mocked them.

On the issue, yeah, it turns out that Abortion is a contentious Issue and people are constantly arguing over it. Who would've thought that would lead to people actually trying to get what they want enshrined into law. Crazy.

And you know, it could also be said that your country isn't very nice to fetuses. But that would be emotionally manipulative bullshit...
Far as I'm concerned you and the right deserve each other xD

Oh and I'm Pro-Abortion. That's how much the sanctimonious shit bothers me.

Meh. compared to the usual shit republicans try to get past this is pretty tame.

Let me know when they do something reeeeallly radical, like create reproductive rights for men.

I don't doubt that there are doctors that will state 100% of pregnancies endanger the life of the mother. It is dangerous to have a baby: even if C-section. I doubt this bill will cause undue ability for women to get an abortion if they want one.

erttheking:
Yet the second the kid gets out of the womb, they give zero fucks about them.

I am anti abortion but agree with this 100%. Conservatives don't just leave poor families or single mothers to themselves - which I guess you can make an argument for from an ideological perspective - often their policies actively harm them and keep them down. Its bullshit.

That being said, 20 weeks? Whats the problem with that? Have you seen a pregnant woman at 20 weeks? Have you seen a baby at 20 weeks? 20 weeks is more than half the pregnancy. Has the status quo shifted to the point where some chick can decide "fuck my baby" 2 weeks before birth and its perfectly acceptable?

Fischgopf:
And you know, it could also be said that your country isn't very nice to fetuses.

You could say that, but to do so would be to suggest that being "mean" to fetuses is comparable to being "mean" to living human beings. Which is an interesting argument considering how differently we treat them in every other way.

I did see the end of your post by the way, I'm not saying that you are wrong. I'm just interested in how persuasive you think the point you made was, considering it apparently doesn't persuade you at all either.

Not sure what you mean about Carlin too. but honestly he never appealed to me as much as Bill Hicks so I'm not overly familiar.

Fischgopf:
Snip

Carlin mocked everyone, is was kind of his thing, so him mocking me is hardly something that surprises me. Also try to help me through on this one. He would mock me? I haven't said anything in this thread that he hasn't. So what would he be mocking me for exactly?

Oh geez, I totally never thought of that. It's not like my problem is related to it being a terrible move, no, I'm more displaying shock that it happened in the first place because I haven't been paying attention.

Pointing out the lousy things the GOP doing is emotionally manipulative? Well I guess pretty much pointing out every time someone does something terrible is emotionally manipulative then. Like I said. Arkansas rape victims can't get abortions without the rapist's permission. That doesn't seem very pro-women to me.

They're trying to restrict the reproductive rights of women, I'm angry at them and calling them out on it. Yup, we sure "deserve" each other.

I'm being sanctimonious. Pot, this is kettle. You're black.

inu-kun:
Isn't that like more than halfway into the pregnancy? Pretty sure if someone doesn't want the kid they would have come into decision by then.

Anyways the OP post conveniently sidesteps the issue that people find people are gainst abortion because they consider it murder, so to make a comparison: It's like calling people who are against police violence against black people hypocrites if they are also against more government benefits for black people because they "obviously" don't care about black people.

Funny thing about abortion in America is that the GOP is doing everything it can where it can to make getting access to it really damn hard. In some cases there's only one abortion clinic in an entire state. It's not just a matter of stopping by the clinic the next time you have a day off, it takes up a lot of time because of all these obstructions. This is just another barrier the GOP is trying to put up.

Yeah, and some people consider gay marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of god and that homosexuality should be punishable by death. People believe all sorts of things, I'm still waiting for people to justify this one. Particularly since the most hard line anti-abortion people are the ones who want the kids born to get zero government support. That little comparison of yours really doesn't work. You're going to have to do a little more than that after the stunt the GOP pulled in Arkansas. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant, she needs permission from her rapist to get an abortion. The GOP seems perfectly fine with that, so I have a hard time swallowing that they don't have an issue with woman having control over their own bodies.

