Home - List All Discussions

Question for Pro-lifers: Fetal Assault

What about pregnant women who smoke?

by: micah

Pro-lifers say that the government should criminalize the killing of fetus. But what about assault on a fetus? For example, if a pregnant mother smokes she can do great harm to a fetus. Or what if she has a poor diet, or does some other form of activity that jeopardizes her fetus's health? Should that be criminalized?

reply from: CharlesD

The law should be consistently applied to all children, whether born or not. Currently it isn't against the law to smoke in the presence of your infant. I might not like it that parents can smoke in the car or the house with their children present, but in most states it isn't against the law to do so, even though a case could be made that it should be. I would like the law applied the same to all human beings regardless of age, location, or stage of development.

reply from: xLoki

Or what about caffeine consumption during pregnancy? Daily coffee-drinking can significantly raise a woman's chance of miscarrying. I think micah brings up a good point. Do pro-lifers believe that pregnant women should be banned or restricted from doing activities that are perfectly legal for non-pregnant citizens, like drinking coffee or eating seafood?
For that matter, it is hard to know when any individual woman is newly pregnant, so should all women of child-bearing age be banned from risky activities that are otherwise legal to be on the safe side? I mean, if pro-lifers want fetuses to be officially classified as citizens deserving of rights, you think you'd have no problem going to such extreme measures to protect them, no? How many rights are okay to take away from a pregnant woman for the fetus's sake?

reply from: rsg007

But since oxygen, nutrients, etc. transfer directly from the mother's blood supply to the fetus' blood supply you cannot really compare a parent smoking in front of a born child with a pregnant woman smoking. Maternal blood (where all the bad stuff in cigarettes goes) is the only source of oxygen, nutrients for a fetus (not true for a born child) and smoking can cause a whole host of problems for the unborn child that do not apply to the born child (e.g., stillbirth, which is more than twice as likely if a pregnant woman smokes--see link below). So you cannot apply the same laws to smoking during pregnancy as you can to smoking in the presence of born kids. So what would you do?
http://www.babycenter.com/0_how-smoking-during-pregnancy-affects-you-and-your-baby_1405720.bc

reply from: rsg007

Bump for those who think it's possible to apply the same laws to unborn children as born children.

reply from: CharlesD

Because it is a separate entity residing inside her body, not a part of her body.

reply from: rsg007

Because it is a separate entity residing inside her body, not a part of her body.
It doesn't have a blood supply that is completely separate from the mother's. Do you think it's the same thing to smoke in front of a born child who, yes, will inhale some of the smoke, and for a pregnant woman to smoke, all of the toxins of which will be passed into the fetus' blood stream with absolutely no filter? It's basically the same thing as the fetus smoking.

reply from: Banned Member

Don't hold your breath for any answers. When the prolifers (or the majority of them, not meaning to lump all together) on this board get hit with a question they can't answer they either ignore it or claim that we are just trying to side track them from the issue.

reply from: BossMomma

If a fetus were part of your body it would have always been there. A fetus is a developing entity that is attached to your uterus, eventually it is born.

reply from: BossMomma

Because it is a separate entity residing inside her body, not a part of her body.
It doesn't have a blood supply that is completely separate from the mother's. Do you think it's the same thing to smoke in front of a born child who, yes, will inhale some of the smoke, and for a pregnant woman to smoke, all of the toxins of which will be passed into the fetus' blood stream with absolutely no filter? It's basically the same thing as the fetus smoking.
Women are criminalized for doing controlled substances during pregnancy if the baby is born with the drugs in his/her system. As a non-smoker I feel cigarettes should be illegal as they kill just as many people as any illegal drug.

reply from: 4given

Not entirely true. It depends on the state. I posted several months ago an article where the woman was charged for her child's death, when he/she was delivered early and tested positive for methamphetymines. I have some grievances to share in regard to drug abuse and the unborn. For one.. the legal restrictions if mom goes to a methadone/soboxine clinic. Anything prescribed is legal. There are a lot of high-priced "rehabs" around. I could go on for quite awhile. I have held my share of addicted babes, only to see them leave with mom and a "plan" for her. It is sad. Many of the children that enter care, are here after months of social worker visits. Is it the system? Is it the state? Who deserves the blame when it has been noted that mom is not in complete control?

