At what point does the law – not public opinion, but the law – have to recognize an irrebutable presumption that anyone who campaigns for public office on a ‘family values’ platform is either an adulterer, a pedophile, a crook, some other species of hypocrite or some combination thereof? From C&L:
I have to wonder what’s in this clown’s closet:
A Republican [Ohio] state legislator John Adams of Sidney, has submitted a bill that would require a woman to obtain the permission of the man who impregnated her before she could receive abortion services. The language of the bill is beyond insane.
As written, the bill would ban women from seeking an abortion without written consent from the father of the fetus. In cases where the identity of the father is unknown, women would be required to submit a list of possible fathers. The physician would be forced to conduct a paternity test from the provided list and then seek paternal permission to abort. Claiming to not know the father’s identity is not a viable excuse, according to the proposed legislation. Simply put: no father means no abortion
Ever notice that the men who fight so hard for the right to stick their sperm in women’s wombs and keep it there against their will are the ones whose reproduction would least benefit the species?