Post: #1

Michigan 'Rape Insurance' Bill Passes Into Law

There's an associated video if you follow the link. I couldn't get it to embed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/11...28432.html

Michigan lawmakers passed a controversial measure on Wednesday that will ban all insurance plans in the state from covering abortion unless the woman's life is in danger. The law, which takes effect in March, will force women and employers to purchase a separate abortion rider if they would like the procedure covered, even in cases of rape and incest.

Supporters of the "Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act" argue that it allows people who are opposed to abortion to avoid paying into a plan that covers it. Opponents have nicknamed it the "rape insurance" initiative, because it would force some women to anticipate the possibility of being raped by purchasing the extra abortion insurance ahead of time.

“This tells women who were raped … that they should have thought ahead and planned for it,” said Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing) during debates. “Make no mistake, this is anything but a citizens' initiative. It’s a special interest group’s perverted dream come true.”

The Michigan State Legislature first passed the measure last year, but Governor Rick Snyder ® vetoed it, saying he does not "believe it is appropriate to tell a woman who becomes pregnant due to a rape that she needed to select elective insurance coverage."

But the anti-abortion group Right to Life of Michigan was able to collect more than 300,000 voter signatures on a petition this year to force a second vote on the measure. Having been passed by both chambers, the bill automatically becomes law now, even without Snyder's approval.

More than 80 percent of private insurance plans currently cover abortions, the New York Times reported, citing research organization the Guttmacher Institute. Eight states have passed similar laws banning the insurance coverage of abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, but only two of them have actually made the abortion rider available to women.

Several Democratic women lawmakers became emotional during debates on Wednesday as they told personal stories of miscarriage and abortion, and State Rep. David Knezek (D) blasted the measure as misogynistic.

Post: #2

I shouldn't be subsidizing other women's bad decisions. That's the only argument that needs to be had here. I can't stand paying for birth control too.

Post: #3

That's such fucking bullshit. "What if they get raped?!" When you go to a hospital after a rape, they administer some kind of day after pill and do STD tests.

I'm glad this passed. The only thing men should pay for sluts is condoms. Not their abortions!

Post: #4

The problem is that women haven't decided it was rape until after they find out they're pregnant.

Post: #5

Quote:I shouldn't be subsidizing other women's bad decisions. That's the only argument that needs to be had here. I can't stand paying for birth control too.

There's an argument to be made that subsidizing abortions is a net positive for society. The argument goes something like:

• Irresponsible woman gets pregnant, usually by irresponsible man
• Irresponsible woman is unlikely to become responsible becasue she is pregnant
• The expected life outcome of unwanted children born to irresponsible parents is pretty poor (e.g., prostitutes, druggies, future criminals)
• Therefore to eliminate a future criminal underclass and the high social/monetary costs associated with them, why not just eliminate the problem before it even starts?
  

More reading: Abortion and crime: who should you believe?

.

Post: #6

I'd agree with that argument. It's straying into the realms of eugenics, however, and needs safeguards in place.

Look at the bigger picture. The cost of an abortion pales into insignificance compared to the lifetime net drain on the public purse of an unwanted kid born into a broken home. Hell, the extra welfare check for the first three years of the kids life is is probably more than the cost of an abortion.

Free birth control provides an even greater ROI.

Post: #7

(12-12-2013 11:55 AM)Parlay44 Wrote:  The problem is that women haven't decided it was rape until after they find out they're pregnant.

Yeah, that's scary. Bitches throwing rape allegations to get their abortions covered.

Bad precedent.

Post: #8

(12-12-2013 12:57 PM)BLarsen Wrote:  

Quote:I shouldn't be subsidizing other women's bad decisions. That's the only argument that needs to be had here. I can't stand paying for birth control too.

