Jade
Well-known Member
- Oct 10, 2024
- 89
- 34
According to Google, "In California, it is illegal to remove a condom without the explicit consent of your partner during sexual intercourse. This practice, known as 'stealthing,' is now considered a civil offense, allowing victims to sue their perpetrators for damages, says the Los Angeles Times. " Well, the reverse should be illegal too. If a man says he's not going to use a condom and secretly puts it on or secretly pulls out when he ejaculates that should be illegal. That man should have his semen collected and put into the woman's vagina. He should serve no prison or jail sentence though. It should also be illegal for a woman to say she's not on contraception but she actually is. I think Nathan Larson thought his wife Meshelle did this. That's why he didn't make a child with her. It should also be illegal to secretly have an abortion and trick the husband into thinking she wants children. Such women should have pregnancy forced onto them. It should also be illegal if she knows she's on her period which means chances are she might not get pregnant, but she says she's ovulating. These things should be illegal because a man may have spent money on dates, the wedding, the engagement ring, housing for her, and other things for this woman expecting to get children out of her.
When a man suspects that his wife or girlfriend is secretly using contraception or abortion pills, she should be forced to have a urine test to determine whether this is true. If it's true, she should be arrested. Her health records should also be investigated to see if she received an abortion. It'd also be helpful if the man recorded her agreeing to her lying saying she wanted children. Frankly though, this is just another reason contraception and abortion should be banned.
Such a woman should be put into solitary confinement for about nine months without access to contraception or abortion - about nine months because that's how long a pregnancy lasts. The man will be able to have many conjugal visits with her so he can get her pregnant. If the man wants more than one child, she should be incarcerated for multiple pregnancies.
Frankly, all incarcerated women should be turned into baby making machines. If any incarcerated woman has children in prison or jail, her sentence should be reduced. If she has multiple children, she should also be taken off of death row. This is like when Massachusetts proposed to reducing sentences to those who save a life by donating an organ. Those who donate organs should be removed from death row. Frankly, if we have an "eye for an eye" policy, that means a one-time murderer who gave birth destroyed one pair of eyes, but brought to life another pair, so she has had a net neutral effect on life. If she had two children, she had a net positive effect on life. Such a woman should be removed from death row if she wants(she might not want to if she's suicidal). This is more about women, but if a man donates sperm(which should be allowed even if he's short, stupid, and unemployed), he should have a small reduction in his sentence. Perhaps he can have a bigger reduction in his sentence if he hires a commercial surrogate, but this is unfair because it discriminates against poor men. Also, he could just make a child with a woman the normal way, but this discriminates against unattractive men, so I don't know. Prisons and jails should be co-ed though and maybe that would allow even unnnattractive men to reproduce and therefore be eligible for reduced sentences.
Speaking of suicide, assisted suicide is a basic human right for inmates. Inmates should be allowed to have this because being in prison or jail is suffering and when they are freed, if they are freed, they will continue to suffer due to not being able to get a job due to background checks. They might also be sent back to prison or jail due to reoffending, which means more suffering. Frankly, inmates might be less suicidal if prisons and jails were co-ed. Some people say children shouldn't be allowed to have assisted suicide but I disagree especially since some children are mature for their age and have high IQs and therefore know they're making the right decision. This is like when Chris Brand argued that the law should allow high IQ children to consent to sex. Suicide is murder though, so the suicidal should be required to have at least one or two children, so they have at least a net neutral effect on life, to be eligible for assisted suicide. I only support assisted suicide in these cases though. I'm against ordinary suicide, which is why I'm against gun ownership because guns are an effective means to sewerslide. For sure, I'm against the mentally ill purchasing guns because I don't want them to commit sudoku. I don't think gun owners should go to prison or jail, but I do think selling guns should be stopped. I also think groups like The Three Percenters and the boogaloo boys are good though I think the crime the boogaloo boys have committed is bad.
Frankly, prisons and jails should be abolished. Prison funds can be redirected into preventing crime. Also, female inmates who would otherwise serve life can be auctioned off as sex slaves. Not only would this mean the government won't pay for their housing, food, and healthcare, but the government would actually turn a profit from these auctions. This money can be further used to prevent crime which makes prison abolition more reasonable. Perhaps to deal with male inmates, all of them can be deported to another country and let it be another country's problem. They can also be given whippings instead of prison or jail sentences. Prison and jail abolition, co-ed prisons and jails,and solitary confinement for women who lie about wanting children are all good, different options.
According to Google, "There are approximately 2 million people in prisons and jails in the United States. This represents a significant increase from the 360,000 incarcerated individuals in the early 1970s. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and spends about $182 billion annually on incarceration."
An alternative to incarceration for the woman who lied about wanting children is for a divorce to take place where the man isn't "divorce raped" and the woman should have to pay him the price that at least one child of commercial surrogacy costs. If the man wanted multiple children, she should have to pay him for multiple surrogacies.
Frankly, stealthing shouldn't be illegal because the birth rate is low. Perhaps if the birth rate was at least a bit above the replacement level, stealthing could be banned. Also, this law can punish innocent men because sometimes the condoms accidentally rip or slip off and the man might not notice. Perhaps after intercourse, he's not paying much attention and fails to notice the condom has a hole so he can't alert her so she can use a douche. Besides, contraception isn't 100% effective.
Also, notice that a woman can lie about being on contraception when she's actually not. It's a double standard. Perhaps the man doesn't want children, but she forces him to be a parent. This shouldn't be illegal because making children is good, but perhaps he shouldn't be expected to pay child support. He should have recorded her saying she wants to have contraceptive sex or that she doesn't want children though.
When a man suspects that his wife or girlfriend is secretly using contraception or abortion pills, she should be forced to have a urine test to determine whether this is true. If it's true, she should be arrested. Her health records should also be investigated to see if she received an abortion. It'd also be helpful if the man recorded her agreeing to her lying saying she wanted children. Frankly though, this is just another reason contraception and abortion should be banned.
Such a woman should be put into solitary confinement for about nine months without access to contraception or abortion - about nine months because that's how long a pregnancy lasts. The man will be able to have many conjugal visits with her so he can get her pregnant. If the man wants more than one child, she should be incarcerated for multiple pregnancies.
Frankly, all incarcerated women should be turned into baby making machines. If any incarcerated woman has children in prison or jail, her sentence should be reduced. If she has multiple children, she should also be taken off of death row. This is like when Massachusetts proposed to reducing sentences to those who save a life by donating an organ. Those who donate organs should be removed from death row. Frankly, if we have an "eye for an eye" policy, that means a one-time murderer who gave birth destroyed one pair of eyes, but brought to life another pair, so she has had a net neutral effect on life. If she had two children, she had a net positive effect on life. Such a woman should be removed from death row if she wants(she might not want to if she's suicidal). This is more about women, but if a man donates sperm(which should be allowed even if he's short, stupid, and unemployed), he should have a small reduction in his sentence. Perhaps he can have a bigger reduction in his sentence if he hires a commercial surrogate, but this is unfair because it discriminates against poor men. Also, he could just make a child with a woman the normal way, but this discriminates against unattractive men, so I don't know. Prisons and jails should be co-ed though and maybe that would allow even unnnattractive men to reproduce and therefore be eligible for reduced sentences.
Speaking of suicide, assisted suicide is a basic human right for inmates. Inmates should be allowed to have this because being in prison or jail is suffering and when they are freed, if they are freed, they will continue to suffer due to not being able to get a job due to background checks. They might also be sent back to prison or jail due to reoffending, which means more suffering. Frankly, inmates might be less suicidal if prisons and jails were co-ed. Some people say children shouldn't be allowed to have assisted suicide but I disagree especially since some children are mature for their age and have high IQs and therefore know they're making the right decision. This is like when Chris Brand argued that the law should allow high IQ children to consent to sex. Suicide is murder though, so the suicidal should be required to have at least one or two children, so they have at least a net neutral effect on life, to be eligible for assisted suicide. I only support assisted suicide in these cases though. I'm against ordinary suicide, which is why I'm against gun ownership because guns are an effective means to sewerslide. For sure, I'm against the mentally ill purchasing guns because I don't want them to commit sudoku. I don't think gun owners should go to prison or jail, but I do think selling guns should be stopped. I also think groups like The Three Percenters and the boogaloo boys are good though I think the crime the boogaloo boys have committed is bad.
Frankly, prisons and jails should be abolished. Prison funds can be redirected into preventing crime. Also, female inmates who would otherwise serve life can be auctioned off as sex slaves. Not only would this mean the government won't pay for their housing, food, and healthcare, but the government would actually turn a profit from these auctions. This money can be further used to prevent crime which makes prison abolition more reasonable. Perhaps to deal with male inmates, all of them can be deported to another country and let it be another country's problem. They can also be given whippings instead of prison or jail sentences. Prison and jail abolition, co-ed prisons and jails,and solitary confinement for women who lie about wanting children are all good, different options.
According to Google, "There are approximately 2 million people in prisons and jails in the United States. This represents a significant increase from the 360,000 incarcerated individuals in the early 1970s. The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and spends about $182 billion annually on incarceration."
An alternative to incarceration for the woman who lied about wanting children is for a divorce to take place where the man isn't "divorce raped" and the woman should have to pay him the price that at least one child of commercial surrogacy costs. If the man wanted multiple children, she should have to pay him for multiple surrogacies.
Frankly, stealthing shouldn't be illegal because the birth rate is low. Perhaps if the birth rate was at least a bit above the replacement level, stealthing could be banned. Also, this law can punish innocent men because sometimes the condoms accidentally rip or slip off and the man might not notice. Perhaps after intercourse, he's not paying much attention and fails to notice the condom has a hole so he can't alert her so she can use a douche. Besides, contraception isn't 100% effective.
Also, notice that a woman can lie about being on contraception when she's actually not. It's a double standard. Perhaps the man doesn't want children, but she forces him to be a parent. This shouldn't be illegal because making children is good, but perhaps he shouldn't be expected to pay child support. He should have recorded her saying she wants to have contraceptive sex or that she doesn't want children though.
