It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New law lets husbands sue to stop wives having abortion

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

See?

You just gave me another (of at least a thousand) reason to celebrate dodging the marriage bullet 3 times.

My spider sense told me not to trust them with too much control in my affairs.




posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: intrptr

Not sure, is there still a saline solution that is used to "burn" the baby?


After six months of pregnancy, is there a rash of this in Arkansas?

YES. Bill Clinton says that "rednecks" are responsible.

Oh yah, Its Bill's state. That explains it...



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TruMcCarthy

Unfortunately logic has nothing to do with this.

The pro abortion crowd DOES NOT want this "fetus" to be seen as a baby. When that happens, they loose ground and that is when people start to look at development and realize the baby isn't a glob at all.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Visine and Alka Seltzer dropped into a 2 liter bottle.

Then she just "Squats-n-Hollers".

*edit* I am just guessing,btw.You DID say Arkansas.
edit on 7-2-2017 by angryproctologist because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

Wow, I hate to bring this news to you.

But yes there are double standards all over the medical community just as in the rest of our lives. It seems right to have the wife sign on to a vas. Just like the abortion.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: angryproctologist

Growing old is not fun alone.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: seasonal

This is a decision that MARRIED couples ought to be making TOGETHER.

We can say this all we want. We can hope that they come to agree all we want. The truth of the matter is there will at the end of the day still be couples who may not be able to agree.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

get a dog, it will die by the time you want to divorce it



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Nyiah

Wow, I hate to bring this news to you.

But yes there are double standards all over the medical community just as in the rest of our lives. It seems right to have the wife sign on to a vas. Just like the abortion.

The abortion law's a grey area ** IMO, so not debating it. But dude, just hell no on the spousal permission for sterilization. Your fertility or desired lack thereof isn't at the whim of someone else. Unless you're a rapist/kiddy diddler and then all bets are off.

Edit: ** Yeah, despite my initial reaction of the law, it's a grey area that depends on circumstances.
edit on 2/7/2017 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: jellyrev

Even though you were totally wrong about Canada I totally agree with you here lol.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Will this also mean the husband can sue the wife or doc to STOP her from having the baby he doesn't want?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Tompdx3

A two way door, eh? More reason why government needs to stay out of our personal decisions.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Nyiah

In Mich, 11 years ago the Dr required wife's OK for the procedure.

Was trying to edit my post, page timed out. I did google this, what a load of utter bulls# that is. A doctor can refuse to perform a vas if the wife doesn't consent. From what I could google of the reverse, no permission needed for women to get a tubal. That's such s#, when someone's done spreading their genes, they're done. You don't get a say in whether the plumbing remains functional or not. Period.


It isn't a law.

It is something that some doctors feel they require to go ahead with the procedure to avoid possible civil litigation later.

It isn't a law. It is the doctor's choice in the matter.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:19 PM
link   

The ACLU claims the new law to be unconstitutional and will be challenging it.

Good they should challenge it.

And because there's no exemption in the law for rape or incest, a woman's rapist could theoretically file suit to stop the abortion.
-CNN source
According to Snopes the law doesn't allow the rapist to sue to woman-see here.



originally posted by: Tompdx3
a reply to: seasonal

Will this also mean the husband can sue the wife or doc to STOP her from having the baby he doesn't want?


No, because it pertains to blocking an abortion from happening. To say he won't be able to sue to make her have an abortion if he doesn't want the child.


The law effectively bans abortions after 14 weeks by making the safest, medically approved procedure a felony. It interferes with best medical practices by substituting safe, evidence-based practices with political ideology ...

The law imposes an undue burden by placing a substantial obstacle in the way of a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. It is clearly unconstitutional.

Source



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: seasonal

This is a decision that MARRIED couples ought to be making TOGETHER.


Why only married couples?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: angryproctologist
a reply to: intrptr

Visine and Alka Seltzer dropped into a 2 liter bottle.

Then she just "Squats-n-Hollers".

*edit* I am just guessing,btw.You DID say Arkansas.


I'll trust your professional opinion.

Geez, rocket assist. Made me cringe down in the lower cockles area.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

I am thinking a healthy relationship where bringing in more crumb snatchers is out of the question. It is a decision that effects both.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Tompdx3

Good question and way out of the box thinking. Gold star.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: GreyScale

In other words $$$.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: WUNK22

If a man wants a vasectomy, he needs his wife's permission.


Completely different.

Not being able to create a life, is different to intentionally ending one.

If someone I was with became pregnant with my child, I'd do everything in my power to ensure my child was born and given a life, unless there was a direct threat to the life of my partner due to complications with the pregnancy.

What everyone else does, is not my problem.




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join