Another Texas GOP Lawmaker Is Attempting To Make Abortion Punishable By The Death Penalty

[John T. Ford]

Of course. You enjoy murdering people...but don't let some poor woman get an abortion (or ask for help raising an unwanted child).

You are not fooling anyone.

We all know you understand the definition of murder.

You are trolling.

I hope your trolling fills that big psychosis void you have.

 

[Hossfly]

I don't understand why people elect politicians like the ones in this article and the Texas government.

Why can't they just be happy doing the job people want them to do ?

Texas has a lot of problems. The highest rate of uninsured in the nation. Among the lowest in education and the list goes on and on.

Yet these men are wasting time and tax dollars with passing legislation that will kill women and doctors.

The stupid bill won't even get past committee much less become law.

It's disgusting.

Amplify Texas Happy Hour - The Texas Tribune

www.texastribune.org

Abortion is murder. There are a few exceptions for legal abortion. Murderers should be given the death penalty.

Intentional 'killing' with a hammer, knife, blunt object, or heaven forbid, even a gun of any type, all fall under the category of Murderer.

You agree?

Certainly and deserves the death penalty.

 

[emilynghiem]

I don't understand why people elect politicians like the ones in this article and the Texas government.

Why can't they just be happy doing the job people want them to do ?

Texas has a lot of problems. The highest rate of uninsured in the nation. Among the lowest in education and the list goes on and on.

Yet these men are wasting time and tax dollars with passing legislation that will kill women and doctors.

The stupid bill won't even get past committee much less become law.

It's disgusting.

Amplify Texas Happy Hour - The Texas Tribune

www.texastribune.org

Let me know when these prolife men decide to give the death penalty to men for having or forcing sex that results in unwanted pregnancy, unwanted children or abortion.

When lawmakers hold men equally responsible for the decision NOT to have sex if pregnancy or children are not wanted, then I will know they are serious about stopping abortion.

Yeah, give men the opportunity to chose if their child is killed or not. Then we can discuss the rest.

.

This can only occur if he can come and get the fetus and find a place to grow it for another seven months or so. And then his 18-year job begins. It's not just a matter of paying some money. He gets to do all of the hands-on work.

No one is forcing a man to have sex with a woman he is not sure of. It is his choice whether to do so or not. Men should think about these things before they go hopping into bed with just about anyone. There must be a male equivalent to "just keep your legs together."

Texas seems to slip farther and farther down the rabbit hole every day.

You can't kill something that's not alive so the person you replied to is lying about abortion being killing. In many cases, it's saving the life of the woman but these disgusting people don't give a damn about the life of the woman.

In fact they don't give a damn about life period. We just went through a year of how much they love life. So much they refuse to wear a simple mask. So much they deny to this day that the virus is deadly. The result of their irresponsible selfishness is 600 thousand dead Americans.

They just love their weapons and believe that they have a right to shoot and kill anyone just because how the feel. They do everything they can to stop the implementation of weapon safety laws. They don't give a flying fig about the thousands of people who needlessly die at the hands of a crazy person with a weapon.

Pro life? That is nothing but a lie.

The equivalent to "keep your legs together" for a man is "keep it in your pants" or "keep your pants zipped."

The reason for a lot of abortions is because the man doesn't want anything to do with the woman after he made her pregnant. They just walk away without even looking back to see what they've caused. A large portion of them don't even acknowledge the child is theirs. The woman is left alone to deal with the pregnancy and raise the child with absolutely zero help from the man. There are millions of children in this nation who have never even seen their dad much less even get a birthday or holiday card from them. it's just fine in our society for a man to make a child then abandon it even before it's born. Yet women have no right to terminate a pregnancy both she and the man don't want.

Anyone who calls a pregnant woman "knocked up" is screaming how much they hate women and how much they hate that zygote. They show they have no respect for anything but themselves. Much less any respect for a new life.

The man has no say in whether a woman has an abortion. He never should. It's not his body.

Terrific, beautifully written post.

The 'Pro Life' label is bullshit. Just another way to control other people. They"re complete phonies and liars.

Right to Life and Right to Due Process
Should both be protected as equal rights.

