Should women who smoke or drink during pregnancy be charged with a crime?

[G.T.]

And thus why we have the issues we have.

If it is not important to you...then it shouldnt be important to anyone.

Sorry...I find that arrogant and selfish.

No, you're mixing up my making a selfish emotional decision with my looking at the facts as they were and accepting them, and thinking it unreasonable based on facts and logic *not* to accept the facts as they were.

There was no reason to believe a state agency had faked or altered the originally released document, the one that says right on it that with the state seal, it's good in any court of law within the united states. It's conspiracy minded to believe that the state would break a law so large as to illigitimately allow a false POTUS.

That's not thinking arrogantly, that's being reasonable. Being arrogant is demanding more than what is legally admissible in any court of law.

And here was my thinking...

He was asked to prodfuce a BC....he didnt. Instead, he produced something that can be used as a BC...which you and I know kept the door open for some people to want to see more...and so many asked for more and were ridiculed for it.

And that irked me. It was an immature and calculated move so he and his party can play on the insecrutities of many on the right....and use it for political expediency.

So I wanted him to do the right thing and produce it seeing as a POTUS should not play with Americans for political gain.

And to really piss me off...he then SHOWS IT when it became politically beneficial for him to show it....as was evident by him using it to knock out the poll leader of the GOP....

If he was willing to show it...he should have at the beginning.....if he went out of his way to show the shorty...he could have shown the longy....

It's not his fault people are conspiracy theorist kooks.

It says right on the short-form that it's an accurate representation of the long form.

I go with the same logic as the bin laden photos. Even if you release them, it won't satisfy conspiracy nut jobs.

And as sure as the sky is blue, the "there's layers! the long form is fake!" was born.

And it's not arrogant to dismiss them as kooks, either. There's no logical reason, n'or LEGAL REASON (<--THAT'S THE KICKER), that he needed to produce more proof of anything.

 

[Dr.Drock]

what if we only made it illegal to smoke or drink during the third trimester? That sounds like a reasonable compromise?

Still an embarrasing waste of taxpayer dollars and government resources.

Frankly that's an empty argument. Every criminal that has EVER been arrested for ANY crime has said exactly the same thing. Why is the government wasting money chasing down speeders, drunk drivers, drug users, abusers.... right on down the line.

No it's not an empty argument, I think the taxes and bureacracies to input that outweigh the postives of stopping people. Same as I do with the drug war.

Gotta weigh the positives and negatives. Do the increase of taxes to administer this new law and prosecute people and provide childcare for newborns outweigh the desire to punish women with newborns or 3rd trimester women? To me, the answer is no.

Think of how hard it would be to catch women doing this, when they can smoke up a storm in their home and drink til they puke.

How many taxes do you want to collect and how much do you want to spend on something that will catch like 1% of the offenders?

 

[Screaming Eagle]

A lot of times you breed your heifers to longhorn bulls the first time cause the calf's head will be smaller and easier to give birth to. Since smoking causes low birth weight wouldn't it be a good idea to smoke during your first pregnancy?

 

[Jarhead]

No, you're mixing up my making a selfish emotional decision with my looking at the facts as they were and accepting them, and thinking it unreasonable based on facts and logic *not* to accept the facts as they were.

There was no reason to believe a state agency had faked or altered the originally released document, the one that says right on it that with the state seal, it's good in any court of law within the united states. It's conspiracy minded to believe that the state would break a law so large as to illigitimately allow a false POTUS.

That's not thinking arrogantly, that's being reasonable. Being arrogant is demanding more than what is legally admissible in any court of law.

And here was my thinking...

He was asked to prodfuce a BC....he didnt. Instead, he produced something that can be used as a BC...which you and I know kept the door open for some people to want to see more...and so many asked for more and were ridiculed for it.

And that irked me. It was an immature and calculated move so he and his party can play on the insecrutities of many on the right....and use it for political expediency.

So I wanted him to do the right thing and produce it seeing as a POTUS should not play with Americans for political gain.

