Bill Tells Women Seeking An Abortion To Get A Permission Note From The Baby’s Father
I really wish I were kidding.
State Rep. John Adams (R-OH) has re-introduced radical legislation that would prevent a woman from having an abortion until she gets written consent from the biological father. As proposed, the bill triggers criminal penalties against women for “providing a false biological father.” Adams says the “first-degree misdemeanor” would be punishable with up to “six months” in jail and a “$1,000 fine.” Labeled by Adams as a “father’s right bill,” the lawmaker would give men the final say on abortion in the state of Ohio.
Wow, just wow. Talk about treating women as brainless, brood mares. This bill doesn’t even consider the woman’s wishes; she simply doesn’t count. Also, please notice where all the responsibility and punishment fall. It’s the woman’s responsibility to obtain written consent, and it’s the woman who faces criminal penalties. Why shouldn’t the man have to keep track of every woman he’s had sex with? And, if he approves the abortion… is that abortion now a-okay, or will he be subject to some sort of punishment?
This bill is ridiculous on so many levels. The fact it has 15 co-sponsors is frightening. Again, this is not an example of pro-life, but rather pro-consequences… unless you’re a man.
Here’s an idea for you “pro-life” guys: You don’t want to risk having your heir aborted? Keep your pants zipped. Ah… but that doesn’t fit with your reality, because while you preach abstinence you still believe it’s the woman’s responsibility to keep you abstinent. Once she agrees to have sex with you, then it’s all her fault. I mean, what red-blooded male would say “no” to sex?
Keep up this nonsense and you might just reap what you sow. Imagine if women started withholding sex from “pro-life” men in order to maintain control of their bodies. Oh, sweet justice!
Tags: Abortion
Easily one of the dumbest posts ever on this site.
Point one. Birth control is a joint responsibility, so is sexual activity.
Point two. Pro life guys, what ever that is, do not blame anyone for a pregnancy as giving birth is a not caused by a random uncontrolled event.
Point three. If a woman becomes pregnant is the ‘father’ removed from financial responsibiity at any point? No, of course not but he has no rights at all to support or be against birth.
Point four. So you think a guy who gets a woman pregnant and has no desire for marriage or a relationship would oppose an abortion?
Point five. You think it is okay to falsify a document with a false father?
Mike Protack
Point six: Protack misses the point again.
Protack has really sunk to a new low. Hey asshole, was one of the vows at your wedding for your wife to remain barefoot and pregnant? Maybe you need to start using an oxygen mask when you’re piloting that prop plane for Comair.
Regard this as another example of Mike’s “moderate” mask slipping off his face. He’s an anti-abortion zealot, always was, always will be.
I love the way Mikey spews phrases like “joint responsibility” and doesn’t address the fact that this bill gives all decision making authority to the man.
“Easily one of the dumbest posts ever on this site.”
What?
Where’s your threshold?
Not only is there rampant rascism in Amerikka, there continues to be sexism against women. This is another right wing attempt to stop abortions, control all women (who should be in the kitchen), not in the workplace.
Most bills like this are spousal notification not consent. Casey already addressed this issue.
I think it takes two. It is not a woman’s body. A wife should not be able to kill her husband’s child without notifying her husband their is a child. It has nothing to do with controlling women. You said in the opening tirade that it doesn’t take her choice into account. It does. It just doesn’t cut the father out. She has the sole choice of whether or not she will seek the abortion. If she chooses to do so under the bill then she needs to notify the father.
She voluntarily choose to mate with someone and should not unilaterally abrogate that resultant child. It was a voluntary choice that involved two people every step of the way. Surely, he should at least know and be able to make his case for the child.
Personally, I believe there should be no abortions. That would make this an irrelevant debate.
“It is not a woman’s body.” “It has nothing to do with controlling women.”
Incredible.
Regard this as another example of Mike’s “moderate” mask slipping off his face.
That mask was lost long ago, Geezer.
““It is not a woman’s body.” “It has nothing to do with controlling women.”
Incredible.”
Really? Well…..what gets dismembered and flushed out? Is that the woman’s body? Did that get controlled?
Every liberal should be forced to eat a fetus. After all….it’s just meat, right?
Perhaps men should focus on controlling their own bodies.
