Here is a thought - In S. Dakota if a man impregnates a woman

[rurallib]

who then tries to abort, shouldn't the man be charged with aiding and abetting a criminal act?
I also happen to think that with the forced birth law, any man who fails to keep up with support payments should be neutered after missing one payment. That should slow things down.

[flvegan]

1. Nah, that'd be like charging a jeweler for having diamonds

that someone tried to heist. I see where you're going with it, though. Maybe he should be charged if he doesn't try to stop her from the abortion? How does that sound in that scenario?

[rurallib]

2. Seems to me unless the onus is put on men anti-abortion laws

will continue to be easy for men to vote for. They currently bear little real responsibility for forced births.
I still like my second part. Don't support what you got, you can't make any more!

[flvegan]

3. I absolutely agree.

And yes, the neutering is PERFECT...maybe castration would be better? I mean, neutering only keeps them from procreating (not the biggest reason men have sex, I don't think). Take the pleasure away.

Okay, that was wrong. I just went over the edge trying to make a point.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

4. To Be Clear, You Know There Are No Criminal Penalties For The Woman Right?

But this thread is what DU needed right now. There weren't enough Male bashing Sexist threads to go round. :eyes:

[leftstreet]

6. Makes you wonder if medical professionals have any opinions

Are they concerned that their potential actions have been 'criminalized' ??

:shrug:

Haven't heard a word.

[Catrina]

5. If you were just talking about hypocritical fundie men, I'd go along.

Better yet, I think it's time for secession ~