Again, this is closer to the mark than both sides might realize.
I wouldn't support a ban on abortions WITHOUT also having an agreement
with all MEN in that state to refrain from sex unless both they and their
partner agree to responsibility for raising children if pregnancy occurs.
If all MEN would agree to no rape, incest, sex abuse or relationship abuse,
then the only sex that would be lawful is where the partners mutually consent,
including the TERMS and responsibility for having children in cases of pregnancy.
Then all abusive MEN could get screened out to protect women.
I might agree to make sure MEN agree to follow the laws so it doesn't target just the women.
If they can't agree, then that's why the abortion laws are protested.
The MEN need to take equal responsibility NOT TO HAVE SEX IN THE FIRST PLACE,
or more responsibility in cases of coercion, abuse and rape where the woman never consented to begin with!
That the most unrealistic thing I’ve ever heard in my life since life began.
EXACTLY
Truth1253
From the place in the process where
Roe V Wade struck down abortion laws,
the issue was Substantive Due Process.
With criminalizing abortion, there was no way for the GOVERNMENT to pursue
investigations into "mitigating factors" without already violating the
woman's due process. Prosecution and defense would already be violating
someone's rights BEFORE proving they had committed an offense that
merits the loss of liberty and protections.
This has not changed. Changing the criteria of the laws
still does not resolve this issue of Substantive Due Process.
The problem is Govt cannot intervene until AFTER a violation has occurred.
But after the point of pregnancy, this targets and affects WOMEN
so the laws are NEVER going to be fair if they only police and
regulate AFTER the point of pregnancy.
However, at the point where both partners are equal in responsibility is
BEFORE having sex and BEFORE pregnancy occurs,
the Government CANNOT intervene in the personal lives
and decisions of people to have sex CONSENSUALLY.
So laws cannot be made at that point either by Govt IMPOSING on people.
This is why it doesn't work at all for Govt to get involved.
The approach that will work is for PEOPLE to decide for themselves
how to follow agreed standards, which is PERSONAL and not for Govt to dictate.
If people want to prevent abortion, and to protect Women (and/or unborn children) from the politics of abortion,
then we'd all have to agree to work personally on plans and standards of conduct
to PREVENT unwanted sex, unwanted pregnancy, unwanted children and abortion
by PREVENTING coercion, rape and any level of relationship abuse or sex abuse.
This clearly can't be done through Govt but must be by consent of the people,
similar to how Prolife outreach works by education and support to prevent abuse and abortion.
Truth1253 the more "ridiculous" and "unrealistic" it gets trying
to legislate through Govt, the more people will realize we need
to take the approach that Prolife advocates use in trying to
resolve and prevent the problems that otherwise lead to abortion.
That's up to people to work this out for ourselves, Govt cannot fix this for us.
