• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Being jailed for having a miscarriage? Is society really that insane now?

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
It's analogous to the right to bear arms...in that
I say this carries the obligation to be trained in
their proper use, & to store them securely.
That is the one that comes immediately to mind and I agree with you.

As a gun owner myself, I was taught at home as well as formal training elsewhere about how to handle arms responsibly.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Um... no. If the woman wants to take the morning-after pill to avoid an unfortunate outcome with a hook-up, she should have the right to and not have to bear the child at his insistence. Let him get a willing partner pregnant.

I've already said the morning after pill should be availibe to any sexual active female.
The morning after, no one knows if there is a pregnancy.

Abortion is beyond the morning after pill.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I've already said the morning after pill should be availibe to any sexual active female.
The morning after, no one knows if there is a pregnancy.

Abortion is beyond the morning after pill.
And for many, whether using an IUD, morning after pill, or vacuum aspiration procedure, you are interrupting the development of a fertilized egg. Within certain time limits there is no significant difference. Taking an unwanted pregnancy to term is always significant.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
And for many, whether using an IUD, morning after pill, or vacuum aspiration procedure, you are interrupting the development of a fertilized egg. Within certain time limits there is no significant difference. Taking an unwanted pregnancy to term is always significant.

So if Jane had sex last night and took the morning after pill today...
And Mary had sex 3 months ago and now ops for an abortion...
You think.that is the same, comparable?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Even if that is the case, so what? Treat her for that, and don't treat what as a murderer. But that's my 2¢

I thought about this some more.
What if she doesn't want treatment and her pregnancy is a result of her addiction that she doesn't want help for.
For example she doesn't want a baby but got pregnant sleeping with someone to feed her addiction.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Yes and no. She should be treated,

but criminalized is a bit of a stretch.
I 100% agree with you

Except it's not "a bit"..but a huge stretch

Bunch of control freaks...Big Brother 1.0

Again, just my opinion
Not interested to debate on this
Means: I am fine if others disagree
 
Last edited:

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
If one is pregnant and chooses to carry the child to term, is there a responsibility of reasonable care for the growing fetus? Should there be consequences for drug or alcohol use that will have a direct impact on the resulting human being?
You have to demonstrate she used while she knew she was pregnant.
And, of course, it's legal for pregnant women to smoke so it's whatever until they get that straightened out or drop the crap.
And if she was using during pregnancy, this is a medical issue NOT a legal issue.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Traces of meth were found in the liver and brain of this woman’s unborn son.

Let’s not pretend it was the mere act of experiencing a miscarriage that had this woman jailed. It was her illicit drug use and the impact it may have had on her pregnancy.
Have you read the article? It says she was convicted of manslaughter.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
If one is pregnant and chooses to carry the child to term, is there a responsibility of reasonable care for the growing fetus? Should there be consequences for drug or alcohol use that will have a direct impact on the resulting human being?
Is a society that wants her to carry the child to term responsible for reasonable care of her and the fetus?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Let’s not pretend it was the mere act of experiencing a miscarriage that had this woman jailed. It was her illicit drug use and the impact it may have had on her pregnancy.[/QUOTE]
Is a society that wants her to carry the child to term responsible for reasonable care of her and the fetus?

Verry much so. And in my opinion it would be even more responsible now. They are now forcing women like her to carry her pregnancy to term after a only one small window to get an abortion. If the sate is going to force a women to give birth it should be on the hook for all costs incurred.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
Traces of meth were found in the liver and brain of this woman’s unborn son.

Let’s not pretend it was the mere act of experiencing a miscarriage that had this woman jailed. It was her illicit drug use and the impact it may have had on her pregnancy.
Some believe that the soul chooses the parents, because certain lessons need to be learned.

IF that were true THEN there is nobody to blame in such cases
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
If one is pregnant and chooses to carry the child to term, is there a responsibility of reasonable care for the growing fetus? Should there be consequences for drug or alcohol use that will have a direct impact on the resulting human being?
NO

Very easy to prove
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
This is something I've addressed in years past on RF.
I argued that the mother has a legal responsibility to
conduct her life during pregnancy such that she doesn't
cause birth defects. I recall vigorous disagreement
about this, ie, the mother can do as she pleases, without
regard for the health of a baby later born.
IF you hold the mother accountable
THEN I hold the Father accountable
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
For what it’s worth, I agree with Revolting’s stance and that CPS should intervene when documented harm is inflicted on the child.

If it’s unintentional (like they didn’t realise they were pregnant at that time) then that’s a “pass” imo.

Eek @Revoltingest I actually agreed with you!
Truly this is the darkest timeline :p;)
Anything parents eat or drink, even how many times the man ejaculated has impact on the health (physical, emotional, mental) of the child

CPS gets very busy

Freedom to Live gets very limited

I live a very limited life
BUT
By choice no sex & drugs & Rock'n Roll

That's the difference
 
Top