In Arkansas, Women Now Need Permission From Men To Get Abortions

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/ent...-to-get-abortions_us_59637d02e4b02e9bdb0e17bb

So instead of actually addressing the serious healthcare issues in their own state the Arkansas legislature wants to make women subservient to men?

And not just any men either. A rapist has to give his victim permission to have an abortion!

WTF?

A man can rape a woman in Arkansas and FORCE her to give birth to his spawn that she will have to support since he will be doing time!

How exactly does this kind of atrocity not be condemned by those who claim to be "pro-life"? How could a "pro-lifer" look themselves in the eye and say that they are glad that they forced a rape victim to give birth to the child of her rapist?

That is NOT "pro-life", that is PRO-RAPE!

And it gets even WORSE!

If she was impregnated by her father and she is under 18 he can force her to give birth!

That is NOT "pro-life"! That is PRO-INCEST!

Note that the question in this OP has nothing whatsoever to do with giving men a say in abortions. That is NOT the question that I am asking. This is SPECIFICALLY about RAPE and INCEST and FORCING the victims to bear those children against their will.

So let's hear from all the "pro-lifers" condemning this appalling legislation.

 

Why would anyone do this in the US?

Is it religious reasons, I just do not get it.

 

Yes, there is a faction of fundamentalist Christians in the USA who are obsessed with abortion and will do anything they can to make it illegal.

If that means giving rapists and those who commit incest the right to dictate that a woman cannot have an abortion then they will endorse it.

 

On reading the actual legislation, this article seems to be a gross misrepresentation of the facts. The bill only covers disposal of the remains of the deceased (which presumably included aborted foetuses) but nothing in it would allow anyone to prevent a pregnant woman having an abortion. It would require to make “reasonable efforts” to contact the biological father regarding the remains but only after the abortion. That could obviously lead to all sorts of practical and emotional problems in a variety of extreme situations, not just in the case of some abortions, and there seems to be limited account taken for any of them but to present this as an attempt to prevent abortion or to “make women subservient” strikes me as totally unjustified and the kind of exaggerated rhetoric that can only be counter-productive.

 

Did you read the bill that makes an abortion subservient to the 2009 disposal of deceased remains bill?

 

There are people everywhere, in any country, that see the unborn as a human life and due more dignity then just a toss in the trash.

 

Yes, but the Deceased Remains bill doesn’t apply until after the abortion so shouldn’t have any impact on the decision to go ahead with it (or not). The situation regarding the remains would be no different to a woman in the same circumstances suffering a miscarriage, with the same potential complications regarding violent partners or rapists. Making it only about abortion actually risks distracting from those wider concerns.

 

Seems to me it forces women to have to share the fact that they will have/have had an abortion with another person or persons.....that is a violation of her rights.

WHY would a woman, a victim of a rapist, have to notify him of what she will do with the remains??


AND , from the article: ""which states that, in the matter of a person’s death, family members have to agree on what to do with the deceased person’s body.

H.B. 1566 includes aborted fetuses into that Act,"""


A fetus is NOT a PERSON......this is a slimey, dishonest, sneaky way to have the fetus declared a PERSON...another step to have abortion declared illegal..

 

Because there are really sick people in this country like rapists and Anti-Choicers who think women are nothing more than cattle, to be abused, raped, controlled and demeaned..

 

This has nothing to do with that unless YOU are saying that women , ONLY WOMEN , if left "unchecked" and UNCONTROLLED, will ALWAYS, without MALE GUIDANCE, throw the remains" in the trash""

 

She shouldn’t. She shouldn’t have to notify him is she has a late-term miscarriage or if the child is born but subsequently dies either, but on a literal reading of the existing law, that is apparently the case. Could it be that in practical terms, the “reasonable attempt to contact” covers such extreme cases already? If it doesn’t, shouldn’t that be where the problem is addressed. My point remains that making this exclusively and unconditionally about abortion, you risk missing the wider picture.

If you believe that it the case here you should simply say so. My problem is that coverage of the law change you referenced appears to contain an outright lie and is never going to be the right way to reach the correct ends.

 

I seen a study on here saying men have a higher IQ .

 

But she has to notify them BEFORE the abortion so that they can agree to the disposal of the remains. If they refuse to do so that obstructs her right to have the abortion.

No woman plans ahead to have a miscarriage. That is a strawman deflection.

 

Asinine non sequitur attempt to derail the thread.

 

Hush with those inconvenient facts. Telling a man she just killed his child means she is the victim here, not the man, and especially not the child who is dead. You just want us to go back to having the nobles having the right to consummate a bride on her wedding night because that's the price we pay for living in a "civilized society" and women are just property.

 

I don’t see anything in any of the legislation stating that, it all refers to the dead foetus or the deceased in general (other than the option of declaring how your own remains should be handled which obviously isn’t relevant here). Feel free to point out something I’ve missed but I suggest you’re reading something in to it that isn’t there.

You could make the argument that’s the intent of course, but if so I think they’d have failed and I suggest that if you really wanted to prevent that happening, simply blocking this specific change isn’t the best way to achieve it as I’ve already mentioned.

 

The ACLU has already filed for a court injunction so obviously their lawyers are reading it the same way.

 

How are they going to police this. I can see a lucrative future for male in hanging around abortion clinics and pretending to be the "father" for a fee. Are they going to check the ID of the men? Are they going to check DNA to ascertain if the male is indeed related, however since it is Arkansas..................

Honestly this legislation is going to bite them in the bum. What is going to happen to any deceased person for whom they cannot find a relative? this could lead to all sorts of family rows over disposal of "Uncle Bill"

And what happens in the case of a miscarriage?

 

And why did the male not do the responsible thing and prevent pregnancy in the first place?

 

Oh, you "seen" one did you? Were men better at English?

OK, the silliness is over , maybe you could attempt to connect your sexist BS with the topic.....or drop it since it isn't going anywhere....

 

Not evident by replies in this forum

 

I don't think you get the picture.....a woman's miscarriage or abortion is HER business, her PRIVATE medical history.

OK, a woman has a miscarriage and ALL her relatives, possible past and present lovers are notified ????.....explain how that protects her PRIVATE medical condition?


A fetus is NOT a person, it does not need a obituary , death notice , burial (maybe the funeral business is behind this) .


IF a woman thinks she has to notify the world that she had an abortion that would certainly aid in curtailing abortions....which are LEGAL medical procedures...

 

How is it not about abortion?

What wider picture?


What lie?

What are the "correct ends"?

 

In the UK this issue is pretty much settled, it is more or less between a woman and her doctors. It appears to me this is just a law to get around the abortion laws and put pressure on the woman.

 

Bingo!

It is settled in Canada and most of the rest of the civilized world too.

But for some reason the concept that a woman's uterus is her own and no one else can tell her what to do with it seems to be beyond the grasp of those with a theist agenda.