Pass a law which makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat, unless you support government welfare programs

Midnight FM

Gold Member
Joined
May 4, 2025
Messages
797
Reaction score
349
Points
143
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

Cool. I'm covered.


If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.

Except it will never happen.
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
In that case, the law should provide that the government remove the newborn immediately. Children will be provided, food, clothing, shelter, education, whatever they need in protective government dormitories.
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
You live in the UK, don't you?

Only the Brits would write a law that bars you from your own thoughts.
 
You live in the UK, don't you?

Only the Brits would write a law that bars you from your own thoughts.
No, but I'm tempted to think that claiming to be against abortion, if you don't support government welfare programs to support the children in question should be charged as fraud.

It's a form of fraud. You're claiming to be "pro-life", when in reality you aren't.
 
No, but I'm tempted to think that claiming to be against abortion, if you don't support government welfare programs to support the children in question should be charged as fraud.

It's a form of fraud. You're claiming to be "pro-life", when in reality you aren't.
Why? If you have a child, YOU are responsible for that child. If you cannot care for it, you should be charged with child endangerment.
 
Why? If you have a child, YOU are responsible for that child. If you cannot care for it, you should be charged with child endangerment.
Right, and if a parent is charged and sent to jail, the state will have to pick up the tab for the child in foster care.
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
NoDrEvilG.gif
 
Right, and if a parent is charged and sent to jail, the state will have to pick up the tab for the child in foster care.
So, the solution to that is obvious to anyone who has two braincells to rub together.

Can you guess at what that is?
 
Teach the children to not have babies before they can afford them.

Always to to the root cause and fix an issue there. Not in the aftermath.
Nope, won't work. Try teaching a cat "not to have babies".

And the root cause of the issue is irreverent. Once the child comes into existence, it needs to be cared for.
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.


And here we see the left's true colors.

They want the right to decide who has the right to speak on political issues.

And, shocker, it is people that agree with them. Others get denied for "Reasons".


Filthy commie bastards.
 
Nope, won't work. Try teaching a cat "not to have babies".

And the root cause of the issue is irreverent. Once the child comes into existence, it needs to be cared for.
I am not surprised you don't agree.
 
I am not surprised you don't agree.
The reality is that sex is a biological drive. You can't "teach" a person not to have this biological drive, just as how you can't train a dog or a cat not to have offspring. You have to neuter them. Most kids don't listen to much of what their teacher says anyway.

If we look a starving children in Africa, we can see that people will continue to have sex and produce offspring even knowing that their offspring will likely starve to death. So, of course they will do so in a country such as America were starvation is rare.

If a person goes out of their way to avoid sexual intercourse entirely out of fear of having offspring, that is very rare and unusual. Most people simply aren't going to do that, especially in a day and age where modern birth control and abortion exist.
 
Why? If you have a child, YOU are responsible for that child. If you cannot care for it, you should be charged with child endangerment.
Better yet, give women the choice to rule their own bodies and to terminate an unwanted pregnancy before it leads to an unwanted baby and then child.
 
15th post
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.

Make you a deal, we can pass that law, but we also need to pass a law that says anyone who is pro choice cannot sue someone for murder if they are responsible for an accident that causes them to lose their "tissue" (pregnancy). After all, its not a baby until its born, its just a mass of tissue. It has no rights, remember?
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
Only if the thought police can shoot to kill
 
We should have a law that makes it illegal to oppose abortion prior to a heartbeat unless you support government welfare programs to care for the offspring in question.

If we did this, we would be better able to distinguish between individuals who are actually "pro-life", and merely "pro-birth". I think it would have some use.
I think you need to get off the bong.
 
The reality is that sex is a biological drive. You can't "teach" a person not to have this biological drive, just as how you can't train a dog or a cat not to have offspring. You have to neuter them. Most kids don't listen to much of what their teacher says anyway.

If we look a starving children in Africa, we can see that people will continue to have sex and produce offspring even knowing that their offspring will likely starve to death. So, of course they will do so in a country such as America were starvation is rare.

If a person goes out of their way to avoid sexual intercourse entirely out of fear of having offspring, that is very rare and unusual. Most people simply aren't going to do that, especially in a day and age where modern birth control and abortion exist.
3 sentences for an incredibly complex issue.

Boy, are you impressive.
 
Back
Top Bottom