The problem is writing shortsighted laws that compromise one for the other.

This is set up to fail from the start.

Prevention of unwanted pregnancy and abortion is the best way to defend both rights fully and equally from violation.

 

[OKTexas]

Let's also add that if a woman needs an abortion the man who made her pregnant must automatically be castrated. Share the burden a bit.

.

Abortion is a choice, not a need, with the exception you could stipulate a condition of the expecting mother's health.

.​

Depends on what you consider a need.

Either way two are responsible for the situation - both should be punished.

Then both should have a "choice".

.

 

[Dana7360]

What is the penalty for rape in Texas?

Why are you asking that question?

If they want the death penalty for abortion they ought to have the death penalty for rape.. Doesn't that make sense to you? And, I think the death penalty for statutory rape as well.

They don't. Here is the penalty for rape in Texas:

Sexual assault under Sec. 22.011 of the Texas Penal Code is generally a felony of the second degree, but it can be charged as a felony of the first degree under certain circumstances. A second degree felony in Texas in punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a fine not to exceed $10,000.

Aggravated sexual assault is a first degree felony, punishable by up to life in prison, and a fine not to exceed $10,000.

I believe if Texas is going to murder a woman and a doctor for abortion then the man who made that woman pregnant in the first place should also be put to death.

 

[Dana7360]

What is the penalty for rape in Texas?

Why are you asking that question?

If they want the death penalty for abortion they ought to have the death penalty for rape.. Doesn't that make sense to you? And, I think the death penalty for statutory rape as well.

Good idea.

Let's also add that if a woman needs an abortion the man who made her pregnant must automatically be castrated. Share the burden a bit.

I believe if Texas is going to start murdering women for having an abortion then the man who made her pregnant in the first place should be put to death right along with that woman.

She didn't get pregnant all by herself.

 

[progressive hunter]

What is the penalty for rape in Texas?

Why are you asking that question?

If they want the death penalty for abortion they ought to have the death penalty for rape.. Doesn't that make sense to you? And, I think the death penalty for statutory rape as well.

Good idea.

Let's also add that if a woman needs an abortion the man who made her pregnant must automatically be castrated. Share the burden a bit.

I believe if Texas is going to start murdering women for having an abortion then the man who made her pregnant in the first place should be put to death right along with that woman.

She didn't get pregnant all by herself.

what if he didnt want his child to be killed??

 

[emilynghiem]

I think it's very hypocritical of the anti choicers who scream life starts at conception and all life is sacred.

Yet these same people want to kill women and doctors for having and performing an abortion.

I don't know if I'm the only person who sees this but it's totally illogical to me to say I'm going to kill you because you had an abortion that I believe it's killing because all life is sacred.

How pro life is it to kill people to tell people it's wrong to have an abortion?

If all life is sacred why are women being exempted from that?

Whoever is threatening death
is disrespecting DUE PROCESS
required before depriving a person
of life, liberty, security or other rights.

The proper rebuke is to defend due process, where neither person is assumed guilty and punished before
facing and resolving accusations of wrong by equal rights of defense and due process.

Accusing people personally doesn't solve the problem.

What steps do we need to take to address the wrongs and prevent these to begin with?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Whoever is threatening death
is disrespecting DUE PROCESS
required before depriving a person
of life, liberty, security or other rights.

There is an important point to be made here regarding due process.

I do not think that anyone is advocating killing abortionists, they clients, or their accomplices, without it. As with any murderer, they are entitled to a fair trial, and to only face punishment after their guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt, to the standard that the law requires.

How much due process is anyone advocating for the innocent victim of abortion, before he is killed?

The staunchest of us who see abortion as murder, and wish to see those who take willing part in it appropriately punished as any murderer should be, are quite willing to allow those killers far more consideration than they are willing to allow their victims.

 

[emilynghiem]

Whoever is threatening death
is disrespecting DUE PROCESS
required before depriving a person
of life, liberty, security or other rights.

There is an important point to be made here regarding due process.

I do not think that anyone is advocating killing abortionists, they clients, or their accomplices, without it. As with any murderer, they are entitled to a fair trial, and to only face punishment after their guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt, to the standard that the law requires.

