[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 108 KB, 500x381, mccoycartoon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2591746 No.2591746 [Reply] [Original]

http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/02/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia

"Georgia State Rep. Bobby Franklin has introduced a 10-page bill that would criminalize miscarriages and make abortion in Georgia completely illegal. Both miscarriages and abortions would be potentially punishable by death: any "prenatal murder" in the words of the bill, including "human involvement" in a miscarriage, would be a felony and carry a penalty of life in prison or death."

On the topic of what defines a human, what do you, sci suggest? Religious dogma that determines humans are at conception? Perhaps at birth? Or maybe when basic infant structures are there in the third trimester.

Peter Singer states that "that human development is a gradual process, that it is nearly impossible to mark a particular moment in time as the moment at which human life begins."

>> No.2591774

It's not at conception, but it's at some point before birth. I'd mark it as the point where the fetus begins to respond to stimuli.

>> No.2591780

I don't think they're is ever going to be a definite answer to this, so my solution is to just pick a point during the pregnancy and say anything after that is alive and anything before that is not. Obviously it's not alive at conception, or even shortly after that. Just because it has a brain and a heart does not make it "alive". Obviously it is alive before it is birthed. So you have to pick some middle ground. Without getting too mucked up in what it means to be "alive" I'd say a good marker is the start of the third trimester. After that I would consider it alive, before that, it's just a bunch of cells. If you don't like that oh well.

>> No.2591785

One of the most ridiculous bills I've ever seen proposed, and damn there's too many...
A human is defined by the genetic code, so it would be a "human" at "conception", however it would not be a person, it would not have a nervous system, consciousness, real emotions, understanding of the world around it, ability to see/hear/feel/sense in general and so on. The law should protect actual persons who are alive and thinking, not potential persons or braindead humans. Oh, and the whole "death penalty" for the mother for choosing to do whatever she wants with her body is ridiculous, especially when it can also be accidental.

>> No.2591795

>>2591746
its not really a person until it is born but thats just my opinion

>> No.2591796

>>2591774
What do you mean by respond to stimuli though? You can poke it and it'll recoil long before it has a brain. Just like when you touch something hot, you jerk your hand away before your brain even has time to process that you were feeling pain. You don't need a brain to respond to stimuli and how can you call something that can't think at all alive.

>> No.2591805

>>2591785
It seems to be the bill only condemns women for causing miscarriages. If it happens naturally they wouldn't be penalized. Either way its fucking stupid and a woman would have a hard time proving she didn't cause it.

>> No.2591812

>>2591785
Women deserve to go to jail for having sex without a condom.

>> No.2591822

>>2591812
That'll teach them for trying to procreate. We wouldn't want that would we.

>> No.2591830
File: 68 KB, 320x250, 1281228577914.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2591830

There are 1.4 million abortions per year and only 120,000 adoptions. Banning abortion would force 1 million unwanted children on people who did not want them, every year.

>> No.2591841

pfftt how sensationalist. they are obviously speaking of back door alley abortions. not natural miscarriages... not that it makes it any better..

>> No.2591847

>>2591822
If they want to procreate, they can get married like normal people.

>> No.2591854

>>2591841
Some how I doubt it. This official is trying to outlaw any and all abortions, not back ally abortions, as well as any miscarriage that was caused by the mother, whether intentional or not. So according to this bill, if a women got pregnant without knowing it, didn't take her prenatal vitimins and didn't treat her body well, and as a result had a miscarriage (all while not even knowing she was pregnant) then she could go to jail for manslaughter.

>> No.2591859

>>2591847
I'm pretty sure its more normal to not get married before you procreate. Also, since when is marriage a requirement for procreation?

>> No.2591865

If men can be jailed for getting married, women can go to jail for a miscarriage.

>> No.2591867

>>2591746
At least this law is taking the idea that an embryo/fetus is a person to its logical conclusion. Really, if you think life begins at conception, than abortion or induced miscarriage is murder in ANY case. Hopefully this law will help illustrate how stupid that idea is.

>> No.2591871

>>2591859

since JESUS

>> No.2591883

>>2591746
It's not a person until it reaches Piaget's Formal operational stage. Until then abortion is acceptable.

>> No.2591897

>>2591867
...by putting a lot of women in jail. Oh, wait. No, that will just make a lot of prison-owners very rich.

Well, I guess abortion is the new "stoner convict". Someone easy to arrest, and expensive to house.

>> No.2591909

Humans are defined by the fact that we are smarter than other animals. So if it is unable of thought, it's not a human.

>> No.2591919

>>2591883
>Piaget
>still thinks Piaget is relevant

Fuck off, developmental faggot. Learn to beat your children. Oh, you're probably a woman, right? Nevermind, it's forgiven, cutie.

>> No.2591921

>>2591909
correction:
>incapable of thought
like me tonight, it seems.

>> No.2591937

>>2591919
Some children need to be beaten, some don't. The ones that do may as well be aborted.

>> No.2591954

>>2591796 how can you call something that can't think at all alive.
... I think you may want to reword that.

>> No.2591973

>>2591746
miscarriages? WTF?

Anyway, up to the 14th day there is no brain so no person as far as I'm concerned.
It gets morally gray from there up to the 3rd month, after which it is unacceptable to me except in case of
1) terrifying deformities that would make the life of the child either a living hell or reaaaly short.
2) Health risk for the mother.

>> No.2591975
File: 3 KB, 184x172, why bro.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2591975

>>2591796
>has never seen a plant before

>> No.2591989
File: 48 KB, 324x356, 1266807380582.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2591989

>>2591975
>implying plants are alive

get the fuck out of here, troll

>> No.2591992

Yes an embryo is certainly is a human, it is a member of the species 'homo sapien' and it is alive, so killing it is murder, but I don't think that's wrong.

Just because it is human doesn’t mean it deserves moral status. It can think, it can’t suffer. The morality of a being should be based on what it is like not on what species it belongs to. The only argument against this is the potential for life argument, which I think is retarded.

Why would we want every potential human to become an actual human? The world is becoming increasingly overpopulated; the more people there are the higher the demand for resources.

Each one of our cells has the potential to become an adult human. It is possible to clone an animal by taking the nucleus of an ordinary cell, and implanting it in an egg from which the nucleus has been removed. There is no reason why this couldn't be done for humans.

Should we 'save' all of these cells? Obviously not.

>> No.2591999

Maybe they wouldn't be so fucking mad if people stopped eating all of the stemcells, even I object to that a little bit.

>> No.2592010

>>2591989

>Implying plants aren't alive
>the fuck?

>> No.2592023

>>2591992
I probably should have stated that arguing when a fertilised egg becomes human is irrelevant. The argument should be whether of not the being has the required characteristics to acquire moral status.

>> No.2592027
File: 123 KB, 700x366, 1266120175834.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2592027

>>2592010
look, sir. Trolls.

anyone with a 6th grade biology education knows that plants are not alive

>> No.2592039
File: 18 KB, 535x669, ID_by_IAmRockit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2592039

mfw I live in the UK and we are mostly secular and pro-choice.

>> No.2592041

I gave up thinking about it ethically and think about it like this: Overpopulation is going to be a huge problem in 50 to 100 years. Why the fuck do we want unwanted children to be around? Could you imagine 50 million more people living in america? Mostly from the lower classes and/or to single mothers? If anything we need more abortions.

>> No.2592050

>>2592041
YOU'RE A MONSTER, NO ONE HAS THAT RIGHT.


...that's how I see it too. I've been compared to Hitler before for taking this stance.

>> No.2592059

The love for little clumps of cells and pre-born fetuses shows less a love for those things than a true HATRED of ACTUAL HUMANS.

This silent hatred is so strong that they would DAMN THE HUMAN for killing off what is only a parasite until it becomes worthy of being "human".

This tartuffery about the moral status of fetuses is just a cover for a deep hatred of the very activity of life, its judgments and its values!

Subhumans will be subhumans, inversion of values and all.

>> No.2592070

>>2592027

>anyone with a 6th grade biology education knows that plants are not alive

>That's why they're in grade 6

>> No.2592074

>>2592070
Don'tfeedthetroll.jpg

>> No.2592101

>when is a human alive?
>think back to when your first memory was
>chances are your memory started somewhere between 2-4 years old
>anyone younger than 2 isn't human

isn't it fucking obvious? Before the babby reaches 20 months old, it should just be considered animal abuse (which is still bad, but only punishable by up to a few years in prison)

>> No.2592102

>>2591796
SIR! DO YOU MEAN TO IMPLY A TRIPFAG IS ALSO NOT ALIVE?

>> No.2592127

>>2592101
>People with long term memory loss
>Not human

>Implying we can test 'when memory begins'

>> No.2592138

>>2592101
WTF does memory have to do with morality, you retard?

>> No.2592145

>>2591999 eating all of the stemcells

trips

>> No.2592152

>>2592138
>>2592127

because, fuckface, if you can't remember that you're alive, you're not really alive. Ever heard of "I think, therefore I am?"

>> No.2592164

>>2592152
HAVE YOU SEEN MEMENTO?

>> No.2592167

HUMANS ARE NOT HUMAN.

You cannot advocate physical violence, and be against abortion. Go blow up some mudslimes, you shit-raping faggots.

>> No.2592193

It is a person ones it is capable of thinking.

easy distinction.

before a development of a nervous system we can be sure it is not capable of thought.

after that (aprox 2 months in) it can start forming thought.

easiest distinction ever.

It is what I will right in my philosophy 1m class and probably receive an E but i don't care. Convictions are more important than good grades I will probably get a good grade anyway cause i can make fun off how retarded the other arguments are like judith jarvis thompson.

>> No.2592201

>>2592152
You have completely missed the point of that phrase.

>> No.2592208

>>2592152
Living: "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally."

That is ‘alive’; memory has nothing to do with life.

>When I'm asleep I can't remember I'm alive...

>> No.2592221

>>2591992
THIS: Obviously a fucking embyro is alive. Does that mean it's wrong to kill it? No. It can't feel, it can't suffer. It should have no more moral status than a plant.

>> No.2592255

durr let's punish women for their mistakes or accidents by forcing them to have children that no one wants that they will be saddled with for life and arresting them if they try to avoid it so our prison industry friends can make money!

that'll teach them responsibility!

>> No.2592287

I hate when pro-life opponents try to say that life doesn't begin until XX days, and use that as a shield for abortion.

The reason they do this is because you can make most of the same arguments for killing a fetus as you can for any sort of mercy killing.

>> No.2592337

I believe NlGGERS AND JE\/\/S should be murdered in the streets with their families, and that abortion is bad.

>> No.2592342

>>2592255
duurr let's punish people who choose to drive drunk with fines and prison time and permanent marks on their record. durrr let's punish people who make mistakes durrr

>> No.2592348
File: 102 KB, 720x488, 1268094948930.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2592348

>>2592221
>implying plants are alive

>> No.2592358

>>2592342
the soonest you can know you're pregnant is 3 weeks. You could have caused a misacarraige by, say, drinking a lot of coffee in that time. You would not know you'd done it. Therefore. It's. A. Mistake.

>> No.2592359

I dont think we should allow abortions at all

"but making them illegal forces women to dangerous back-alley abortionists"

Good. I hope they die for their attempted murder. Not trolling here but i cant believe we as a society dont see how wrong it is.

>> No.2592369

>>2592348
>Implying that a .5 gram gob of meat is alive.

>> No.2592376

>>2592359
K. What do if:
1 - baby is 100% going to die before it is born, and the mother will have to deliver a dead child (they don't automatically drop out if dead, y'know)
2 - little girl who has just become fertile is raped by her father
There are tons of other examples I could ask you about, but these'll do.

>> No.2592394

>>2592359

yea, but then you pay for them in the emergency room bleeding out.

then you also pay for the lost wages and decreased productivity by their absence.

then consider that you already paid to educate these women, some for 12 or more years.

then consider that nothing has lowered crime anywhere near as much as legal abortions, because the ghetto baby mamas that can't even afford a back alley abortionist crap out lots of extra criminals.

gigantic costs for the gain of peace of mind.

>> No.2592398

>>2592376
well, perhaps their kid will have a better life.

>> No.2592401

>>2592152
You don't actually know what that actually means. I think therefore I am does not mean I don't think therefore I am not. Logically the 2 aren't equivalent.

>> No.2592412

>>2592359
Rape, incest, accidents, women who are likely to be injured/die by giving birth/carrying, girls who have no desire or ability to have a child etc etc. But clearly you think forcing a women to bear her rapists/fathers child, risk her own life or raise a child she does not want or can support or have it pushed into a severely overcrowded adoption system is a good thing.

>> No.2592419

>>2592376
Didn't even read them. Abortion is evil.

>> No.2592428

>>2592376

Rape by the father: allow abortion within 2 weeks of said rape for special circumstances and increased risk of genetic disease.

If the baby is dead or it puts the mother at a significant risk then i can see allowing it for special circumstances.

>>2592394
I dont believe we should allow blacks/mexicans/those who cant demonstrate that they are able and willing to support a family to breed. I think breeding isnt a right, its a privilege and we should restrict who does it.

>> No.2592430

>>2592419
is raping an eleven year old evil?

>> No.2592437

>>2592428
3 weeks is the earliest a pregnancy test will work, I'm afraid.

>> No.2592442

>>2592401
>doesn't mean i don't think therefore i am not

uhhhh....yes it does.

>> No.2592444

>>2592428
Mexico might lose a lot of it's population that way, just sayin. Expansionist Americans...

>> No.2592454

>>2592428
Why do you care less about a real thinking human than a unthinking and unfeeling stupid sack of cells which can't even form memories? Let me guess, religious reasons?

>> No.2592460

>>2592419
Thank you for conceding defeat by refusing to read others points or defend your arguments in a debate. Also you are advocating children born of incest or rape and women dying due to circumstances out of their control, who is the real evil person here?

>> No.2592484

>miscarriages would be potentially punishable by death

What the fuck am I reading? Does "miscarriage" mean something different in America to what ti does in England? Babies sometimes sie during pregnancy or child birth, that's it. Do they think that every single person who miscarriages has tried to kill their baby by smoking and drinkning heavily and not eating properly and punching themselves in the stomach?

This is fucking stupid.

>> No.2592487

>>2592437

/evil smile

>> No.2592494

>>2592484
that's why it says potentially punishable: if the miscarrier can be shown to have brought it about maliciously/intentionally whatever then they are punished

>> No.2592502

>>2592484
It seems to imply that doing things that can kill a baby such as a hot bath without knowing you are pregnant would now be manslaughter. Only a backwards religiously minded immoral idiot who hates women could propose such a law.

>> No.2592506

>>2592484

they'll do a trial to see if it was because the mother acted irresponsibly or if it was natural reasons

If you smoke/drink/do retarded stuff while pregnant and it results in a miscarriage i'm a fan of the death penalty for that.

>> No.2592516

>>2592442
Actually no
let p be "I think"
let q be "I am"

"I think therefore I am" means p implies q, or p --> q

"I don't think therefore I am not" means !p --> !q

!p --> !q =/= p --> q (It's actually the converse)

>> No.2592523

>>2592502

>person believes life is sacred
>thinks abortion/intentional miscarriage is murder
>proposes a bill to stop male and FEMALE babies from dying

>must hate women

hurr durr. fuck off moran.

>> No.2592530

>>2592506
Everone's going to be too fucking terrified to get pregnant. It's still a dangerous thing to do to your body, you can lose your job, and now you can be killed if it goes wrong, should the state decide it was your fault. If I was a woman in GA and this went through, I'd move out of the fucking state.

>> No.2592540

>>2592523
moron, actually

>> No.2592544

>>2592540

learn to internet nub

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moran

>> No.2592545

>>2592454
Potential. That sac of cells might be Jesus.

>> No.2592549

>>2592523
>women deserve to die if they drink a bit/have a hot bath/are not careful and bump into something too hard and the baby dies

You want to imprison someone who just lost their baby or execute them? you are scum who does not belong in a moral society. This is just more bullshit from backwards conservatives trying to control people.

>> No.2592556
File: 50 KB, 407x405, 1292273870335.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2592556

>>2592523
>Implying religious people can think that far ahead

>> No.2592560

>>2592523
If they though life was sacred they would consider the life of an adult, self aware person more important than that of a foetus.

>> No.2592571

>>2592487
oh jon, I didn't think you hated child rape victims quite that much...

>> No.2592573

A child isn't really aware of its surroundings until at least their first 6 after being born. And legally, a child that young doesn't even have rights. I don't understand why abortion is illegal.

>> No.2592574

You're not gonna believe this, but Shirley Phelps-Roper made a pretty good point in the abortion debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xC9nPEqmRI#t=2m10s

>> No.2592575

Legalized abortion lowers crime. They want to pass a bill that bans abortion. They want to pass a bill that increases crime.

Yep, makes sense to do that.

>> No.2592584

>>2592573
it isn't

>> No.2592586

>>2592358
So is drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car and killing someone. You think they mean for that to happen? You think that's an "on purpose?" Yet they're punished for their mistakes that they didn't even realize they did. Hmmm...

>> No.2592596
File: 17 KB, 539x450, Republicans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2592596

>say they want smaller government and less intrusive government
>proceed to legislate bills that have the government looking up every woman's skirt.

>> No.2592598

>>2592586

Congratulations on making the worst comparison in the history of comparisons.

>> No.2592601

>>2592502
>>2592494
So every woman who suffers a miscarriage is now going to be accused of murder? This is still fucking insane. Do these people hav any idea how common miscarriages are? It's like they're under the impression that every birth will be due to the love of the Lord Almighty unless the mother becomes bewitched by Satan to murder her own baby.

>> No.2592608

>>2592586
people know you shouldn't drink and drive. Are you honestly suggesting that no sexually active woman should drink coffee?

>> No.2592609

>>2592586
>Involuntary Manslaughter
>Involuntary

>> No.2592618

Pregnant women should not have to be terrified of going to prison or being executed if they make a mistake or are not careful enough. Hell the stress will make miscarriages more likely and then they will arrested on suspicion of murdering their baby because of an extremely common and natural process.

>> No.2592620

>>2592574

And then she immediately discredits herself when she rolls her eyes and laughs and mocks the kid when he says something she doesn't agree with. Then she continues to yell "priests rape children!", and "there are no rapists in my church!".

I don't think I'm going to take an argument seriously if it's coming from someone like her.

>> No.2592624

>>2592608
If she knew she was pregnant, then yes. Yet you seem to like to fearmonger by saying "OMG EVEN IF WOMYN MISTAKENLY KILL BABBY THEY STILL GET ARRESTED" No. That's not what happens. That's not what anyone is saying is going to happen. The only one who keeps saying that women will go to jail for unknowingly killing their baby is you.

>> No.2592634

Hey, guys y'know miscarries are kind of.... upsetting. Lets say Betty has a miscarriage for a totally medical, no-at-all-her-fault reason. She really wanted a baby. She'd carried it for months, her huband and family are all happy and proud and that. She gets arrested and put on trial. Yes, she's innocent, but that doesn't stop this from looking pretty damn hellish. And uncivilized.

>> No.2592636

>>2592586
Anybody can tell that if they get behind the wheel of the car while drunk they won't be in control and so could endanger anyone they come across while driving. On the other hand how the fuck is somebody mean to know when they're pregnant unless they've been fucking without contraception (and even then rates for actually conceiving for a single given fuck at a random point in the menstrual cycle aren't that high so it wouldn't be a genrally accurate a sumption normally anyway)? Are they meant to just naturally assume at any given point after their first period that they might be pregnant?

That analogy sucks and your shit is all retarded.

>> No.2592638

Die in a fire, OP.

1) Biology already defines what a human is. This is not up for discussion. (Protip for fucking morons: Human describes a genus; it does not define a developmental stage you pig-fucking hillbilly.)

2) This is not /new/.

3) Suck triangles, political scum.
...
...
<span class="math">\newcommand{\aaaa}[1]{{{#1} \atop {#1}{#1}}}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\bbbb}{\displaystyle{{{S \atop CI} \atop ENCE}}} \bbbb[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\cccc}{\aaaa{\bbbb}} \cccc[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\dddd}{\aaaa{\cccc}} \dddd[/spoiler]

>> No.2592643

>>2592624
Of course women will be arrested for this. Not everyone who gets arrested is guilty, and this is a really hard one to prove. Someone might think she did it on purpose and report her to the police.

>> No.2592642 [DELETED] 

<span class="math">\newcommand{\eeee}{\aaaa{\dddd}} \eeee[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\ffff}{\aaaa{\eeee}} \ffff[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\gggg}{\aaaa{\ffff}} \gggg[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\hhhh}{\aaaa{\gggg}} \hhhh[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\iiii}{\aaaa{\hhhh}} \iiii[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\jjjj}{\aaaa{\iiii}} \jjjj[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\kkkk}{\aaaa{\jjjj}} \kkkk[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\llll}{\aaaa{\kkkk}} \llll[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\mmmm}{\aaaa{\llll}} \mmmm[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\nnnnn}{\aaaa{\mmmm}} \nnnn[/spoiler]

>> No.2592649

>>2592636
If she didn't know, she won't go to jail. Jesus, learn your fucking shit before you post. No woman is going to go to jail because her baby happened to miscarriage on accident. She would go to jail if she didn't want the baby, so she threw herself down the stairs to kill it. Not if she happens to drink coffee without knowing she's pregnant.

>> No.2592656

>>2592624
>That's not what anyone is saying is going to happen.

No, that is exactly what is being said is going to happen. A miscarriage is any time the baby dies before or during child birth, not just any time a baby dies explicitly due to the mother abusing substances known to be harmful for developing babies.

>> No.2592657

.
.
...
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
...
.
.

<span class="math">\newcommand{\eeee}{\aaaa{\dddd}} \eeee[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\ffff}{\aaaa{\eeee}} \ffff[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\gggg}{\aaaa{\ffff}} \gggg[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\hhhh}{\aaaa{\gggg}} \hhhh[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\iiii}{\aaaa{\hhhh}} \iiii[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\jjjj}{\aaaa{\iiii}} \jjjj[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\kkkk}{\aaaa{\jjjj}} \kkkk[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\llll}{\aaaa{\kkkk}} \llll[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\mmmm}{\aaaa{\llll}} \mmmm[/spoiler]
<span class="math">\newcommand{\nnnnn}{\aaaa{\mmmm}} \nnnn[/spoiler]

>> No.2592667

>>2592656
Nope, under this law, it's only if the woman INTENTIONALLY has a miscarriage KNOWING she's pregnant. Try again.

>> No.2592674

>>2592649
Holy shit. Right. If you are arrested, it is because the police suspected you did something wrong. If causing a miscarriege is a capital offence, they will suspect you if you have a miscarriage (yes, not 100% of women but it's bound to happen). If you arrested for a capital offence, I'd imagine you don't get bail so yes, they would go to jail. Fucking hell.

>> No.2592697

2592667
they need to prove that it was intentional. you have to be arrested for this to happen.

>> No.2592705

I'm guessing eveyone else on this thread died, so my argument wins? It's a crappy law. Yay. Now I will go do something fun.

>> No.2592721

Shouldn't we be happy about this? It's indirectly a form of population control. It forces people to be parents or not have children, making it more likely that people will have protected sex and take things like birth control, right?

>> No.2592729

2592721
What about rape victims?

>> No.2592737

>>2592721
> banning abortion
> population control
At least it hasn't passed, so it's probably nothing to worry about yet, but if it does pass, it will be pretty sad seing random innocent women being sent to prison (or worse).

>> No.2592841

>>2592705
the only people who think this isn't a crappy law are retarded brainwashed americunts. the rest of the civilized world knows that this is shit and not an intellectual debate up for discussion. saging because this thread needs to die in hellfire.

>> No.2592969

>>2592657

1
2
4
1
2
4
1
2
4

DOES NOT COMPUTE