And to really piss me off...he then SHOWS IT when it became politically beneficial for him to show it....as was evident by him using it to knock out the poll leader of the GOP....

If he was willing to show it...he should have at the beginning.....if he went out of his way to show the shorty...he could have shown the longy....

It's not his fault people are conspiracy theorist kooks.

It says right on the short-form that it's an accurate representation of the long form.

I go with the same logic as the bin laden photos. Even if you release them, it won't satisfy conspiracy nut jobs.

And as sure as the sky is blue, the "there's layers! the long form is fake!" was born.

And it's not arrogant to dismiss them as kooks, either. There's no logical reason, n'or LEGAL REASON (<--THAT'S THE KICKER), that he needed to produce more proof of anything.

He resisted.
Thats enough reason.
We can argue this all day long.
I am not a birther. I believe ALL americans have the right to be served by the President. ANd he owed it to the 25% that were not satisified with the shorty and the total of 35% that were not convinced by the shorty..... There was valid reason for people to doubt the shorty...requiring explanations from state officials and others...or he could have opened his wallet and said "here it is"
And that is why I wanted to see it....
And now I saw it and I will move on...

But not to my surprise...he produced it and then used it on his comefdy tour to knock his leading opponent.

To me...Obama and Axelrod have no shame as campaigners....They will galdly make Americans look like fools if it means gaining votes.

 

[Anachronism]

Of course you'd be wrong.

But that's alright. I don't need to walk you through it, do I?

Oh? Show me any way that smoking, drinking, doing illegal drugs or having an abortion can be considered Moral and Decent. Go right ahead if you think you can do it.

 

[G.T.]

And here was my thinking...

He was asked to prodfuce a BC....he didnt. Instead, he produced something that can be used as a BC...which you and I know kept the door open for some people to want to see more...and so many asked for more and were ridiculed for it.

And that irked me. It was an immature and calculated move so he and his party can play on the insecrutities of many on the right....and use it for political expediency.

So I wanted him to do the right thing and produce it seeing as a POTUS should not play with Americans for political gain.

And to really piss me off...he then SHOWS IT when it became politically beneficial for him to show it....as was evident by him using it to knock out the poll leader of the GOP....

If he was willing to show it...he should have at the beginning.....if he went out of his way to show the shorty...he could have shown the longy....

It's not his fault people are conspiracy theorist kooks.

It says right on the short-form that it's an accurate representation of the long form.

I go with the same logic as the bin laden photos. Even if you release them, it won't satisfy conspiracy nut jobs.

And as sure as the sky is blue, the "there's layers! the long form is fake!" was born.

And it's not arrogant to dismiss them as kooks, either. There's no logical reason, n'or LEGAL REASON (<--THAT'S THE KICKER), that he needed to produce more proof of anything.

He resisted.
Thats enough reason.
We can argue this all day long.
I am not a birther. I believe ALL americans have the right to be served by the President. ANd he owed it to the 25% that were not satisified with the shorty and the total of 35% that were not convinced by the shorty..... There was valid reason for people to doubt the shorty...requiring explanations from state officials and others...or he could have opened his wallet and said "here it is"
And that is why I wanted to see it....
And now I saw it and I will move on...

But not to my surprise...he produced it and then used it on his comefdy tour to knock his leading opponent.

To me...Obama and Axelrod have no shame as campaigners....They will galdly make Americans look like fools if it means gaining votes.

no valid reasons for people to "doubt the shorty," none at all.

 

[Rozman]

They should,and if they are accepting any sort of government assistance it should be with held until they have proved they have stopped....

 

[hortysir]

How would you possibly enforce that?

Very simple.... blood and urine tests each time they go in for a doctor's appointment. Besides, most of them will be well known to their PCP as smokers and drinkers ahead of time. If the mother is known to have those issues it's reported to the insurance company who wipes their hands of any issues potentially related to those activities once the child is born.

You do realize that the vast majority affected by this will be the poor... don't you? Are we arguing that the poor should be held responsible for their choices?