We have it well in hand, thanks.
If only!
But what if you are poor and, since you’re a slut, you don’t know who the daddy is?
Just sign a notarized document to that effect. If we find out you’re lying later on, we get you on two crimes. BONUS!!!
“She has the sole choice of whether or not she will seek the abortion. If she chooses to do so under the bill then she needs to notify the father.”
Actually, for the record, no: under this bill, the “father” has the final say on whether an abortion will take place, regardless of whether the “father” and mother are married to each other. It is not a notification bill — it is a consent bill. It requires that in all cases the father agree to the abortion. The bill also has penalties for a woman who refuses to disclose who the father is.
It is NOT a notification bill.
It is a bill that makes the pregnant woman’s womb the property of the man who impregnanted her, regardless of whether that man is her husband, her boyfriend, Mr. Goodbar, her rapist, or her father.
It’s so refreshing to read logic. Thank you, Progressive Mom.
“Personally, I believe there should be no abortions”
Even in cases of ashole males RAPING women?
Would the victim have to get the rapists consent for the abortion?
What is next? A husband’s consent to prescribing birth control pills?
oh, and you have it wrong – this is not a NOTIFICATION bill – but a CONSENT bill – she would have to get the sperm donors WRITTEN CONSENT.
You know what’s my favorite – the article states that “In the case where the father isn’t known, House Bill 252 would compel the woman to provide a list of names of people who may be the father in an effort to determine paternity. “.
This comes from those people who believe that the government should not interfere in people’s lives at all – and that scream about giving the government any personal information — yet they want those women to list whom they had sex with. Why does she have to prove who MIGHT be the father, why don’t the guys have to prove they could be the father? How about a little add in the paper “if you are the father of the fetus of Jane Doe, please call 1-800-MY-CHILD to claim paternity. ”
I wonder how many honest man would come forward to claim that they are the father.
The bill is even worse than this pandora. It has a provision that if the woman is not sure who the father is then she must obtain a paternity test. Not only does this accomplish the woman-shaming but it also serves to delay the procedure, since a DNA paternity test can’t be done until 10 weeks. It’s just more of the same old, same old of throwing up obstacles in the way of women.
It’s not a woman’s body – really? I guess David and Mike are admitting that they think the government owns a woman’s body since they can force her to be pregnant. It’s funny that these are the same people screaming about government-run healthcare. Government run healthcare is awful but government-controlled (as long as they’re Republicans) wombs are a-ok.
“Easily one of the dumbest posts ever on this site.” –
Mike Protack, easily one of the biggest RETARDS posting on this site.
…….
Point one: this post is not about “birth control being a joint responsibility”; this is a discussion about an Ohio Representative taking it upon himself to try to roll back the pages of history and REVERSE the political progress of women in this country. *Hits you with a CLUE-BY-FOUR*.
Point two: Get it straight, Mr. Protack – “pro-life” men do not like women, and wish to control them. That is the truth of the matter. *Smacks you in the mouth with a CLUE-BY-FOUR*.
Point three. If a woman becomes pregnant what happens next is HER DECISION. Period. Deal with it, Protack, or leave the country. *Swats you in your balls with a CLUE-BY-FOUR*.
Point four: a guy who gets a woman pregnant and has no desire for marriage or a relationship can oppose an abortion all he freaking likes, it’s STILL THE WOMAN’S DECISION, DIPSHIT. *Hurts you in the ass with a CLUE-BY-FOUR*.
Point five: your “falsifying a document with a false father” question is so irrelevant it hurts the brain. And it also assumes there ought to even BE such a document. It’s a woman’s body, and it’s a woman’s choice. End of story, moron. *Wallops you across your mouth, buck teeth and Baba-Booey mustache with a CLUE-BY-FOUR*.
Brains, or GTFO, Protack.
Following along the logic of this bill, the man that the woman chose to “mate with” should also be allowed to dictate entirely to the woman all of her health choices: what she eats, how much sleep she gets, what medications she can take- everything – since it is his fetus that she is serving as the vessel for (to use a Biblical term).
Here is this RETARD’s contact info:
John Adams, Minority Whip
State Representative (R)
Address:
77 S. High St
14th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215-6111
Phone: (614) 466-1507
Fax: (614) 719-3978
Email: district78@ohr.state.oh.us
|||||||||||
I will be getting an email out to this maniac with all due haste,
and will post the email on this thread, and I urge others to do the same.