How much due process is anyone advocating for the innocent victim of abortion, before he is killed?

The staunchest of us who see abortion as murder, and wish to see those who take willing part in it appropriately punished as any murderer should be, are quite willing to allow those killers far more consideration than they are willing to allow their victims.

I apologize to the original poster if they did not mean to judge and denounce prolife people PERSONALLY for "wanting people to die."

I thought that post was criticizing the PEOPLE and deflecting attention from the real problems and reasons for objections, as well as agreed solutions and means of prevention I believe are the best approach and focus.

Adding more complications with capital punishment distracts even worse. I do not think the intent was for people to get executed, but the intent was deterrence to prevent abortion so nobody dies. Clearly the law doesn't help address preventing abortion, but adds further distration while the original problems still aren't solved.

The original problem with why prolife laws fail was that govt enforcing them imposes on due process protections
While the problem with prochoice laws is that these involve govt discriminating against prolife beliefs of citizens who believe abortion is murder.

Instead of trying to impose one policy for all people across a state or the nation,
Local communities, party or groups can agree on their own policies, including funding or defunding abortion. I recommend setting up democratically run health care cooperatives per district or party precinct, to separate prochoice from prolife policies and jurisdiction, as a first step. Then from there, prochoice taxpayers can choose to reduce or prevent unwanted pregnancy and abortion by funding birth control or other means they believe work best. While prolife taxpayers can fund Christian education, abstinence education, or Spiritual healing to prevent sexual abuse and abortion in ways that represent them.

We clearly are not going to agree.
So I would treat prochoice beliefs and prolife beliefs as equal "faith based" choices and have citizens and parties fund their own programs independently.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Running over a protestor for no reason other than inconvenience is murder

Running over a protestor for no reason other than he’s protesting against something conservatives support is also murder – laws enacted by Republicans that allow conservative motorists to do that is also an example of the authoritarian right’s desire to compel conformity and silence dissent.

 

[dannyboys]

I don't understand why people elect politicians like the ones in this article and the Texas government.

Why can't they just be happy doing the job people want them to do ?

Texas has a lot of problems. The highest rate of uninsured in the nation. Among the lowest in education and the list goes on and on.

Yet these men are wasting time and tax dollars with passing legislation that will kill women and doctors.

The stupid bill won't even get past committee much less become law.

It's disgusting.

Amplify Texas Happy Hour - The Texas Tribune

www.texastribune.org

Why don't you ask the baby about to be murdered what their opinion of abortion is ASSHOLE!

 

[Likkmee]

He was going to call the law"a tooth for a tooth-21".
Then he remembered he was in Tejas

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Running over a protestor for no reason other than he’s protesting against something conservatives support is also murder…

Nobody is advocating or defending that.

Blocking roads, attacking innocent motorists and/or holding them prisoner is not protest; it is terrorism. And the targets of it have every right to use whatever force they must to defend themselves.

 

[Dana7360]

I don't understand why people elect politicians like the ones in this article and the Texas government.

Why can't they just be happy doing the job people want them to do ?

Texas has a lot of problems. The highest rate of uninsured in the nation. Among the lowest in education and the list goes on and on.

Yet these men are wasting time and tax dollars with passing legislation that will kill women and doctors.

The stupid bill won't even get past committee much less become law.

It's disgusting.

Amplify Texas Happy Hour - The Texas Tribune

www.texastribune.org

Why don't you ask the baby about to be murdered what their opinion of abortion is ASSHOLE!

That "baby" doesn't have a mouth to speak. It doesn't have a brain to think.

So asking a zygote, embryo or fetus what it thinks is stupid since it can't think, doesn't have a brain to think and can't speak because it doesn't have a mouth.

Since it doesn't have a brain to think it's not aware of anything and doesn't know it even exists.

Your statement is just as ridiculous and evil as you wanting to murder women simply because she had an abortion.

Why don't you want the man who got her pregnant to be killed too? That woman didn't get pregnant alone. That man made her pregnant. Yet you don't want to murder him nor do the Texas politicians. Just the women.

