[indent] [font='Trebuchet MS']Can anyone from Indiana explain this???[/font] [font='Trebuchet MS'][/font] [font='Trebuchet MS']"Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana, including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do become pregnant "by means other than sexual intercourse."[/font][font='Trebuchet MS'][/font]
"Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given to married couples that successfully complete the same screening process currently required by law of adoptive parents." [/indent]
Quite easily. If a married man who gets divorced can be forced to pay child support, why is the government forced into the same when it didn't have any responsibilty in creating the life?
Furthermore, if one decides to breed dogs, they must apply for a breeding permit. But not so with humans. Why a breeding permit? Because of welfare of the dogs.
Thomas Jefferson said it perfectly when he wrote "..a government large enough to provide its citizens with everything is large enough to take all away..."
what will happen to all those babies that will be born without a certificate? does that mean that they are not entitled to the same benefits as other children..
insane...
Wiesse got it right, you need a permit to breed in Indiana,
now, i can see the merit of this in slack jaw county...where the parents are required to undertake genetic screening and finger counting to make sure they are not closely related...
Bikerman2004 said:
[indent]
[font=Trebuchet MS]Can anyone from Indiana explain this???[/font]
[font=Trebuchet MS]"Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana, including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do become pregnant "by means other than sexual intercourse."[/font]
"Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given to married couples that successfully complete the same screening process currently required by law of adoptive parents."
now, i can see the merit of this in slack jaw county...where the parents are required to undertake genetic screening and finger counting to make sure they are not closely related...
There are places in Indiana where 'slack jaw' is a step up on the evolutionary scale. But, name a state that doesn't have a few 'hill-folk.' Look at the Kennedy's of Mass. Tell me there wasn't some inbreeding involved in that clan.
So far as this story goes, no one has been able to come with names or dates.
There are places in Indiana where 'slack jaw' is a step up on the evolutionary scale. But, name a state that doesn't have a few 'hill-folk.' Look at the Kennedy's of Mass. Tell me there wasn't some inbreeding involved in that clan.
So far as this story goes, no one has been able to come with names or dates.
Follow this link...You find more information.. Bikerman I can't explain it only to say that it is absurd...
I might be reading something different, but this looks like lawyer/politician speak for a law concerning invertro type births and, in short, "Who's your daddy."
This stems from cases such as one woman carries another's eggs. It was meant to address who the legal parent of the child would be is there was ever any dispute.
What page, paragraph has the 'license to give birth' or 'only married women can have babies' clause?
Didn't some other State controlled by the Republicans try to ban the wearing of thongs by young girls as well ?
There needs to be laws and restrictions on thongs and those 'belly shirts.' Over 18 and under 200 pounds. And that's being generous.
There most certainly should be a law outlawing Two-ton Tessie from having her belly poking out of her t-shirt or having her tatooed, extra-wide backside erupting from all sides of her thong.
I might be reading something different, but this looks like lawyer/politician speak for a law concerning invertro type births and, in short, "Who's your daddy."
This stems from cases such as one woman carries another's eggs. It was meant to address who the legal parent of the child would be is there was ever any dispute.
What page, paragraph has the 'license to give birth' or 'only married women can have babies' clause?
Not quite...
An intended parent "who knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of artificial reproduction." Criminal charges for "unauthorized reproduction"????
An intended parent "who knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of artificial reproduction." Criminal charges for "unauthorized reproduction"????
What a bunch of sorry-assed Neanderthal's. 🙄 Why not let's get out the racks and the thumb screws and do this 21st-century Inquisition proper-like?
An intended parent "who knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of artificial reproduction." Criminal charges for "unauthorized reproduction"????
Again, I can't find anything about 'only married woman being allowed to have babies.' Where is that? I can't find it.
All this is is the same legal [censored] that you'll find in most laws and contracts.