reply from: SRUW4I5

That wouldn't work. For example, if a 12 year old did physical harm to someone they would be sent to juvie. If a fetus caused physical harm to its someone, it couldn't be sent to juvie, because they would have to sentence a person that is innocent of that crime too.
Or do you just mean all laws that could apply to a preborn child?

reply from: Rosalie

If a fetus were part of your body it would have always been there. A fetus is a developing entity that is attached to your uterus, eventually it is born.
They're not a part of your body but they are not separate. The word separate strongly implies that it is independent on the woman's body, which is not true. As you know, the baby needs to be detached (=separated) from the woman's body which is achieved by cutting the umbilical cord. That is when they become separate. The fetus is then no longer (physically) attached to the woman in any way.

reply from: nancyu

No, when we get a hit with a question which has no meaning, we ignore it.

reply from: Rosalie

But this question has meaning. You just don't want to answer it so you're making up excuses.

reply from: yoda

Yes. Next question?

reply from: nancyu

I do. They may be more difficult to enforce, but they definitely can apply.

reply from: micah

Fascinating! Wow you really do see a woman as a uterus on legs!
So suppose doctors established a link between caffeine and miscarriages. You think that police should arrest a woman if she goes to Starbucks twice a day for coffee?
Also, if the woman is arrested, how do they make sure she follows the proper nutritional guidelines? Do they imprison her and force her to eat the proper foods?
Yes. Next question?

reply from: micah

The question has meaning. You just find it very difficult to answer because it illustrates how immoral it is for the government to take control over a woman's body under the guise of fetal welfare.
No, when we get a hit with a question which has no meaning, we ignore it.

reply from: Rosalie

Fascinating? I'd say it's frightening and degrading. And controlling, of course.

reply from: faithman

In case your dumb a$$ hasn't been paying attention, there are already laws on the books against the abuse of womb children in this way. It most assuredly should, and is some cases already is criminalized. There is absolutly no excuse in this country for a mom to harm her womb child in that way. Your very question proves that you pro-death scum knows that the womb child is more than just a clump of cells. They are little human beings who can be greatly harmed by the neglect, and irresponcible actions of others. SSSSSSOOOOOO ask another stupid question death scum. You slice your own ignorant throat everytime you ask one.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Fascinating? I'd say it's frightening and degrading. And controlling, of course.
It is.
We cannot arrest poor women for being malnourished and pregnant. It's not their fault.

reply from: micah

All right, FaithMan, calm yourself down I have this vision of you as a superhero in a little yellow spandex suite with a big black F on the front.
Can you give me an example of a court case where a pregnant woman has been charged and convicted of such an offense? Illegal drugs don't count, because they aren't allowed even if you aren't pregnant.

reply from: scopia19822

"Women are criminalized for doing controlled substances during pregnancy if the baby is born with the drugs in his/her system. As a non-smoker I feel cigarettes should be illegal as they kill just as many people as any illegal drug."
I am a smoker sadly, but I did quit while I was pregnant as the damn things just made me puke.Prohibition on cigs wouldnt work, just like it didnt work back in the 20s. Alchol kills more people than cigarettes, I have never heard of someone who smoked a pack of cigs and kill people when they get behind the wheele of a car.

reply from: BossMomma

I'm a non-drinker as well, with children to think of I do all I can to promote a healthy life style for my kids to live by.

reply from: Banned Member

I am a smoker. Though I tried I couldn't quite quit smoking throughout my pregnancy. I have an anxiety disorder & manic depression, & I couldn't take my meds. I would go 2 days without a cigarette then feel like I was going to kill someone or feel like screaming. Plus migraines , etc. I ended up smoking on average 3-5 cigarettes a day & gave birth to a very healthy, beautiful baby girl. And the doctor tells me how healthy she is every time I see him!