There's an argument to be made that subsidizing abortions is a net positive for society. The argument goes something like:

• Irresponsible woman gets pregnant, usually by irresponsible man
• Irresponsible woman is unlikely to become responsible becasue she is pregnant
• The expected life outcome of unwanted children born to irresponsible parents is pretty poor (e.g., prostitutes, druggies, future criminals)
• Therefore to eliminate a future criminal underclass and the high social/monetary costs associated with them, why not just eliminate the problem before it even starts?
  

More reading: Abortion and crime: who should you believe?

.

Plenty of women pay for abortions out of pocket already. Somehow they come up with the money.

Women have children because they decided to keep it. Not because they couldn't come up with the money for an abortion they wanted. I'm guessing there's a lot of soon to be baby daddies who'd be happy to pay the bill to avoid a child support raping 7 months down the road.

Post: #9

(12-12-2013 12:57 PM)BLarsen Wrote:  

Quote:I shouldn't be subsidizing other women's bad decisions. That's the only argument that needs to be had here. I can't stand paying for birth control too.

There's an argument to be made that subsidizing abortions is a net positive for society. The argument goes something like:

• Irresponsible woman gets pregnant, usually by irresponsible man
• Irresponsible woman is unlikely to become responsible becasue she is pregnant
• The expected life outcome of unwanted children born to irresponsible parents is pretty poor (e.g., prostitutes, druggies, future criminals)
• Therefore to eliminate a future criminal underclass and the high social/monetary costs associated with them, why not just eliminate the problem before it even starts?

That is the same argument historically made about blacks, Jews, Indians, Irish and every other underclass: as a class, they will not produce more than they take from society so, even as individuals, they are all worthless human garbage.

That is also a long and convoluted supposition leading to a very unclear proposition.

The opposite argument, however, is very clear: If abortion is murder, then your argument is irrelevant and morally untenable.

At the point when two DNA strands unite to form a third DNA strand that is -- and always will be -- unique, then a separate person is created, regardless of whether it still temporarily exists in its mother. Sounds pretty simple to me.

Post: #10

(12-12-2013 09:04 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  That is the same argument historically made about blacks, Jews, Indians, Irish and every other underclass: as a class, they will not produce more than they take from society so, even as individuals, they are all worthless human garbage.

That is also a long and convoluted supposition leading to a very unclear proposition.

The opposite argument, however, is very clear: If abortion is murder, then your argument is irrelevant and morally untenable.

At the point when two DNA strands unite to form a third DNA strand that is -- and always will be -- unique, then a separate person is created, regardless of whether it still temporarily exists in its mother. Sounds pretty simple to me.

I wasn't even thinking about it in racial terms; plenty of European-Americans women like to have irresponsible sex also.

To your point of abortion being murder...*puts on Morpheus Sunglasses* What if I told you that even if abortion was murder...it doesn't matter?

What if I told you that abortion and capital punishment were moral equivalents?

What if I told you that the safety and security of productive members of society was worth more than the life of an unborn fetus? (This is my argument against the 'Women and Children are first off the sinking ship!' argument)

Post: #11

(12-12-2013 09:23 PM)BLarsen Wrote:  

(12-12-2013 09:04 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  That is the same argument historically made about blacks, Jews, Indians, Irish and every other underclass: as a class, they will not produce more than they take from society so, even as individuals, they are all worthless human garbage.

That is also a long and convoluted supposition leading to a very unclear proposition.

The opposite argument, however, is very clear: If abortion is murder, then your argument is irrelevant and morally untenable.

At the point when two DNA strands unite to form a third DNA strand that is -- and always will be -- unique, then a separate person is created, regardless of whether it still temporarily exists in its mother. Sounds pretty simple to me.

I wasn't even thinking about it in racial terms; plenty of European-Americans women like to have irresponsible sex also.

To your point of abortion being murder...*puts on Morpheus Sunglasses* What if I told you that even if abortion was murder...it doesn't matter?

What if I told you that abortion and capital punishment were moral equivalents?

What if I told you that the safety and security of productive members of society was worth more than the life of an unborn fetus? (This is my argument against the 'Women and Children are first off the sinking ship!' argument)

That would make you immoral -- or, at best, amoral. Morpheus fought for a moral and just society.

