Trump when re-elected should do an operation to create machines that can grow the fetuses and birth them. We can extract the babies from the woman and grow/nurture them so they do not die for the sins of their fathers.
LOL Why would we need Trump for that? Why would women agree to that? Who pays for it ? ....taxpayers. Does the "father" have rights to it when it's "born". Would the "father" have to support it or will taxpayers? Why would taxpayers agree to that when they don't have to pay for abortions ?
Because murder is wrong. I think pro choice people should maybe sterilize themselves then they can have as much sex as they want without consequence.
FoxHastings said: ↑ LOL Why would we need Trump for that? Why would women agree to that? Who pays for it ? ....taxpayers. Does the "father" have rights to it when it's "born". Would the "father" have to support it or will taxpayers? Why would taxpayers agree to that when they don't have to pay for abortions ? I see that like most Anti-Choicers you can't answer those inconvenient yet very practical questions Just the mindless mantra " It's murder, it's Murder" as if that proves anything or changes anything....it doesn't and it hasn't... AND BTW, pro-choice people DO have as much sex as they want without consequence
They offer babies to their true love satan and “science”. That is why they do not sterilize themselves. Serial abortionists and their enablers/encouragers are addicted to power.
FoxHastings said: ↑ LOL Why would we need Trump for that? Why would women agree to that? Who pays for it ? ....taxpayers. Does the "father" have rights to it when it's "born". Would the "father" have to support it or will taxpayers? Why would taxpayers agree to that when they don't have to pay for abortions ? I see that like most Anti-Choicers you can't answer those inconvenient, yet very practical, questions Just the mindless mantra " It's murder, it's Murder" as if that proves anything or changes anything....it doesn't and it hasn't... AND BTW, pro-choice people DO have as much sex as they want without consequence LOL, so you didn't really want a serious discussion....
Nothing like that good o’l Christian love and compassion. I guess it is almost Valentines day makes sense.
The suggestion in the OP just goes to show there's always a full moon somewhere to really bring out the crazy.
What is so crazy about it? You do realize that half of these rape victims choose not to have their offspring terminated? You might view that as "unimaginable", but it's really not.
Well, it could work similar to child support. Once they track down the father, he will be paying for it (or at least half of it). Or if people want to adopt the baby, they could help defray some of the gestation tank costs.
Good thing rape/incest is only responsible for less than 1% of all abortions. Of course this 1% is used to justify all those others. A growing tank would solve the problem. We have the technology to go to the moon, I don't see why growing babies in artificial tanks should be an insurmountable problem, as long as we throw enough money into the research.
A RAPIST would hopefully be in jail. A RAPIST should have NO connection to the child at all. A rapist is hardly a likely candidate to pay anything. Ya, IF people want to adopt......AND WHO pays the REST ??? YOU? AND it's IF the woman AGREES to this,... she may not. Or is this another Anti-Choicers FORCE the woman to do their bidding routine?
Sure - if anti-abortionists want to pay for incubating millions of kids and the next 18 years of raising them - then go for it ... Of course, it will never happen because anti-abortionists would never pay for it - hell, as soon as a kid is born, they forget about them.
I would never tell a woman to get an abortion if I had sex. I would beg and grovel for a baby. I always wanted a baby. I love myself and want to pass my genes on.
If you want to set up a fund to help rape victims keep the babies go ahead. But face it. Abortion is here to stay. Right or wrong.
Then isn't it interesting that there are so many on the Left in this forum who scream and seem to lose it at even the mere suggestion that maybe women should not be entitled to sue a man for monetary damages due to sexual abuse. I think what you're doing is just posturing, trying to get us to just drop the issue, when what you have presented is not indeed what you actually believe. Things seem to be one way when you want them to be, but suddenly they are another when it's a different situation and the argument is about something else. I'm just pointing out one more example of something that appears to be an inconsistency.
I just disagree with the idea that them getting to choose, by extension, means all those other women who DIDN'T get raped get to choose.
And what would the “extraction” process entail? At what point is this “extraction” process going to occur? Are you going to retraumatise an already traumatised woman? I doubt you understand reproductive physiology.
UNCHERRY PICKED POST : A RAPIST would hopefully be in jail. A RAPIST should have NO connection to the child at all. A rapist is hardly a likely candidate to pay anything. Ya, IF people want to adopt......AND WHO pays the REST ??? YOU? AND it's IF the woman AGREES to this,... she may not. Or is this another Anti-Choicers FORCE the woman to do their bidding routine? Is there? Where? LOL, you have to tell people what they believe so YOU have an answer? Pathetic. When you have NO answers (as usual) your imagination has to take over...
I doubt the extraction process would be all that much more traumatic than the extraction process in an ordinary abortion. I guess they might just dilate her cervix, stick a large diameter tube in there, and then gently pull the fetus out through the tube, protecting its delicate body from the crushing pressure of the birth canal. Unless she waits too long, in which case it would probably entail a C-section. Or the woman could just wait and give birth naturally.
Ummm that is obvious but may I suggest you do more research on reproductive physiology? You know - so you develop a conceptual framework by which to make informed decisions