reply from: yoda

And you're a complete fool and a liar. Next?
Is she pregnant? Does she know she's pregnant? How much coffee does it take? What does the local legislature think about it?
Most states don't have that kind of resources. If they did, they could furnish all pregnant women with the proper diet. But some states already do punish pregnant women for the use of illegal drugs while pregnant. Do you oppose that?
You just see babies as a piece of property, to be thrown away or ground up like sausage, don't you?

reply from: yoda

That wasn't part of the question, but thank you for siding with the proaborts in their nasty personal attack, it makes it so much clearer as to where you stand.

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: ProInformed

So pro-aborts say it is OK to commit fatal violence against innocent babies just because it's legal to expose them to the toxins from smoking?
Wow - what a weak pro-abort argument.
If the same sort of 'reasoning' were applied to already born humans than infanticide, toddlercide, teencide, and even killing adult humans would be OK in your mind?!? because it is currently legal to expose other humans in any stage of life to smoking toxins, isn't it?
Apparently the desire (need?) to justifiy abortion is deemed even more important than reason, logic, and sane thought processes to choicists, eh?

reply from: Antibigot

Yes, but the drinking could HARM or KILL another human: her unborn child. If she wants to keep the pregnancy, she should not drink.
Drinking alcohol is not always legal anyway. There are certain public places you cannot drink. And you cannot drink and drive because it could HARM or KILL other humans. You cannot provide alcohol to born children, but drinking during pregnancy is also providing alcohol to your unborn child.

reply from: Antibigot

Do these women intentionally get obese during their pregnancies? How many women know about obesity causing miscarriage and how many know about CHEMICALS and DRUGS causing miscarriage, which most people with common sense know would cause damage because they go to the fetus?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

That wasn't part of the question, but thank you for siding with the proaborts in their nasty personal attack, it makes it so much clearer as to where you stand.
You already know my opinion on arresting women for actual abuse during pregnancy. You know I considering FAS to be child abuse, and the mother should be persecuted. I also feel that if the woman knows she is pregnant and purposely (not accidentally) engages in behaviors that can harm the child, she should be persecuted for child abuse.
So, how clear does THAT make it as to where I stand?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

A pregnant woman is not just a pregnant woman - she is more (not less). She is also the carrier of a child, and that child is directly exposed to anything she is exposed to. It's like drinking a beer and forcing your child to drink too. The child can't even turn his/her head away and say no; it is directly pumped into their bloodstream. They are a completely helpless victim of this abuse.
When you are pregnant, yes you must now be responsible for someone else. And this may mean you lose out on a few "rights" that other people get, like sky diving, drinking until you pass out, and chain-smoking. It's called being an adult.
When I was a baby, I could have peed all over myself and no one would have thought twice about it, aside from either "eew" or "it's your turn". If I did that now, obviously people would be wondering what the hell was wrong with me! Did I become "less" of a person because I no longer have the "right" to piss on myself? No... I'm an adult.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Yes, but the drinking could HARM or KILL another human: her unborn child. If she wants to keep the pregnancy, she should not drink.
Drinking alcohol is not always legal anyway. There are certain public places you cannot drink. And you cannot drink and drive because it could HARM or KILL other humans. You cannot provide alcohol to born children, but drinking during pregnancy is also providing alcohol to your unborn child.
Hallelujiah, you said it better than I did I think. Drinking during pregnancy is providing alcohol to a minor. Among other things. It's also causing physical damage which is why I consider it child abuse.

reply from: yoda

Your agreement with the "he thinks women are just wombs with legs" personal attack made that clear.

reply from: Rosalie

EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.

reply from: Antibigot

EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.
Unfortunately, these women are screwing up their children's lives. I guess they have the right to. Who cares once a person is born. The mother is not responsible apparently. It's as if nothing happened! That kid will just have to deal with it. His or her mother was just excercising her rights!
But, once born, that person may suffer from serious problems due to drinking, illegal drug use, smoking tobacco...Not everyone knows things like cafeine can affect their babies. But, common sense tells you that too much alcohol and drugs are not good (for both born AND unborn.) Who's to blame for the intentionally damage to the unborn of WANTED pregnancies?

