Man sentenced to 13 years for tricking girlfriend into taking abortion pill

[nehalem256]

Yeah,.. no.

This is what happens when a crazy person does something crazy;

I don't know of anyone else who did anything similar to anything like this. There have been cases where men are in court to claim they did not know a woman was pregnant - and in those instances, they were unfairly held responsible for it. THAT has to change, IMO. And I consider situations like this on top of the list of things that need fixing.

Nonetheless, if you want him to be the martyr for men's rights - have at it. I wouldn't paint him as anything other than someone who is sick.

Is a woman who gets an abortion sick?

Imagine that instead the guy had tricked one of his frat brother's into taking laxatives. Do you think he would get 13 years for that?

 

[Texashiker]

Yeah,.. no.

This is what happens when a crazy person does something crazy;

What the guy did was the same thing as removing a wart, mole, cutting her hair, or clipping her nails.

Would you sentence a guy to 13 years in prison for cutting a womans hair?

 

[nehalem256]

What the guy did was the same thing as removing a wart, mole, cutting her hair, or clipping her nails.

Would you sentence a guy to 13 years in prison for cutting a womans hair?

I think the most accurate comparison is to say giving a guy laxatives. Would you send a guy to prison for tricking his frat brother into taking some laxatives?

All he did was give her some uterine laxatives

 

[Newell Steamer]

Is a woman who gets an abortion sick?

Imagine that instead the guy had tricked one of his frat brother's into taking laxatives. Do you think he would get 13 years for that?

Abortion procedures review the overall health of a woman before they dive in for the scrapping. If she forges Rxs, lies to the medical providers - then yes, she is sick.

Ah, so, this has to do with disrespecting the fetus. If you can campaign and push for the fetus' rights, to overturn a law - go for it. But, to answer your question, no, of course not.

 

[bshole]

Tex and Neh,

I agree wholeheartedly with you. This conviction is an OBSCENE travesty of justice.

It should be an assualt charge only. Similar to if they slipped acid or some other drug into her food.

 

[Newell Steamer]

What the guy did was the same thing as removing a wart, mole, cutting her hair, or clipping her nails.

Would you sentence a guy to 13 years in prison for cutting a womans hair?

If you fooled her into removing that stuff - and broke the law in the process - I don't think he would get 13 years. But, he would get into some serious trouble.

I guess the point you are trying to make, is that there is additional weight added to all of this, because it was a woman and baby. A baby most people say is just a bunch of cells. Yup, understood.

But, the man broke the law. This is no different than a cop getting into your face and yelling / frightening you to push him and then he can bust you for assaulting a cop. Meaning, they (the courts / liberals / whatever) smelled blood and bit down hard. Moral of the story; don't push the cop if you don't want to get arressted / don't bang a chick without a condom if you don't want to have your rights as a man/father thrown out the window.

 

[Texashiker]

Tex and Neh,

I agree wholeheartedly with you. This conviction is an OBSCENE travesty of justice.

We are on opposing sides of the abortion issue. But on this point we seem to have some common ground.

While I believe what the guy did was wrong, women, feminist and the court can not have it both ways. Either a fetus is a clump of cells or it is alive, but not both.

 

[kage69]

Shows how tilted parental rights are.

Mother can abort the child with no considerations given to what the father wants.

Father aborts the child that everyone is upset.




How can you justify prison for someone excising their right to decide if they want to be a parent?

Maybe because women are the only ones that get to decide if they want to be a parent?

What about this whole equal rights thing?

Why do you guys insist on making yourselves look like such fools? It was HER body, HER choice. What exactly is so hard to understand about the difference between a woman having a say about her reproductive future, and a cowardly deceitful act that violated both her and her right to choose?

I wish you "pro-lifers" could be a little more "pro-smart," the fail you guys continually spew is getting tiresome.

 

[nehalem256]

Why do you guys insist on making yourselves look like such fools? It was HER body, HER choice. What exactly is so hard to understand about the difference between a woman having a say about her reproductive future, and a cowardly deceitful act that violated both her and her right to choose?

All this man wanted was to have a say about his reproductive future.

Due to hypocritical liberals opposing this he was forced into this "cowardly deceitful act".

Seems like the real monsters are anti-equality liberals.

 

[CLite]

This is what happens when men have to resort to backalley abortions.




After all, it is just a clump of unwanted cells.

You seem to think there is an issue here, but there is not.

Men can't control what woman do with their bodies with regards to reproductive rights until the point of viability for the fetus. Likewise women can't control what men do with their bodies with regards to reproductive rights. You are more than free to snip yourself, control what you release unto the world. After you release it from your body you lose all control. Likewise woman can have abortions up to the point of viability, they can control their reproductive system with various methods. However once the fetus reaches viability or is released upon the world they no longer can make determinations, they must support it at that point.

Inherently woman have never asked to control what is inside a man's body. Men are banging at the doors trying their best to do this with regards to woman, as most recently evidenced by this article of the fucking psychopath.

The key point here is the 6 week embryo entirely relies on the mother and is not viable yet which is why Roe vs. Wade still gives her control over what's inside her body. The embryo is not inside the man and is not inherently dependent on him for viability hence he has no power over it. When a fetus no longer inherently relies upon the woman's body for life the woman can no longer casually discard the fetus. The fetus never relies upon the man's body for life, so he never has any power to determine the fetus's fate. This should be stupidly obvious to anyone with even below average intelligence.