Capital punishment is inflicted upon the guilty after dues process by trial and jury. Abortion is summary execution upon the innocent without due process. So, there is no moral equivalency, unless the person making the comparison is immoral.

Post: #12

(12-12-2013 09:23 PM)BLarsen Wrote:  (This is my argument against the 'Women and Children are first off the sinking ship!' argument)

Charlie? I didn't know that you had internet access at San Quentin.

Post: #13

This will lead to false rape accusations, many against The Unknown Black Man.

Post: #14

(12-12-2013 11:55 AM)Parlay44 Wrote:  The problem is that women haven't decided it was rape until after they find out they're pregnant.

(12-12-2013 01:51 PM)Shotgun Styles Wrote:  

(12-12-2013 11:55 AM)Parlay44 Wrote:  The problem is that women haven't decided it was rape until after they find out they're pregnant.

Yeah, that's scary. Bitches throwing rape allegations to get their abortions covered.

Bad precedent.

(12-13-2013 04:07 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  This will lead to false rape accusations, many against The Unknown Black Man.

I don't understand why. Quote the OP: "The law, which takes effect in March, will force women and employers to purchase a separate abortion rider if they would like the procedure covered, even in cases of rape and incest."

Lie about the rape all you want. It's still not covered unless you paid for the separate rider in advance.

Post: #15

This is a shitty law. If this law were a person, he'd be a passive aggressive loser. He'd be the hall monitor.

Politicians are pretty terrible people. And Republicans are just proving themselves to be extra terrible lately. Abortion is legal. Just deal with it.

What's funny is that there are all sorts of common sense restrictions and useful things that people could be doing to cut down on unwanted pregnancies and the number of abortions, but instead politicians are just busy passing absurd laws.

Long live the culture war.

Post: #16

It's a freedom of contract issue. Insurance companies and people should be able to contract and offer policies any way they want.

This law will be struck down by the courts on 1st/4th/5th/14th Amendment grounds.

Post: #17

(12-13-2013 12:23 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  Charlie? I didn't know that you had internet access at San Quentin.

Not sure what you mean by this?

Looking at it from a purely logic-driven view what makes more sense? To save a fully-functioning adult that contributes to society, or a child? Save an engineer or some kid that plays with blocks? Save a nurse or save some little girl that "plays doctor"? Save a mechanic or some kid that plays with toy cars?

Oh oh, but children are the future right? Adults can fuck and have more kids; losing someone with a skillset that took decades to acquire is a much bigger loss to society.

Unless you are a member of a wandering tribe with a dwindling population then reproduction is not high on the priority list. Therefore, improving the lives of the living, productive members of your society is of a higher priority than the life of a child.

TL;DR We're all equal in the eyes of the creator, but we're not in Heaven, we live on Earth. Some people are worth more to society than others (e.g., the President vs a bum).

IMO this principal is true, but the human application of this philosophy is fraught with error (e.g. Third Reich, ethnic cleansing, etc.). Because human beings are inherently emotional beings I wouldn't trust anyone to go through with this philosophy.

Post: #18

I have seen many studies showing that if you make abortions easily available, then crime goes down. It's a benefit to society. Really I don't see why emotion should play a role in this. Laws are built to benefit the general public. If making birth pills and day after pills and abortions all free makes society have less crime, better parenting, etc, etc, etc............... Then yeah, I'll pay for it all day every day.

Post: #19

Since you guys are talking about rape...

What are the English feminists saying about this case?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ste...ng-2918710

A man who filmed himself having sex with a sleeping woman and posted the footage on Facebook was cleared of rape yesterday.

A jury of eight women and four men only took an hour to unanimously find him not guilty of rape after a two-day trial at Ipswich Crown Court.

He then made no comment when interviewed by police.

Smart bloke

Post: #20

(12-13-2013 04:09 PM)Mr. Plow Wrote:  I have seen many studies showing that if you make abortions easily available, then crime goes down.