reply from: scopia19822

"EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women."
Not nessecarily, my mom was not prosecuted for her illegal drug use while she was pregnant with me. She was given an ultimatum by the doctor when I was born seizuring and thrashing in pain. Either give custody to her sister or they would turn her into CPS. She may have lost me to the state, but I doubt she would have been prosecuted criminally
"Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it. "
So you think my mother who CHOSE to remain pregnant had a right to do drugs while pregnant with me endangering my health and my life? When a woman chooses to carry a pregnancy she has an obligation to ensure her childs welfare by not drinking, smoking or doing illegal drugs.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, Rosalie thinks you were just a "blob".

reply from: scopia19822

"Yeah, Rosalie thinks you were just a "blob".'
Pathetic isnt it.

reply from: yoda

Well pathetic is one good adjective. "Slimy" is another good one that comes to mind.

reply from: micah

I'm getting the impression that this topic is very uncomforatable for anti-choicers.

reply from: BossMomma

It's uncomfortable and complicated. I personally feel that if a woman is going to stay pregnant she should not be allowed to damage her child with alcohol, cigarettes or, controlled substances.

reply from: yoda

That's just wishful thinking on your part.

reply from: faithman

Prove this
If you are just tttttooooooo stupid to see it, no amount of "proof" can help you. But I will try for the sake of others who may have a little objectivity... The way to measure life is by the instruments made to measure it. Human beings are the instruments created to contain human life. It is pretty obvious at a funeral which instruments have it, and which ones don't. It is the scientific principal of observation. Simple observable facts. But the willingly ignorant and blind, driven by personal agenda, refuse to use any inteligence they may have to observe facts, but waiste their time, as well as others, posting such monkey shines as you do. SSSSOOOOO tell us smart a$$, what is SSSSSOOOOOO hard to understand here? Live, moving around doing stuff live people do. Absence of, no movement, no responce, no breathing, and the like. Observable facts. All thru human history is the evidence of belief that life goes on beyond this one. Also an observable fact. Thru thurmo imagry, and wieght scales, one can measure and observe the presents of life leaving the dying person. This also strongly suggest that life goes on after leaving the physical world. Before there was electron microscopes, we could not observe viruses, and the like. Just because they could not be seen, does it mean they did not exist? The evidence of life is all around you punk. They evidence that it goes on after leaving this physical world is pretty compelling as well. Now come on and smear your willingly ignorant, self agenda crap over these facts like you always do. I realize that deprave wicked folks such as you, can not help themselves. It is just what low life scum bag pro abort maggots do. So come on little magot, wiggle on your dung pile for us.

reply from: JRH

Physical life is detectable yes. This does not mean something exists beyond our bodies. When our bodies die they are dead. This in no way helps you.
Irrelevant. This proves nothing. You can not assume that something is true because some people have believed it.
Bodies do change after death, but this does not mean there is an afterlife.
What measurements? Please link me to scientific studies. How do they suggest that an after life exists?
Ithought you just said we could observe the world and see the evidence?
What evidence? Present it.
You have given not evidence to support your assertion. Attacking me will not make you correct.

reply from: faithman

EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.
SSSSSOOOOO... you don't have a uterus and legs? And men are not just a penis to go for a joy ride on, but it seems that is the exstent of your interaction with them. Seems like once you are thru riding you have no need for them. What a fine choice you make for the father of your children, seeings how you are that GGGGRRRREATTT mom you keep bragging about. You choose "sperm doners" then condemn them for being exactly what you chose them to be. I would call that intrapment. But of course good men usually choose good women. That is good and honorable women who don't sell them selves out for a cheap thrill on saterday night. We are not looking to have control over women, we are looking for women who have control over themselves. If you want to be cheap and easy, that is on you. But don't come a crying when the only men you attracked are whore mongering low lifes that run out on their responcibility as fathers. That is the kind of bait you used, that is the kind of fish you catch.