Personally I think he should have be charged attempted murder on the mother for illegally sourced medication rather than murder on a 6-week embryo but anyone thinking there is a double standard here is not thinking rationally.

 

[Texashiker]

You seem to think there is an issue here, but there is not.

There are a couple of issues here:

When it comes to deciding if you want to be a parent, women have more rights then men.

A court system that flip-flops on whether a fetus is alive or a clump of cells.

 

[bshole]

Personally I think he should have be charged attempted murder on the mother for illegally sourced medication rather than murder on a 6-week embryo but anyone thinking there is a double standard here is not thinking rationally.

That's ridiculous. He clearly wasn't trying to kill the woman, he was trying to killing the embryo. It should be an assault, similiar to if he slipped some other drug in her drink. That is the CONSISTENT way to approach this. He should be held responsible for any damage to the woman, the fetus does not and should not count.

 

[nehalem256]

You seem to think there is an issue here, but there is not.

Men can't control what woman do with their bodies with regards to reproductive rights until the point of viability for the fetus. Likewise women can't control what men do with their bodies with regards to reproductive rights. You are more than free to snip yourself, control what you release unto the world. After you release it from your body you lose all control. Likewise woman can have abortions up to the point of viability, they can control their reproductive system with various methods. However once the fetus reaches viability or is released upon the world they no longer can make determinations, they must support it at that point.

And women aren't responsible what for they willingly take into their body?

If a man makes a gift of his seed to a woman why he is responsible for what she does with it?

If a woman buys a man a gun and 9 months later he uses it to murder someone should the woman be held equally responsible?

 

[Texashiker]

It was HER body, HER choice.

Shouldn't it be my choice if I want to pay child support?

My body, my choice where the money from my labor goes.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Shouldn't it be my choice if I want to pay child support?

My body, my choice where the money from my labor goes.

Yes, it's called wearing a condom.

Or, are you obsolved of that responsibility, by choice, for that as well??

 

[boomerang]

The guy has a mental illness, is held responsible, sentenced to thirteen years and assessed a huge penalty. Where in the hell is Gloria Allred?

 

[Texashiker]

Yes, it's called wearing a condom.

Or, are you obsolved of that responsibility, by choice, for that as well??

Women have a choice, men do not.

And that is called equal rights?

 

[Newell Steamer]

Women have a choice, men do not.

And that is called equal rights?

So, it's her responsibility (choice) to wear protection, not yours - but, you demand you should be part of the decision if they baby is kept or not,.. that doesn't seem to match up.

 

[nehalem256]

Yes, it's called wearing a condom.

Or, are you obsolved of that responsibility, by choice, for that as well??

So by your logic if the woman isn't on the pill she shouldn't be able to get an abortion.

Or are women absolved of that responsibility.

 

[CLite]

That's ridiculous. He clearly wasn't trying to kill the woman, he was trying to killing the embryo. It should be an assault, similiar to if he slipped some other drug in her drink. That is the CONSISTENT way to approach this. He should be held responsible for any damage to the woman, the fetus does not and should not count.

There can be side effects to abortions, excessive bleeding/etc.

And women aren't responsible what for they willingly take into their body?

If a man makes a gift of his seed to a woman why he is responsible for what she does with it?

If a woman buys a man a gun and 9 months later he uses it to murder someone should the woman be held equally responsible?

Woman and Men are not beholden to society to maintain things inside their bodies that they don't want to maintain. The only current exception being once a fetus is viable the woman is beholden to care for that fetus despite no likewise requirement imposed on a man's body for any sort of life within them. If anything the pendulum is still swung in man's favor because there is nothing they are forced to keep inside their body against their will.

Your murdering man analogy is worthless, although me replying to you about woman's rights is equally worthless so we are both stupid.

 

[CLite]

There are a couple of issues here:

When it comes to deciding if you want to be a parent, women have more rights then men.

A court system that flip-flops on whether a fetus is alive or a clump of cells.

The court system simply states a woman can control what's inside her body up until the point of viability, at which point she no longer carries the right to control what's inside her body. There is absolutely no flip-flop, roe versus wade did not define life it defined viability as a point at which the state can impose control over a woman.

 

[Newell Steamer]

So by your logic if the woman isn't on the pill she shouldn't be able to get an abortion.

Or are women absolved of that responsibility.

It just takes 1 person to prevent pregancy.

It's better to ensure you yourself (be it a man or a woman) takes that step, than assume (or expect the other) to make sure there isn't a kid or the need for legal / illegal actions to take place after the fact.

 

[Mursilis]

Inherently woman have never asked to control what is inside a man's body.

You've obviously never heard of Carrie Nation, then. And plenty of women today support drug prohibition, although those numbers appear to be declining.

I'd also wonder how many women (or men) are still singing that "her body, her choice" tune if a woman wants to work in the sex industry.

 

[Texashiker]

The court system simply states a woman can control what's inside her body up until the point of viability, at which point she no longer carries the right to control what's inside her body. There is absolutely no flip-flop, roe versus wade did not define life it defined viability as a point at which the state can impose control over a woman.

That fetus was also the fathers property.

As such he should have the right to decide if he wants to be a parent, just like what a woman gets to do.

 

[Mursilis]

That fetus was also the fathers property.

How so?