 

[progressive hunter]

I don't understand why people elect politicians like the ones in this article and the Texas government.

Why can't they just be happy doing the job people want them to do ?

Texas has a lot of problems. The highest rate of uninsured in the nation. Among the lowest in education and the list goes on and on.

Yet these men are wasting time and tax dollars with passing legislation that will kill women and doctors.

The stupid bill won't even get past committee much less become law.

It's disgusting.

Amplify Texas Happy Hour - The Texas Tribune

www.texastribune.org

Why don't you ask the baby about to be murdered what their opinion of abortion is ASSHOLE!

That "baby" doesn't have a mouth to speak. It doesn't have a brain to think.

So asking a zygote, embryo or fetus what it thinks is stupid since it can't think, doesn't have a brain to think and can't speak because it doesn't have a mouth.

Since it doesn't have a brain to think it's not aware of anything and doesn't know it even exists.

Your statement is just as ridiculous and evil as you wanting to murder women simply because she had an abortion.

Why don't you want the man who got her pregnant to be killed too? That woman didn't get pregnant alone. That man made her pregnant. Yet you don't want to murder him nor do the Texas politicians. Just the women.

A one week old baby cant speak or think for itself,, so are you going to kill it???

and dont even get me started on democrats,,

 

[Coyote]

Says the person who thinks it's ok to run over and kill protesters.

Nobody thinks that.

And no sane person buys your dishonest conflation of subhuman criminal pieces of shit who block public roadways and attack innocent motorists, with “protesters”.

You haven't been reading the posts here Bobby.

 

[Coyote]

I've never discussed Bruce Jenner.

Perhaps not him specifically, but you're repeatedly expressed belief in and support for the madness on which the claim that he is a woman is based. Just one example that I was quickly and easily able to find…

​

Gender is complicated. I firmly believe that transgender people are exactly that.

​

But then again, this is coming from someone who thinks science supports creationism.

Really?

Where have I ever claimed that?

And, do you realize that my statement is supported by science?

Here is your post on creationism, like Jenner - not specific, more a proposition of intelligent design. Good post, but still an advocation of a belief in Intelligent Design. What I wonder is why you can't see gender as something more complicated than a simple binary? Can't discuss it here though, it would derail, have to find another thread to do it in.

You seem to see abortion as involving only one set of rights once fertilization occurs - and that is the unborn child's. You seem to see it as being one person's primary responsibility - the mother's. Father seems to get a free pass. If HE doesn't want the child, he can leave. His responsibility is limited to child support and a large number seem to easily avoid that. She takes all the health risks, and they are not insignificant. Even today. Infact, childbirth mortality has been on the rise. She takes the bulk of the financial risk - does she have health insurance? If she is on the lower end of the economic spectrum, but not on welfare, probably not. Will her job give her maternity leave? Doesn't have to. Lower end jobs usually don't. Is she in highschool still? Will she drop out to raise a child? The answer I hear from most conservatives on this board is - not my problem. She got into this mess, she made her bed. These statements are usually peppered with "slut". The stigma, the labels, the costs and the risks are ALL on HER. But not the choice of whether or not to end a pregnancy she can't afford and doesn't want, even when it's just a fertilized egg, with no brain, no nothing but a few cells swimming towards the uterus (correct me if I'm wrong but I think some of these laws attack abortion at the moment of fertilization).

Let's go a step further on abortion. Serious discussion without mud flinging? Let's say the Texas law passes, along with laws in the wings of a number of other states (most clustered in that same region).

What next?

The top ten states with the highest level of teen pregnancy are all red states (though the #1 is actually DC, but it's not a state). These are all states likely to pass or have passed restrictive abortion measures and include Texas. Texas also has the highest number of uninsured people closely followed by some of these other red states with high teen pregnancies and potentially restrictive laws. Those same states - WV, MS, AK, AL, LA, KY, TN....rank among the worst for overall health. And guess what? They also rank among those with the highest maternal mortality.

So the law passes in these places, and we know it will disproportionately affect poor people - those least able to afford a child, least able to go to another state for an abortion (and given these states are clustered together in many cases, or they are western states with big distances involved), and most likely to need some sort of financial assistance.

