New Oklahoma Abortion Bill hands over final say to males

As described here,

Link to PDF copy of bill Link to PDF copy of bill here.
Not only is this law sexist to the extreme, it is unconstitutional.

Terrible bill.

If it passes, Oklahoma pro-choice men should start an all-volunteer organization – “pro-choice men in Oklahoma – we support all women’s rights to choose… contact us here and one of our volunteers will get back to you to support you in any way possible”.

What is it you are suggesting they could do?

What “partner consent”? The law assumes the man is available. If it was a fling or a rape, you’re SOL. If the guy refuses to admit paternity, you’re SOL (it’s not as if they can run paternity tests on a weeks-old fetus). If he’s, dunnow, just been shipped off to Irak, you’re SOL.

Maybe I’m PMSing, but today there seems to be a lot of people begging to get aborted post-birth :mad:

Say that they’re the father and give consent to any woman who asks. It would only need a few guys, spread out throughout the state, ready to sign permission forms.

"Did I impregnate you? I dunno, sure. To paraphrase Michael Flynn (admittedly he was talking about illegal communications with Russia, a less terrible thing), “while I have no recollection of impregnating you, I can’t be certain that the subject never came up.”

So sure, go ahead and put my name on that form. I’ll sign your permission slip!

“I’m [del]Spartacus[/del] the father.”

I thought my proposal made it obvious… did I not italicize the right words?

Brilliant idea! The concerned male signs such a thing, committing fraud, and what happens if…

  1. The abortion request is denied anyway, or
  2. The actual person who impregnated her steps forward to challenge it?

Congratulations-Now two people are in trouble with the law, and the abortion is denied anyway.

It’s stupid and unworkable. And immoral. But, “sexist”?

Yes, in that it puts the woman under the automatic authority of a man.

This is compounded by the fact that the man may not even be her partner. It can be a one-night stand, it can be her ex, it can even be her rapist.

Isn’t it the case that in some states the woman’s husband is assumed to be the father? So, this would not work for married women.

And it would be easy to prove that the man was not the father, and open these men up to serious criminal prosecution. Cute idea, but wouldn’t work.

But it doesn’t matter, really. The law is not constitutional anyway.

No. From the OP’s link:

“Easy”? In what sense? How are you thinking this proof would occur?

Genetic testing after the abortion. If a program such as iianyiiii proposed was actually implemented, surely the legislature would take action to counter it.

More details please. Does this means all the woman has to do is say “I was raped” and thus nullify the law, or there has to be an accusation of rape and police report? Or does it mean that there has to be a conviction for rape, you know when the fetus is two years old?

Sorry for jumping on you twice, but what about if the man only thinks he might be the father? Will there be prosecutions for perjury?

Yes, this is sexist, backward, stupid, and (if you will excuse it) ill conceived. It is meant to punish women for doing what men do freely and with out consequence.

It’s not my proposed bill. The OP has a link to the full bill if you want to read it for details.

The point I was trying to make is that if this bill were to become law and some group thinks they could come up with a clever way to game the system, then the legislature will almost certainly propose laws to deter that action. that is all.

“Gosh, like I said, I couldn’t quite remember. I’m kind of a player.”

I think you’re vastly overestimating the ease of convicting in such a case (which is obviously a fantasy case, since this bill is obviously unconstitutional, but since we’re in this weird hypothetical anyway)

So, child support is sexist since it makes a man surrender his property to something that only exists due to the whims of a woman?