reply from: faithman

Physical life is detectable yes. This does not mean something exists beyond our bodies. When our bodies die they are dead. This in no way helps you.
Irrelevant. This proves nothing. You can not assume that something is true because some people have believed it.
Bodies do change after death, but this does not mean there is an afterlife.
What measurements? Please link me to scientific studies. How do they suggest that an after life exists?
Ithought you just said we could observe the world and see the evidence?
What evidence? Present it.
You have given not evidence to support your assertion. Attacking me will not make you correct.
Once again you prove you are a willingly ignorant and blind punk. All you want to do is play word twisting games. But we already knew that, just one of them observable facts.

reply from: faithman

http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth28.html But you really are not looking for "proof". Otherwise you would see it all around you.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Your agreement with the "he thinks women are just wombs with legs" personal attack made that clear.
Please quote me saying I agree to that, because I don't even remember that phrase being mentioned OR me agreeing to it.

reply from: JRH

He admits in the piece that there is no proof in the empirical world. There is proof, as far as he sees it, in subjective religious experience and the way that man is. Of course that is nonsense to me because I have had no such experiences and see nothing to suggest that there is an afterlife. I can into more detail if that is your desire. He also makes a number of arguments which attempt to prove a non necessary truth using a priori reasoning, which cannot be done.

reply from: Rosalie

Why do you even bother to ask? Both you and yoda are so ignorant and arrogant that you think you know exactly what I think (even though every single time you try to guess, you're completely wrong). Why should I even bother trying to explain anything to you anymore when you don't read what I write and go on with your own lies and ignorant agenda?
EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.
SSSSSOOOOO... you don't have a uterus and legs? And men are not just a penis to go for a joy ride on, but it seems that is the exstent of your interaction with them. Seems like once you are thru riding you have no need for them. What a fine choice you make for the father of your children, seeings how you are that GGGGRRRREATTT mom you keep bragging about. You choose "sperm doners" then condemn them for being exactly what you chose them to be. I would call that intrapment. But of course good men usually choose good women. That is good and honorable women who don't sell them selves out for a cheap thrill on saterday night. We are not looking to have control over women, we are looking for women who have control over themselves. If you want to be cheap and easy, that is on you. But don't come a crying when the only men you attracked are whore mongering low lifes that run out on their responcibility as fathers. That is the kind of bait you used, that is the kind of fish you catch.
When you learn to interact like an adult without insults and all the incredible hatred, maybe I will join in. Your hateful assumptions are astoundingly ridiculous and disgusting. You are just as deranged as your abusive pal ChristianLott.

reply from: BossMomma

Why do you even bother to ask? Both you and yoda are so ignorant and arrogant that you think you know exactly what I think (even though every single time you try to guess, you're completely wrong). Why should I even bother trying to explain anything to you anymore when you don't read what I write and go on with your own lies and ignorant agenda?
EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.
SSSSSOOOOO... you don't have a uterus and legs? And men are not just a penis to go for a joy ride on, but it seems that is the exstent of your interaction with them. Seems like once you are thru riding you have no need for them. What a fine choice you make for the father of your children, seeings how you are that GGGGRRRREATTT mom you keep bragging about. You choose "sperm doners" then condemn them for being exactly what you chose them to be. I would call that intrapment. But of course good men usually choose good women. That is good and honorable women who don't sell them selves out for a cheap thrill on saterday night. We are not looking to have control over women, we are looking for women who have control over themselves. If you want to be cheap and easy, that is on you. But don't come a crying when the only men you attracked are whore mongering low lifes that run out on their responcibility as fathers. That is the kind of bait you used, that is the kind of fish you catch.
When you learn to interact like an adult without insults and all the incredible hatred, maybe I will join in. Your hateful assumptions are astoundingly ridiculous and disgusting. You are just as deranged as your abusive pal ChristianLott.
Yeah, somehow it's a woman's fault that the man ain't worth a damn. FBoy is a walking case for abortion.