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

That being said, 20 weeks? Whats the problem with that? Have you seen a pregnant woman at 20 weeks? Have you seen a baby at 20 weeks? 20 weeks is more than half the pregnancy. Has the status quo shifted to the point where some chick can decide "fuck my baby" 2 weeks before birth and its perfectly acceptable?

Maybe if the GOP wasn't doing everything it can to make getting an abortion as hard as possible in the states it controls, I wouldn't mind a ticking clock element being added to the situation as well. But they are. So I do.

Gorfias:
Let me know when they do something reeeeallly radical, like create reproductive rights for men.

I'm sorry to be the one to have to tell you this, because apparently no one in your personal life ever has: not everything is about you.

OT, this is par for the course with Republicans. It's not about protecting life, it never was. It's about control. For all their talk of freedom, the Republicans are the most nakedly authoritarian motherfuckers in the country. This is thanks in part to the connection with the Religious Right who believe that God wants them to call the shots for everybody else. They see themselves as America's designated adults and that they have a divine mandate to make our decisions for us. Fucking hell, we can't be rid of these poisonous ass parasites soon enough.

20 weeks is more than halfway into the pregnancy term!
Abortion in the first trimester (0-12 weeks) sounds reasonable to me.

Oh, and if the mother wants to keep it and the father doesn't, he shouldn't be forced to pay alimony/child-support.

Vendor-Lazarus:
20 weeks is more than halfway into the pregnancy term!
Abortion in the first trimester (0-12 weeks) sounds reasonable to me.

As I said above, when the GOP is doing everything it can to make getting an abortion as hard as possible, a ticking clock is just another hoop that they're making women jump through, one that may mean women may not be able to receive one because their time was wasted getting through red tape.

erttheking:

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

That being said, 20 weeks? Whats the problem with that? Have you seen a pregnant woman at 20 weeks? Have you seen a baby at 20 weeks? 20 weeks is more than half the pregnancy. Has the status quo shifted to the point where some chick can decide "fuck my baby" 2 weeks before birth and its perfectly acceptable?

Maybe if the GOP wasn't doing everything it can to make getting an abortion as hard as possible in the states it controls, I wouldn't mind a ticking clock element being added to the situation as well. But they are. So I do.

Right, so surely you'd rather fight and complain about making it harder, rather than do the same to the ticking clock?

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

erttheking:

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

That being said, 20 weeks? Whats the problem with that? Have you seen a pregnant woman at 20 weeks? Have you seen a baby at 20 weeks? 20 weeks is more than half the pregnancy. Has the status quo shifted to the point where some chick can decide "fuck my baby" 2 weeks before birth and its perfectly acceptable?

Maybe if the GOP wasn't doing everything it can to make getting an abortion as hard as possible in the states it controls, I wouldn't mind a ticking clock element being added to the situation as well. But they are. So I do.

Right, so surely you'd rather fight and complain about making it harder, rather than do the same to the ticking clock?

In this situation I'm going with "All of the above," because both approaches fall under the GOP slowly attempting to erode women's access to a service they need.

Honestly this is something that could probably backfire for the anti-abortion crowd too. Do you really want to take an issue as important as abortion and say "you have to make a choice NOW!" Because it's going to make people panic and jump to snap decisions. I will hate that it may make women feel obligated to stick with a pregnancy they don't want, and I can see other people getting angry if it makes women who wanted to keep a baby but they were unsure jump to abortion because she didn't want to miss the boat. Heck, I'm pro-choice but I don't want women to have abortions if they're not certain.

Gorfias:
Let me know when they do something reeeeallly radical, like create reproductive rights for men.

I'm probably going to regret this, but what exactly are you looking for? The right to adopt? The technology to produce a child without someone having to carry it to term for you? (I'm guessing some sort of 'implant the fertilized egg in a pig' kind of scenario for this.)

inu-kun:
Pretty sure if someone doesn't want the kid they would have come into decision by then.