BUT, do you support assistance for these mothers? Most conservatives on this board don't seem to. Nor, does it seem, do most legislatures in those states. Most of those states want less welfare, more restrictions and limits, they want to cut WIC, CHIP, and other programs designed to help poor mothers. Nor do they support truly family-values/family-friendly oriented legislation like paid maternity/paternity leave. They tend to opppose science-based sex education that includes contraception use, and they oppose making health insurance cover contraception or the government offer free contraception - all things that more enlightened nations (with lower levels of unwanted pregnancies) offer.

The attitude in these states, and conservatives in general, can be summed up like this (IMO):

1. Women are a unique "class" of citizens, who's rights can be terminated by the state upon pregnancy.

2. The child's life has more value to the state prior to birth. After birth, it becomes a burden to the state if the mother can't afford it and the state must take measures to reduce that burden.

3. The unborn child's life has more value to the state than the mother's.

4. 100% of the blame for an unwanted pregnancy is on the woman. This is obvious even in our language where we have a host of terms for her - slut, ho, welfare queen, etc. and none for the man.

5. Pregnancy is a punishment. It's a punishment for her sins, bad choices in life, etc. Don't expect the state to offer help.

What's next?

Proponants of making abortion entirely illegal insist that they just want to leave it up to the states...but is that true? These are the same people who push "personhood" amendments and legislation afterall. To them, a fetus is person, with rights - why would those rights be restricted by state borders? That's not rational. Their next push is going to be on the federal level and that is dangerous to women because once you make a fetus's "rights" equal to the "mothers" you are opening a can of worms.

There is no other category of human in this country who's body can be coopted by another, against their will for a period of time.

If you move on to the next step in terms of "rights" you can not allow exemptions for rape or incest. It's not the fetus' fault that it was created through an act of violence so it shouldn't be killed because of that. It did nothing to cause it. You also can not put the mother's life over that of the fetus so if her life is endangered or her health - you can't choose. They are equal. You make a choice based on who has the best chance of making it. Does the mother then become responsible for any conduct that might lead to fetal deformaties, miscarriage, or such? That seems to make her little more than a vessel for what is inside her, for 9 months.

Would miscarriages then be looked at as possible criminal acts? Seriously - there are countries that do this.

When these issues come up for discussion, the most frequent response is that she shouldn't have had sex (unlike the man I might add). Well, sex is not an agreement for pregnancy, birth control can fail, circumstances can go wrong, immature teens can think it won't happen to them.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You're arguing with someone who thinks that “science” supports the premise that Bruce Jenner is a woman.

Someone who thinks that Bruce Jenner is a woman…

I've never discussed Bruce Jenner.

I've never discussed Bruce Jenner.

Perhaps not him specifically, but you're repeatedly expressed belief in and support for the madness on which the claim that he is a woman is based. Just one example that I was quickly and easily able to find…

​

Gender is complicated. I firmly believe that transgender people are exactly that.

​

And, do you realize that my statement is supported by science?

What I wonder is why you can't see gender as something more complicated than a simple binary?

Perhaps because I'm not batshit crazy and/or mentally retarded; because I am able to understand basic science, and I understand the biological distinction between men and women. Again, someone who cannot grasp this basic bit of hard science, who thinks that “gender is something more than binary”, who thinks that “Gender is complicated. I firmly believe that transgender people are exactly that.”, has no credibility whatsoever in discussing biology. It's like someone who believes that the Earth is flat discussing astronomy and geology. Sane people know to dismiss any claims made by any such person as utter nonsense.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

But then again, this is coming from someone who thinks science supports creationism.

Here is your post on creationism, like Jenner - not specific, more a proposition of intelligent design. Good post, but still an advocation of a belief in Intelligent Design.

Your post is full of straw men, attributing claims to me that I never made, and do not support.

My post which you cited, to claim that I support creationism, is actually a rejection of creationism, as it is usually understood.

That you deny God, or at the very least, criticize me for acknowledging the undeniable truth of His existence and His hand in creating us and all that we know, only further detracts from what credibility you have; or would if you had ever had any credibility to begin with.