reply from: yoda

Top of page 2, this thread. You didn't know what you were saying?

reply from: scopia19822

"Why do you even bother to ask? Both you and yoda are so ignorant and arrogant that you think you know exactly what I think (even though every single time you try to guess, you're completely wrong). Why should I even bother trying to explain anything to you anymore when you don't read what I write and go on with your own lies and ignorant agenda?"
You said a pregnant women doesnt forfiet any rights to her body. So I ask you a legitment question about pregnant women who use illegal drugs and endangers the health and life of her preborn child. And yet since that would actually require you to THINK and give an original answer instead of the choiceist script, you once again are having a fit and hurling insults, the very thing you accuse me of doing. Are you familar with the phrase the pot calling the kettle black? Now are you going to give an intelliegent answer and actually have a debate or are you just going to go on spewing the choicest rhethoric you are so deeply indoctrinated with?

reply from: Rosalie

True. You rarely see someone this hateful, abusive and demented.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Top of page 2, this thread. You didn't know what you were saying?
It meant that I think it is frightening and degrading to consider a woman to be just a uterus, and that's it. No reference to WHO thinks that, or even if someone feels that way. Just my agreement that IF someone DID feel that way, it would be frightening and degreading.
It also doesn't mean I agree with EVERYTHING Micah says; in fact I do not. But I did agree with that one statement of his. I occasionally agree with you too.

reply from: BossMomma

True. You rarely see someone this hateful, abusive and demented.
I seriously hope he doesn't have a wife or girl friend, he strikes me as the type who prefers his women huddling in corners with black eyes.

reply from: scopia19822

"I seriously hope he doesn't have a wife or girl friend, he strikes me as the type who prefers his women huddling in corners with black eyes"
I hope not. A woman isnt a mans personal punching bag/doormat. I am now lobbying with other women on another group I belong too to get marital rape in VA to be considered a sex crime, not under the domestic violence statue where it would be equated with simple assault. A man who rapes his wife is the worst of worst, only to be beaten out by child molesters as they have violated the most sacred trust that is part of the marriage bond. We finally were successful with abolishing the practice of making a rape victim pass a lie detector test before prosecution will move ahead. We also got the loophole closed that if a man raped a girl between 15-18 offered to marry the girl that the charges would be dismissed.

reply from: Rosalie

That's pretty much the impression I get, too.

reply from: yoda

You reposted all those statements in the same post. You knew they went together. Don't play innocent.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You reposted all those statements in the same post. You knew they went together. Don't play innocent.
I was really simply hitting the quote button, Yoda. Stop trying to find conspiracies everywhere.

reply from: yoda

No need to. You provide the evidence without any effort on my part.
You hit the quote button with no regard at all to how it looked. You just don't care.

reply from: faithman

Why do you even bother to ask? Both you and yoda are so ignorant and arrogant that you think you know exactly what I think (even though every single time you try to guess, you're completely wrong). Why should I even bother trying to explain anything to you anymore when you don't read what I write and go on with your own lies and ignorant agenda?
EVERYONE is punished for using illegal drugs. Not just pregnant women.
Believe it or not, pregnant women do not forfeit any rights to their bodies at all. I know you hate this fact but that's about all you can do about it.
We are not uteruses on legs. I know that you and your abusive pals would just LOVe to tie us up in the basement and control our lives, even such little things as caffein intake, but you are insane if you think any self-respecting woman will ever allow that. You have no control over us, nor will you ever have any.
SSSSSOOOOO... you don't have a uterus and legs? And men are not just a penis to go for a joy ride on, but it seems that is the exstent of your interaction with them. Seems like once you are thru riding you have no need for them. What a fine choice you make for the father of your children, seeings how you are that GGGGRRRREATTT mom you keep bragging about. You choose "sperm doners" then condemn them for being exactly what you chose them to be. I would call that intrapment. But of course good men usually choose good women. That is good and honorable women who don't sell them selves out for a cheap thrill on saterday night. We are not looking to have control over women, we are looking for women who have control over themselves. If you want to be cheap and easy, that is on you. But don't come a crying when the only men you attracked are whore mongering low lifes that run out on their responcibility as fathers. That is the kind of bait you used, that is the kind of fish you catch.
When you learn to interact like an adult without insults and all the incredible hatred, maybe I will join in. Your hateful assumptions are astoundingly ridiculous and disgusting. You are just as deranged as your abusive pal ChristianLott.
Yeah, somehow it's a woman's fault that the man ain't worth a damn. FBoy is a walking case for abortion.
I never said that it was women's fault for men not being a damn, and I dare you to quote the post where I did. I said it was your fault for choosing one HHHHHHUGGGEEE difference. But it is just like a bunch of man hating lying scancs to try and atribute what was never said.