It's a life-changing decision, they aren't trying to decide which Pot Noodle they like the most. It's quite likely they will go backwards and forwards on the decision a number of times.

Gorfias:
Let me know when they do something reeeeallly radical, like create reproductive rights for men.

Let the entirety of the world know when we men have reproductive capabilities mate. I guarantee you'll earn a Nobel prize and instant hero status among many gay couples.

In the UK, only 1.6% of abortions happen after 20 weeks.

Making it so 1.6% have to decide something a week or two sooner in order to appease religious groups seems a fair compromise.

erttheking:

inu-kun:
Isn't that like more than halfway into the pregnancy? Pretty sure if someone doesn't want the kid they would have come into decision by then.

Anyways the OP post conveniently sidesteps the issue that people find people are gainst abortion because they consider it murder, so to make a comparison: It's like calling people who are against police violence against black people hypocrites if they are also against more government benefits for black people because they "obviously" don't care about black people.

Funny thing about abortion in America is that the GOP is doing everything it can where it can to make getting access to it really damn hard. In some cases there's only one abortion clinic in an entire state. It's not just a matter of stopping by the clinic the next time you have a day off, it takes up a lot of time because of all these obstructions. This is just another barrier the GOP is trying to put up.

Yeah, and some people consider gay marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of god and that homosexuality should be punishable by death. People believe all sorts of things, I'm still waiting for people to justify this one. Particularly since the most hard line anti-abortion people are the ones who want the kids born to get zero government support. That little comparison of yours really doesn't work. You're going to have to do a little more than that after the stunt the GOP pulled in Arkansas. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant, she needs permission from her rapist to get an abortion. The GOP seems perfectly fine with that, so I have a hard time swallowing that they don't have an issue with woman having control over their own bodies.

So a slippery slope argument?

We are talking about this bill, not something else. And the question of "when is something considered human and worthy of life" is a deep one (is it when it develops a brain? Is it when it's born out of the womb?). Giving a being the right to live shouldn't be connected to how much you want the government to invest in that being later that life.

I'll add to my criticism the fact that as abortion is an ethical question the implication that "only" conservatives are against it is strictly false and the idea that it is "anti women" implies strongly that women who are pro life are mind washed or hate women (because women clearly aren't allowed to be anti abortion, they aren't allowed to have their own opinions). Really, reading your comments you seem to very strongly enforce your thoughts on how women should act and think.

inu-kun:

erttheking:

inu-kun:
Isn't that like more than halfway into the pregnancy? Pretty sure if someone doesn't want the kid they would have come into decision by then.

Anyways the OP post conveniently sidesteps the issue that people find people are gainst abortion because they consider it murder, so to make a comparison: It's like calling people who are against police violence against black people hypocrites if they are also against more government benefits for black people because they "obviously" don't care about black people.

Funny thing about abortion in America is that the GOP is doing everything it can where it can to make getting access to it really damn hard. In some cases there's only one abortion clinic in an entire state. It's not just a matter of stopping by the clinic the next time you have a day off, it takes up a lot of time because of all these obstructions. This is just another barrier the GOP is trying to put up.

Yeah, and some people consider gay marriage to be an abomination in the eyes of god and that homosexuality should be punishable by death. People believe all sorts of things, I'm still waiting for people to justify this one. Particularly since the most hard line anti-abortion people are the ones who want the kids born to get zero government support. That little comparison of yours really doesn't work. You're going to have to do a little more than that after the stunt the GOP pulled in Arkansas. If a woman is raped and gets pregnant, she needs permission from her rapist to get an abortion. The GOP seems perfectly fine with that, so I have a hard time swallowing that they don't have an issue with woman having control over their own bodies.

So a slippery slope argument?

We are talking about this bill, not something else. And the question of "when is something considered human and worthy of life" is a deep one (is it when it develops a brain? Is it when it's born out of the womb?). Giving a being the right to live shouldn't be connected to how much you want the government to invest in that being later that life.

I'll add to my criticism the fact that as abortion is an ethical question the implication that "only" conservatives are against it is strictly false and the idea that it is "anti women" implies strongly that women who are pro life are mind washed or hate women (because women clearly aren't allowed to be anti abortion, they aren't allowed to have their own opinions). Really, reading your comments you seem to very strongly enforce your thoughts on how women should act and think.

The two sides are Pro-'Life' and Pro-'Choice'. The idea is that we should let pregnant people decide for themselves, not have it decided for them. If a woman is pro-life then they should be allowed to have the baby. If they do not want to have the baby, they should be allowed that choice.

inu-kun:
Snip

More basic pattern recognition. If this was a slippery slope, we're a good way down the slope by this point.

This bill doesn't exist in a vacuum. The GOP is pushing anti-abortion legislation wherever it can, you can't just pretend that this bill isn't the latest in a very long line of things they've done. Yeah, it is a deep question, though I have to question how much GOP congressmen actually give a shit. They have a well documented history in eroding access to abortion, I have a hard time seeing this as anything but the next step. And it's pretty rich that the "pro-life" demographic has the most overlap with the people who don't give a damn about starving kids. It's almost like they're not as pro-life as they say they are.

Hey, I'll get on non-conservatives for being anti-abortion when non-conservatives start trying to crowbar laws like this into rule. My problem isn't people having an issue with abortion, it's people saying "I don't like abortion, therefore I don't want other people to have it." You know, let me tell you something. You bring up the idea of women upholding concepts that are sexist to women like it's utterly impossible. It isn't. You seriously don't need to look back far in history to get that. There were American woman who were against the concept of women gaining the right to vote. They thought it would tear the country apart into women vs men, that strict gender roles were needed to keep society running. "They aren't allowed to have opinions," I think you need to learn the difference between me saying people aren't allowed to have opinions and me criticizing their opinions. It's a concept you seem to struggle with. Also, yeah, I do have strong opinions on how women should act and think. The way they want to, without other people forcing their beliefs on them. Including that of other women. It's called pro-CHOICE for a reason. Or are you saying I was being dishonest when I wrote this?

erttheking:

Honestly this is something that could probably backfire for the anti-abortion crowd too. Do you really want to take an issue as important as abortion and say "you have to make a choice NOW!" Because it's going to make people panic and jump to snap decisions. I will hate that it may make women feel obligated to stick with a pregnancy they don't want, and I can see other people getting angry if it makes women who wanted to keep a baby but they were unsure jump to abortion because she didn't want to miss the boat. Heck, I'm pro-choice but I don't want women to have abortions if they're not certain.

Republicans are pro-life, ergo they are passing bills which reflect that. Hell.....this is one of their better ones as it affects about 1% of all abortions and includes stipulations for health and rape. They are not pulling a texas (....yet) and adding inane regulations aimed at closing down clinics for the filmiest of reasons. Compared to republicans other attempts at abortion laws, this one is at least somewhat thought out.

The vast majority still believes that abortion in third trimester should be illegal (86%), the majority also believes that abortion in the second trimester should be illegal (71%) therefore what this amounts to is haggling over where exactly.

and im saying this as a pro-choice person.

Does this bill make an exception for a non-viable fetus?

EDIT: Of course it's a bill based on junk science. I'd expect nothing less. They can't actually make abortion illegal, so they'll spout pseudoscience and weasel words to get around it. "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" my entire fat ass.

And naturally, one of the fucknuckle "pro-life" co-sponsors asked his mistress to get an abortion. Do as I say, not as I do.

BeetleManiac:
snip

Baffle2:
snip

Avnger:
snip

Here's a good primer to get'yall started on the topic.

this thing will be far less impactfull than providing men with reproductive rights.

Vendor-Lazarus:

Oh, and if the mother wants to keep it and the father doesn't, he shouldn't be forced to pay alimony/child-support.

