Indiana to make unwedded pregnancy a crime...

Chieftess said:
That's impossible for them to do. It's like saying, "Two magnets with the north end facing each other can stick together". They can only adopt, which I don't really support either.
I think he was probably referring to lesbians getting ahold of someone's sperm either by paying for it or from a sperm bank and then having children that way.

While I don't think encouraging single parenthood is a good idea, I think this is way out of line. I don't want people registering for the right to be parents, that smacks of old books on how the government is going to take over everything and quash free thought. (I will not say 1984 or Brave New World, I will no....ah crap, I said them)
 
ComradeDavo said:
This is really bad. I totally am disgusted by such a policy. Another example of the Republicans trying to run peoples lifes for them. The US really needs to start electing Democrats before the whole country turnsd into one big social conservative nightmare.

Please! Then we get the eminent domain folks that take away my property and then tax everything I make. Need a nice, intelligent Centrist Party. For now, just split the vote.

Both parties have big problems, and these particular wackos need to go. Can't believe they would try it....yes I do. They are nuts.
 
A'AbarachAmadan said:
Please! Then we get the eminent domain folks that take away my property and then tax everything I make. Need a nice, intelligent Centrist Party. For now, just split the vote.

Both parties have big problems, and these particular wackos need to go. Can't believe they would try it....yes I do. They are nuts.
Right, because there really is going to be a center party at the next election to vote for with a realistic chance of winning:rolleyes: Face it - You have a joice between Social Conservatives driven by fundamentalist christians, or the Democrats.

And your Democrat party is pretty centerist by Europes standards anyways:p
 
rmsharpe said:
Is encouraging single parenthood really a positive value for America?

..and of course unmarried parents are always single..... :rolleyes: and even if that were the case, not having this law doesn't encourage it, it merely allows it. I'm allowed to drink my brain to mush if i want to, does that mean the government encourages drinking your brain to mush?
 
rmsharpe said:
I haven't seen any evidence that the aforementioned law would require some sort of religious or volunteering service committment. All it says is that part of the questionnaire will contain personal information.

And they're not going to make decisions based on said personal information? Please.
 
Yup, another reason why I'd never live in the US. I pity you guys having to put up with this meddling, theocratic, conservative, condescending, ignorant, patronising, nanny state, crap. But then again - you don't have to put up with it.
 
To let women become pregnant without having sex is a bad idea. What’s the fun in donating to a sperm bank? It is much more fun to give the donation directly into the woman in need. I think sex is a good value that should be preserved, so I fully support this law!:)
 
Pikachu said:
To let women become pregnant without having sex is a bad idea. What’s the fun in donating to a sperm bank? It is much more fun to give the donation directly into the woman in need. I think sex is a good value that should be preserved, so I fully support this law!:)
I suppose you realize that those chiefly hit by this law would be those who can't conceive naturally?
 
Rik Meleet said:
I'll control my irritation and just post 2 statements.

1 - The state has no affair in "matters of the heart" - never.

2 - Everyday I get happier and happier I do not live in the USA.
1 - Ditto

2 - wish I could feel this way sometimes :wallbash:
But truly I think there has been some legislation introduced in European countries that is just as biased and parochial.
 
Rambuchan said:
Yup, another reason why I'd never live in the US. I pity you guys having to put up with this meddling, theocratic, conservative, condescending, ignorant, patronising, nanny state, crap. But then again - you don't have to put up with it.

Not all of us in the US are subject to this sort of nastiness. Some states (my own New Hampshire being one) try very hard to avoid nannyness.
 
Pikachu said:
To let women become pregnant without having sex is a bad idea. What’s the fun in donating to a sperm bank? It is much more fun to give the donation directly into the woman in need. I think sex is a good value that should be preserved, so I fully support this law!:)

One day we might rely solely on technology to produce babies...

When we mess up our genetics and biosphere so much that normal reproduction is impossible...

Ever see 'Genesis of the Daleks'? that is where we are heading in the end.

:)
 
IglooDude said:
Not all of us in the US are subject to this sort of nastiness. Some states (my own New Hampshire being one) try very hard to avoid nannyness.
Yes but it would be quite out of OT form for me to accept that. ;)
 
The Last Conformist said:
I suppose you realize that those chiefly hit by this law would be those who can't conceive naturally?
The law opens for an exception for them. If the authorities find a couple qualified to be adoptive parents they can get assistance. I don’t think it would be appropriate to assist a couple to become parents if the authorities find them unfit as parents, and you cannot call an artificial reproduction procedure an accident. If the authorities find a couple unfit as parents and at the same time nature makes it impossible for them to get a child naturally, then maybe they should take a hint?

I think usually the problem is only with one of the parents though, or maybe it is just a compatibility problem? In that case a stand-in could solve the problem.

CurtSibling said:
One day we might rely solely on technology to produce babies...
:eek: That must never happen!
 
Rambuchan said:
Yes but it would be quite out of OT form for me to accept that. ;)

True, but it would have been out of OT form for me to fail to point it out, also. :lol:
 
Truthfully, though, it's not exactly surprising from a state like Indiana. I mean, this is the fireworks capital of the United States. :rolleyes:

I wonder how many conservatives will really throw their support behind this law, as opposed to a simple knee-jerk reaction to defend anything the GOP says and does (not unlike the Democrats' anti-Roberts stance, for instance). I'm sure this is one of those times when one would like to have a multi-party electoral system: one could still be conservative without having the humiliting task of defending a most ridiculous law proposal.
 
Top Bottom