reply from: yoda

Shhhhhh!
They're killing their strawmen again, be quiet!!

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No need to. You provide the evidence without any effort on my part.
You hit the quote button with no regard at all to how it looked. You just don't care.
Yes, I did not care how it looked because it never occurred to me that someone would freak out and think that I:
A. thought the original person really DID think women were walking uteruses
B. though everything Micah said was perfectly amazing all the time
C. agreed with every single thing Micah said all the time
D. had the same exact beliefs as Micah on everything
Yet you assumed ALL of the above as far as I can tell. It seems as if you think I believed the first person considers all women to be walking uteruses, that I think Micah is God's gift to human kind, that I always agree with everything he says, and that my beliefs are exactly the same as his.
You're wrong on every single count.

reply from: 4given

True. You rarely see someone this hateful, abusive and demented.
I seriously hope he doesn't have a wife or girl friend, he strikes me as the type who prefers his women huddling in corners with black eyes. Slanderer! That is a horribly disgusting thing to say, and not anywhere close to the truth.

reply from: 4given

Are you agreeing with the above statement Scopia?

reply from: yoda

No, you just want to "win" again. Fine, consider yourself the "winner" again.
I'm done with you. Iggyland is the best place for you.

reply from: scopia19822

"Are you agreeing with the above statement Scopia?"
No I am not. I just said I hope not and that a woman isnt meant to be abused or used. Since Rosalie thinks I am so anti woman and I am having to defend myself against such accusations. It was meant as a general statement.

reply from: 4given

Oh. It was the "hope not" that seemed to imply that it may be a possibility. I am sure you are aware of what he has been through caring for his wife through her long battle with cancer. We have been friends throughout. I know his true heart. Many would be fortunate to have a spouse that does all of the things he had to for his wife.

reply from: scopia19822

"Oh. It was the "hope not" that seemed to imply that it may be a possibility. I am sure you are aware of what he has been through caring for his wife through her long battle with cancer. We have been friends throughout. I know his true heart. Many would be fortunate to have a spouse that does all of the things he had to for his wife.'
I had heard about it yes. If it came off that way I apologize, I dont agree with some of his "discriptive" phrases, but its free country and we have the 1st amendment.

reply from: 4given

Nor do I, but it in no way would make it okay for me to slander him in such a way. Given most people are aware of what he has been going through, a statement like that (the battered wife bit) would be a way to deliberately hurt him.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Nor do I, but it in no way would make it okay for me to slander him in such a way. Given most people are aware of what he has been going through, a statement like that (the battered wife bit) would be a way to deliberately hurt him.
I had no idea he was even married. I couldn't imagine it.

reply from: scopia19822

"I had no idea he was even married. I couldn't imagine it."
Yes and he has stayed and cared for his wife through out the whole ordeal, when some men will abandon their wives when they find out they have cancer especially breast cancer either one they are cowards and cant stand being around a sick person or they are just superficial and cant stand to have an "imperfect " spouse when they may loose their breast or their hair from the chemo.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Well, that's one good deed I can say he's done. I still don't like him. No matter how sick his wife is, that does not excuse his behavior on this forum.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics