Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

A state law voters have a say about unlike when a government institution decided for everyone. That is not how a democracy works but Democrats are experts on Democracy right?!

 

Says they guy claiming that one state should have a say about what is legal in another state, lol.

 

They don't care. This has never really been about 'saving babies' for most involved. It is about punishing people they see as being beneath them - pretty much a core conservative value. It never takes long for a discussion on abortion to end up with attacks on women who have sex. This is about imposing a particular version of morality in the most punitive way they can get away with. You only have to look at GOP moves to limit access to contraception to see what really motivates this.

Once you start down that path laws & constitutions can all be bent to make them do & say what you want. This won't be where it ends. There will me moves to monitor pregnant women. Doctor patient confidentiality will come under threat....and so on.

 

Then, where was he before he decided to sue? Taking responsibility? I think not.

 

Then no man anywhere should be made to pay child support. Unless he wants to.

 

Why don't you tell me? Don't assume like you do in the last part of your post. Tell me factually.

 

Should a State who refuses to allow abortion be required to maintain the child?

 

I offered an opinion. And noted that it was just an opinion.

 

I can elaborate.

What standing does this man have to challenge the behavior of an ex?????????

And, who’s paying the legal bills?

The man representing him is also the architect of SB8, and is particularly interested in pushing the idea that he can use litigation instead of law enforcement.

Of course, he’s well known to the Federalist Society crowd.

‘Hardly the sort of lawyer that an ordinary Joe blow can afford.

 

Doesn't matter who's paying for it. Be it the Federalist Society because they want to push their agenda, some schmuck down the road, or even himself.

As for what standing he has...if its his kid, of course he has standing. Her being his ex matters not. It sure as hell doesn't matter when the roles are reversed does it? If a woman decides to have a kid, and the guy doesn't want one, the guy will still be forced to pay for the child that is born, ex or not, he's held responsible for the child until they are 18.

As for where he's been, who knows, and it doesn't matter. You can assign negative connotations if you wish, doesn't mean they're true. It could be as simple as he didn't know about a new law being passed that allows him to do what he's doing until recently. Could be he couldn't find a lawyer until now. Could be he didn't know about the child until recently. Neither of us know. In the end, it doesn't matter. What matters is what is happening now.

 

That is the mother and fathers job. Barring that, yes the State often DOES take care of unwanted children. Hence why we have foster care which is paid for by the State.

 

Part of me says he was telling her have the baby and I will take full custody and the baby can live, I doubt he wants anything further to do with her.

If the father of the child wants his child not to be killed and will take full responsibility should the mother be allowed to kill it simply because she doesn't want it to live?

 

Only mothers have rights to their children? Only mother's can protect them from harm? The relationship in question is not between the two adults it is between the father and his child. He IS going to take responsibility it's rectified, she still wanted to kill the baby.

 

No, the mother can place the baby up for adoption for which there are millions of awaiting young couples. But in this case the father wanted the baby.

 

From the article, U.S. citizens are subject to the laws of the foreign countries they visit.
If this person were to travel to TX to get an abortion then they are subject to prosecution, not the other way around. From your explanation, someone from TX can be arrested for smoking pot in CO.

 

Did you really just read one line and ignore the rest? Of COURSE US citizens are subject to the countries that they visit laws. That's a no brainer. But, if you read beyond that first line you will see that US Citizens are still subject to some laws in the US even if they are in another country and the thing that they did is legal in that country, but illegal in the US.

From the article, literally right after the line you quoted: You can be prosecuted in the United States for some acts committed overseas. You can be prosecuted even if the acts are legal where they happened.

And yes, IF Texas made a law making it illegal to smoke pot even in a state where its legal, they could prosecute you for doing so. Just as you can be prosecuted by the US government if you go to a country where having sex with a 14 year old is legal (and you do have sex with that 14 year old), such as Albania.

 

That's where the problem lies. Who has parental rights of a fetus?
I lean towards the mom, but I definitely understand the other point of views.
It's literally part of her body at that point.
I don't think there's a "right" answer for this.

 

It should be their job to make all decisions, but if the State takes away their capacity to make a fundamental one, then why should the State not pay for the consequences of the State's interference?

 

Given the State forced the child upon her, she then may well have strong views about not wanting to adopt.

 

Conservative are all about "freedom", unless your a woman, and then all the suddenly they should have a say over your body

 

No one force a child upon her the sexual intercourse was consensual. The FATHER wanted to child and what "strong views" of hers could possible trump the life of the baby?

 

I'm against payouts of money that could create perverse incentives for legal action.

The parallel of this, for those on the Left, is allowing women to sue men for alleged sexual assaults that the women claim happened 20 years ago.

 

Liberals are all about freedom unless you are an unborn human baby and then suddenly some one can have you killed simply because they don't want you to live because they have some "strong views" about you continuing to live.

See two can play that game.

 

There would be jurisdictional issues with that. I'm not sure what legal jurisdiction claim rights California would be able to have on those in other states, for a matter that did not happen in California.

Of course we might expect California to pass some law to try to shield women who come from other states, becoming a haven, of sorts. (They're already a self-proclaimed sanctuary state for illegal aliens)

 

Who forced this woman to get pregnant? That's a new claim. Please provide evidence that she was raped.