MO rep: No abortion w/o dad's written permission

I'm really surprised not to see this here or at TCFL site. It's real, and it's not so much an anti abortion bill that this thing is proposing ,but rather something in line with an MRA "activist's" favorite masturbatory fantasy (IOW, the turd blossom is less concerned with "fetal rights" than the rights of the father...He claims he was 'inspired' to write the bill after having to get his wife's permission to get a vasectomy; too bad for him that MO doesn't have a law requiring a man to get his wife's permission to get the snip. IOW,he lied, and he's just another MRA/red piller. This bill will go nowhere,but it doesn't make the philosophy behind it any less repugnant :

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.

A bill filed this month would require pregnant women to get permission from the father before having an abortion except in cases of incest and what the Missouri Republican who sponsored the legislation called "legitimate rape."

If passed, state Rep. Rick Brattin's bill would require women to obtain notarized written permission from the father to terminate a pregnancy. The mandate would be waived for rape and incest. An identical bill by the Harrisonville lawmaker died in committee last session.

"Just like any rape, you have to report it, and you have to prove it," Brattin told Mother Jones in a statement that drew criticism from state Democrats. "So you couldn't just go and say, 'Oh yeah, I was raped,' and get an abortion. It has to be a legitimate rape." (SNIP)


http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article4576564.html

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/17/your_body_his_choice_missouri_gop_bill_requires_men_to_give_written_permission_for_abortion/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/republican-wants-women-get-permission-father-having-abortion

http://www.mtv.com/news/2029519/missouri-abortion-father-permission-slip/

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/12/17/missouri-rep-pushes-bill-requiring-fathers-signature-for-abortion-except-in-cases-of-legitimate-rape/

OK let's do it....as long as the dear old daddy starts forfeiting a minimum of 25 percent of his pay (pretax) each month toward care and feeding of the shitsack he had to save.

Why should the taxpayers pay for his wants?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From a bottle cap message on a Magic Hat #9 beer: Condoms Prevent Minivans
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I want to pick up a bus full of unruly kids and feed them gummi bears and crack, then turn them loose in Hobby Lobby to ransack the place. They will all be wearing T shirts that say "You Could Have Prevented This."

If people would think a little more about where they stand on abortion and commit to it in a contract before having sex, that might be a good thing. I wouldn't mind stating my stance and expecting someone I have sex with to agree to it before I'd have intercourse.

Of course, in such a world, certain types of rape would be a lot easier to prove[*]: it would be the absence of a signed contract, and anyone with common sense would prevent allegations from arising by ensuring that there was a contract.

But somehow I think he only wants to shift more burdens on to women, instead of clarifying the situation between people about abortion, which would be good for all.

[*] Of course it would not change the situation at all for rape where there was previously consent.

All I can say is - New Zapata, here we come!

http://www.amazon.com/New-Zapata-Teri-Hall/dp/1482643359
Because in that book, the husbands written consent is needed for an abortion, and the husband of the heroine is not willing to give it, even though he knows that having another loaf is going to kill his wife.

I saw this several days ago. When I read this, I wanted to rip that politician a new one fuck

I hate shit like this, and I hate men (and women) who put the fetus before the actual woman, who only concern themselves with men's wants and intentions. That potential law has a snowball's chance in hell of passing, but it concerns me because another politician in another state will try to get something like this passed. What the fuck is happening to America?!? Do they really think they can force women to have unwanted babies? Abortion will always happen, but you have a choice as to whether or not you want a woman to live through it, or die in some back alley, or on a kitchen table.

Hey, Rick Brattin, MRA lurkers, and potential wannabe: fuck fuck

So if you do not have the ability to report a rape for any reason (oh, I don't know, because you are traumatised, you are a minor who is terrified to do so, or the rapist is your spouse and is no more likely to make that easy than he would sign the piece of paper for an abortion) then it is not "legitimate rape" ????

Enraging levels of wilful stupidity.

Prolife politicians' stupidity knows no bounds.

The US Supreme Court settled this question already in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992). It struck down a state law requiring a married woman to inform her husband of her decision to get an abortion—meaning that she did not need her husband's consent to abort, either.

The same decision did approve a notification or consent requirement for minors if states wanted to pass one, but there were nuances and, anyway, that's a horse of a different color. That did not apply to those who had reached the age of majority.

You would think this idiot in Missouri would be fully aware of the Supremes' decision. The present court is not likely to undo it, no matter how many asshat laws these states try to pass or enforce.

Not that this absurd proposal is going to get any traction, but a woman can pay any guy $50 bucks to sign as the father (hey, job creation). She can travel to a neighboring state for an abortion, sperm donor never any the wiser. This kind of law would, as usual, make life more difficult for poorer women, but overall it wouldn't affect the abortion rate significantly. One of the most amusing things about 'pro-life' is that they actually believe anti-abortion laws will prevent abortion. The law would merely rearrange the undesired behavior, certainly not eradicate it.

This education-free dominionist assshole has barely even heard of the Supreme Court. He scraped out of high school and immediately went off to engage his gross gun and war fetishes by being cannon fodder for the marine corps. That's literally all the education he has. He's a moron infected with Southern Baptist delusion.

While this proposal will go nowhere, it disturbs me that even a (very) minor politician is openly espousing MRA crap-and make no mistake, this *IS* MRA-stuff, not pro life : His own words he used to justify/defend his proposal were all about 'father's rights', not the "Pwecious Unborn Lives" drivel we usually hear.

Quote
ex lurker
While this proposal will go nowhere, it disturbs me that even a (very) minor politician is openly espousing MRA crap-and make no mistake, this *IS* MRA-stuff, not pro life : His own words he used to justify/defend his proposal were all about 'father's rights', not the "Pwecious Unborn Lives" drivel we usually hear.

This is why every woman needs to educate herself about law, and politics. Women need to vote these Neanderthals and their ilk out of office the first chance they get. I find it so amazing how hypocritical Republicans can be. They are all for less government, and less regulation, unless it concerns women's bodies. Then they go for maximun control and regulation.

What a big shock that a male politician wants to try and take reproductive choices away from women. Because there's no way such a law could be used to control women, especially ones who are vulnerable or in abusive situations. Oh sure, make the exception for rape and incest, but what about women who are with mentally abusive and controlling men who would use a loaf to keep hr shackled to him? I don't think such horse shit will pass, but the fact that people repeatedly try to succeed shows how much they have to do with their time.

What's next? Women need consent of their partners to have venereal disease treated? After all, he most likely had a part in giving it to her, so does he get to say whether or not she can receive treatment for it? It can never be said enough: when men can get pregnant and give birth, they can have a real say in abortion. Until then, they can shut their fucking dickholes. And I know some guys are pro-choice, and they're fine because they aren't causing any trouble. I mean the ones who oppose it or who want to try and make it harder for women to get them.

I have no intention of even showing an inkling of an intention to follow such a law. I will simply procure an abortion in other ways. I have even said these things to a pro-lifer how I have every intention of reclaiming abortion rights as a personal service and not a doctor given service should they choose to continue. I have studied the ins and outs of how to perform an abortion before the 12 week mark with minimal casualty, harm, or infection. I also have personal connections in the way of medical abortion.

They can pass that shit all they want, but it won't last. The moment that women start to feel the brunt of what these assholes are doing, the sooner they will be out on their asses.

Come at me bitches. Because I don't care what laws you pass, I won't follow them.