You know we have child support laws for that exact reason, right?

If a dude doesn't want kids, get a vasectomy. Freeze some sperm beforehand in necessary.

Gorfias:
SNIP

I never watch the videos people link to, I'm not made of time. Can't you just do a quick list?

Gorfias:
Here's a good primer to get'yall started on the topic.

this thing will be far less impactfull than providing men with reproductive rights.

Seen it. It's crap. Tell me in your own words or don't tell me at all.

Baffle2:

Gorfias:
SNIP

I never watch the videos people link to, I'm not made of time. Can't you just do a quick list?

Sorry if I miss stuff but few considerations:
When women want sex and for whatever reason, a pregnancy occurs, Western civilization recognizes that consent to sex is NOT consent to have a child.
The woman can have the child and never tell the man;
The woman can abort and there's nothing he can do about it;
The woman can put the child up for adoption (law is fuzzy: if the man finds out, can he interfere and insist the child be turned over to him? If that happens, can he insist upon child support from the woman?)

My own positions:
I don't think a man should have the right to interfere if a woman wants an abortion.
The woman should be obliged to advise the man of the pregnancy if known whose it is.
If the woman want to put the child up for adoption the man should have first dibs: he's the dad BUT if he does so, he has no child support rights;
If the man does NOT want to support the child, he still should contribute some remuneration for the woman's costs in bearing the child. But he too wanted sex: not a child. The remuneration must be fair for the choices the woman makes.

Big challenge here: kid's support rights rest with the kid, not the mom. All that happens is the mom is in a position to enforce the kid's rights. That has to change.

BeetleManiac:
Tell me in your own words or don't tell me at all.

See above

EDIT: Interesting about adoptions: http://www.dummies.com/relationships/raising-children/adoption-facts-understanding-the-birthfathers-rights/

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

erttheking:

RiseOfTheWhiteWolf:

That being said, 20 weeks? Whats the problem with that? Have you seen a pregnant woman at 20 weeks? Have you seen a baby at 20 weeks? 20 weeks is more than half the pregnancy. Has the status quo shifted to the point where some chick can decide "fuck my baby" 2 weeks before birth and its perfectly acceptable?

Maybe if the GOP wasn't doing everything it can to make getting an abortion as hard as possible in the states it controls, I wouldn't mind a ticking clock element being added to the situation as well. But they are. So I do.

Right, so surely you'd rather fight and complain about making it harder, rather than do the same to the ticking clock?

Some states have all but removed all abortion clinics, meaning that women in those states have to travel to other states to get abortions. Arranging for such can take time, and this law now makes it actively more difficult for the people who aren't able to seek abortion in the state they live in

altnameJag:

Vendor-Lazarus:

Oh, and if the mother wants to keep it and the father doesn't, he shouldn't be forced to pay alimony/child-support.

You know we have child support laws for that exact reason, right?

If a dude doesn't want kids, get a vasectomy. Freeze some sperm beforehand in necessary.

If a woman doesn't want kids, get a tubectomy, freeze some eggs and use a surrogate.

Abortion is completely unnecessary.

The Lunatic:
In the UK, only 1.6% of abortions happen after 20 weeks.

Making it so 1.6% have to decide something a week or two sooner in order to appease religious groups seems a fair compromise.

In the UK they have the NHS and the districts of the country can't independently shut down all of its abortion clinics. The US has no public healthcare and whiel states cannot outlaw abortion outright, they can impose laws that effectively shut down all abortion clinics within it. People in states without clinics have to travel to other states to get abortions, something that can be expensive and take time to arrange for. This law makes it harder for the lowest income groups, arguably the ones most affected by not having access to abortion and contraception, to get abortions

Gorfias:
The woman should be obliged to advise the man of the pregnancy if known whose it is.