Gee, it would be ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE to make somebody actually face the consequences and take responsibility for their own actions, wouldn't it? I mean that would just be Cruel and Unusual Punishment.... to force someone to deal with their own responsibilities for once in this fucked-up welfare state of a country we have going on right now.

The moment I was born my parents knew that they might be in for major medical expenses and problems due to my birthmark. Thankfully it didn't turn out as bad as it could have. In most cases kids born with issues like mine spend a ton of time in hospitals and doctor's offices. I spent my own fair share. You know what.... my parents never asked the government for a handout to help with those expenses. What the insurance didn't cover, they found a way to pay for.

Of course you couldn't have. That would require a functioning brain.

No. It requres a moral compass; something that you and the vast majority of the other worthless sacks of shit who call themselves Americans these days couldn't find with both hands if it was placed on a tabletop in front of you.

Sounds like a lot of rules, laws and over-regulation by government and/or insurance companies (of which we will soon be unable to distinguish the difference) for a group that defines their selves as pro-CHOICE

 

[chanel]

Newsflash: Many women don't show until their third trimester. The bartender and the convenience store clerk would not know. I can see it now: " 7/11 Shut Down By Nicotine Police For Selling Smokes to Pregnant Woman."

"But she was wearing a coat!" Ridiculous.

 

[Momanohedhunter]

This is ware it gets deficult. I personely feel that a poof of MJ now and again wont harm a fetus, and it has been said that a glass of wine or occasionel cocktail will do no harm. And a smoke now and again is not so bad. If you went after pregnant moms who drink and smoke while pregnant you would have to task the states CPS with working thees cases. Thees guys make F.E.M.A. look like pros and are legalised babie stealers and are just not real smart folks.

 

[TheBrain]

Newsflash: Many women don't show until their third trimester. The bartender and the convenience store clerk would not know. I can see it now: " 7/11 Shut Down By Nicotine Police For Selling Smokes to Pregnant Woman."

"But she was wearing a coat!" Ridiculous.

oh you're making it more difficult than it would need to be.

The law currently requires a doctor to call the police if they suspect abuse. A routine prenatal exam would almost certainly highlight any alcohol or tobacco use by a pregnant woman, at which point the police could be summoned and the law enforced.

Of course women who choose to go without prenatal care wouldn't be scrutinized, but no system is perfect.

Of course this is all hypothetical and I'm not even suggesting that I believe it SHOULD be done, just stating that it CAN be done.

 

[Shadow]

Newsflash: Many women don't show until their third trimester. The bartender and the convenience store clerk would not know. I can see it now: " 7/11 Shut Down By Nicotine Police For Selling Smokes to Pregnant Woman."

"But she was wearing a coat!" Ridiculous.

And some women "look" pregnant when they aren't. Wouldn't that be discrimination.

 

[chanel]

A "routine prenatal exam"? Do you even know what that is? Docs don't test blood and urine at "routine visits" and they certainly shouldn't be reporting test results to law enforcement. You must be a man.

I live in the real world - not a hypothetical one. Many women who smoke or drink (even occasionally) might not seek prenatal care for fear of being busted. That could hurt far more infants than a glass of wine. Stupid, stupid idea.

 

[TheBrain]

A "routine prenatal exam"? Do you even know what that is? Docs don't test blood and urine at "routine visits" and they certainly shouldn't be reporting test results to law enforcement. You must be a man.

I live in the real world - not a hypothetical one. Many women who smoke or drink (even occasionally) might not seek prenatal care for fear of being busted. That could hurt far more infants than a glass of wine. Stupid, stupid idea.

Hmm, my wife certainly had her blood tested at least a few times while pregnant with our last. Perhaps our doctor was just being overly cautious.

And doctors are already required by law to contact police over a variety of matters (IE gunshots, suspected abuse)

I certainly concede that some women would avoid prenatal exams if they knew they would fail such a test.

I didn't say it was a perfect plan, but I don't think it is stupid, stupid either.