Wouldn’t a man have legal recourse to stop a woman who is taking cocaine or guzzling alcohol to the detriment of their child? Yet he has no right to say don’t rip it limb from limb. Why not? In the first case you are afraid that you might have to share the bill from a deformed or damaged child, but if the child is dead, you don’t care.
That is a heartless ideology. No wonder you pretend to have a heart by wasting other people’s money with no regard to efficacy. It is that conscience trying to take a peak to see if there is a little light left.
Oh I bet their wives would just love to see that consent come through–is that via mail or electronic from boyfriend, john, or fling?
Rich,
I appreciate your efforts but I doubt Protack will listen.
Any man who wants to stay an abortion must agree to:
1. An irrevocable child support allocation of at least 40% of his income in the case that he does not marry the mother OR he divorces the mother. That allocation goes up — way up — if there is more than one kid. Said allocation of income goes away once the kid is 21 or out of college.
2. An irrevocable agreement to start a Coverdale or similar account for the baby the day it is born that he has to contribute a minimum of $100/month to in order to make sure college costs are taken care of.
3. An irrevocable agreement that if he inherits any money, 20% gets put in the kid’s name.
So I think that if all of these men want a say, they’d be willing to make an ironclad offer of lifetime monetary support at a pretty hefty level — it is for the kids, you know.
Seems a little stupid. We already have allocations for child support. Considering it doesn’t cost 40% of income to pay for one child that is silly. Why do you assume that he wouldn’t want to have custody of the child? I would say let him have the child unless there is some reason which prevents it. Why make her raise a child she didn’t want when a father is willing? If neither are fit, there is adoption.
This is a bill which will not pass out of committee in its current form so the argument over details about a bill in Ohio is laughable. That is why I would rather take the big picture as I did. Most bills of this type are spousal notification which are wholly reasonable as I said earlier. I wish you would tackle the larger issues but you choose not to.
College education is not a right and no one is obligated to pay for it including tax payers just by virtue of one breathing. Earn it or go to a place that you can afford. Work, join the service whether civilian or military or one can Many get lostudy and earn a scholarship. Many get loans. Respect the gifts of others who invest in you as a privilege and honor.
“We already have allocations for child support. ”
Yeah, and you try raising a child on that money – or half a child, I suppose. And those allocations ar eonly good if the father PAYS which, much of the time, they suck at doing.
“Considering it doesn’t cost 40% of income to pay for one child that is silly.”
Depends on how much money you make and if you want to make sure your child lives at least as good as you. See, child support isn’t only for food and clothing – but also rent etc. Much less then 2K – yeah, it took 40percent of my income to raise my child and at times even more.
“I would say let him have the child unless there is some reason which prevents it. Why make her raise a child she didn’t want when a father is willing? If neither are fit, there is adoption.”
Ahh….a living incubator and nothimg more…
THANK GOD men can not tell us women what to do with OUR BODIES.
See how David shirks his and other men’s financial responsibility. It’s all about life until you have to pay the piper. Then… not so much. And yes, Cassandra’s figures are accurate.
Cassandra,
I think men must sign a paper like this every time they have sex with a woman since according to the Republicans sex is for baby-making.
No they are not, I have children and combined it does not cost that much to raise them. You pay for your housing anyway. Pandora, how can you say something so absurd. Impoverishing people does not encourage child support payments. 40% of a homeless jobless person’s income is a lot less than 25% of a working man’s. Stop taxing men and women who pay child support while you are at it. That’s right tax cuts….
In case you missed it my solution was to let the man have the child the mother doesn’t want. Wouldn’t he have primary responsibility for the child including financial? How would that be shirking a responsibility? I know that you can read so why aren’t you?
U. I. marriage is a permanent covenant. You all see men as sperm donors and checks. That degrading of men is the greatest threat to civilization. It is the heart of radical feminism and must be condemned. Men have rights just as much as women do to raise their children.
Men have rights – yep, that’s why there’s so many men that don’t support their children. Not everyone is married either.
The point being that you get a say in the decision-making when you make irrevocable commitments to a level of financial support that does not leave mother and child in poverty. Everyone has responsibilities here — your words, I think — and you’d think that men serious about the raising of children wouldn’t think twice about long term financial commitments to the raising of them.
And until the level of responsibility for raising the child are equal, you should not be an equal partner in the decision to have the child. Otherwise you are known for trying to control the lives of women, not in making sure that children are wanted and well taken care of.
“You all see men as sperm donors and checks. That degrading of men is the greatest threat to civilization.”
Oh, for FUCK’S sake, this is just a RETARDED thing to say.
Republican David, are you seriously that thick in the skull?
I’ll say it one more time, s – l – o – w – l – y, so that you
can digest this:
What Representative Adams is trying to do here is to CONTROL WOMEN,
because he DOES NOT VIEW THEM AS EQUALS.
Tits or GTFO, David!
This is ridiculous. As a single father of two kids AND YES I HAVE FULL CUSTODY OF MY KIDS. A woman’s right to decide is simple, SHE CARRIES THE BABY FOR 9 MONTHS!! If she doesn’t want to do that, that’s her choice, not MINE, not any MAN’s choice. Until men start carrying babies for 9 months, NO we have no say in it. And for all the self righteous bull about it’s about the same cost to take care of kids, you’re so full of shit, you have no idea.
“U. I. marriage is a permanent covenant. You all see men as sperm donors and checks. That degrading of men is the greatest threat to civilization. It is the heart of radical feminism and must be condemned. Men have rights just as much as women do to raise their children.”
No one is degrading men. No one sees men as sperm donors and No, unfortunately marriage isn’t a permanent covenant. A belief that it’s permanent, yes that’s true. This is a matter of who is the vessel for the initial point of suffering and I think you’re missing the point that until WE can carry babies on our own, we have no say.
Being a Man has nothing to do with what feminism says or doesn’t say. I’m perfectly 100% in my manhood regardless of what feminists say. The biggest threat to civilization is the belief that we don’t have to change. Even God made a change in his covenant.
I’m loving you short stuff.
Feminism isn’t about degrading men, it’s about treating women and their choices as equal to anyone else’s.
Okay, so this here is for Pandora,
who originated this post, and for the right
of all women to make choices concerning their own bodies.
Here, as promised, is the email I just sent out
to Ohio State Rep. John Adams (R)etarded,
concerning his attempt to turn back the clock
on the women of America, HB 252:
|||||||||||||||||||
July 24, 2009
John Adams, Minority Whip
State Representative (R)
Address:
77 S. High St, 14th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215-6111
Dear Representative Adams,
I’m writing to you in regard to H. B. No. 252, which I understand has you as its primary sponsor. I have read the bill, and now have a question about it, and I hope that you have the time to reflect upon and then answer my question. According to the language of the bill, as it is written now, it appears that what your bill will do is make it necessary for a pregnant woman to get written consent FIRST from the father before an abortion is performed. If my reading of the bill you have sponsored is correct, then I would like to ask you if you are MENTALLY RETARDED. It is my hope that you will not take offense at the question, it’s just that I find it difficult to believe that a state representative would be able to propose and sponsor such a bill and not be INOPERABLY RETARDED IN THE BRAIN.
I think it’s a shame that you are trying to push for legislation that will set back the progress of women in this country. However, to be fair, if my intuition is correct, and you *are* mentally retarded, let me at least congratulate you for overcoming what I think everyone would agree is a tremendous obstacle to obtaining public office.
Sincerely Yours,
Rich Boucher
That’s some funny shit Rich… Harsh but funny… I don’t think he’ll get it but his staff should get a kick out of it…
Short stuff,
Thank you. At least, with this email,
I can say that I tried. To hurt Mr. Adams’
feelings, I mean.
And as for being harsh, well, I say
Rep. Adams asked for it. He’s the one,
after all, doing something harmful to
women with this retarded bill.
I agree UI — Feminism has NOTHING to do with degrading men. Iknow many great men.
Feminism is about women helping/trying to change the way a lot of men, especially those in power, think. Only by changing this thinking will there ever be true political, social and economic equality of women.
LUCKILY there are are many men (for example these here — http://www.engagingmen2009.org/24) out there willing to work together with women toward true equality.