Why? You still haven't told me precisely what rights you do not have that you think you should have. You've even admitted that you don't believe you have a right to interfere in a doctor/patient decision in which you are neither doctor nor patient. I'm seeing a very non-specific victim complex and not substance to back it up.

The Lunatic:

altnameJag:

Vendor-Lazarus:

Oh, and if the mother wants to keep it and the father doesn't, he shouldn't be forced to pay alimony/child-support.

You know we have child support laws for that exact reason, right?

If a dude doesn't want kids, get a vasectomy. Freeze some sperm beforehand in necessary.

If a woman doesn't want kids, get a tubectomy, freeze some eggs and use a surrogate.

Abortion is completely unnecessary.

One of those is major surgery typically requiring spinal anesthesia, the other is outpatient surgery and has versions that are reversible.

Just sayin. And I find it constantly hilarious that all of the arguments for why women should have to go through pregnancy are suddenly objectionable when applied to men.

erttheking:
In this situation I'm going with "All of the above," because both approaches fall under the GOP slowly attempting to erode women's access to a service they need.

This is dumb ideology, nobody "needs" this service. You "need" food, drink, sufficient shelter and arguably love to survive. Pregnant women don't "need" an abortion clinic in the same way about 99,9% of the time.

Don't think this means I'm in favor of closing abortion clinics all over but lets have a sensible basis on which to discuss this. Access to abortion isn't a vital, mandatory building block in allowing women to live a life some unquestionable and all powerful thing intended them to have; if anything, its quite the opposite.

erttheking:
Honestly this is something that could probably backfire for the anti-abortion crowd too. Do you really want to take an issue as important as abortion and say "you have to make a choice NOW!" Because it's going to make people panic and jump to snap decisions. I will hate that it may make women feel obligated to stick with a pregnancy they don't want, and I can see other people getting angry if it makes women who wanted to keep a baby but they were unsure jump to abortion because she didn't want to miss the boat. Heck, I'm pro-choice but I don't want women to have abortions if they're not certain.

Look bro, its 20 weeks. Twenty. I have some history with this, I'm loosely familiar with the situation. Of course its something where, if you could, you'd love to freeze time and take however long you need to come to a decision, as you would with any other number of things - job offers or moving houses or breaking up or whatever, although admittedly few are as radical and life changing as having children. Reality is different, sometimes we have to deal with pressure and make decisions more quickly than we'd like to. We shouldn't just drop morals and instinct to avoid that reality.

And its 20 weeks. Lets assume you only notice your pregnant 8 weeks in, which is statistically unlikely. You still have 12 weeks - 84 days - to come to a decision and execute it (no pun intended there). It really isn't as tight as you're making it out to be.

And now kiss your lucky stars that you're not in ultra liberal Germany where you can't have an abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy. Makes those 20 seem almost tame considering you'll probably notice you're pregnant only after 4-8 weeks.

Now as I said I'm not a big fan of abortion outside of cases where it threatens a womans life (and I mean life, not livelihood) or when they were raped but we can agree the way republicans go about it is fucking stupid. In large parts I'd assume we agree on what should be done - better childcare, lightening the burden on low income families, giving easier access to all those things a child needs, etc etc - which is why I'm completely puzzled to see you and others fighting against this 20 week limit instead of fighting for those things. By doing that you're essentially angling for compromise where compromise really isn't desirable. I can tell you what will happen if you keep going down this route. 3 years from now the democrats will win some larger piece of the pie, retract this bill, sprinkle the country with abortion clinics where previously there were none and... Thats it. No improved childcare, no lightening the burden, none of that. So be smarter about it.

altnameJag:
]One of those is major surgery typically requiring spinal anesthesia, the other is outpatient surgery and has versions that are reversible.

Just sayin. And I find it constantly hilarious that all of the arguments for why women should have to go through pregnancy are suddenly objectionable when applied to men.

"Men shouldn't have reproductive rights because their surgery isn't painful enough!!"

What?

So you only get a choice in having a kid based on how painful and invasive preventive surgery of it is?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here