Comments by "Debany Doombringer" (@debanydoombringer1385) on "Legacy Media Tries to Astroturf Desantis as "Dangerous" and "Edgy"" video.

@nicoles9077 According to the Supreme Court it's for each state to decide. It's not up to you or any other single person. You can not like a decision, but that doesn't make it no longer exist.
1
A father can contest an adoption. I know because I wanted to be adopted by my stepfather and didn't want my biological father's last name. It would have required me making contact and getting his permission because he hadn't legally surrendered his parental rights. That's only if the father is listed on the birth certificate though. If the father can prove through DNA that he is indeed the father, the court would give him custody but it does require a lot of cost because it has to go to court. The problem is there's never any doubt who the mother is, but the father isn't as easy to determine. Edit: You not being aware that an adoption requires both parents to give up their rights to child shows you're rant about men not having rights isn't because you know about the process but based on what someone else told you.
1
@ninaappelt9001 Yes because women never trap men by sabotaging birth control. That never ever happens.
1
You'd be wrong. There absolutely have been times when the father decides he's not going to support her at a late stage of the pregnancy and the woman has ended it. You think a woman that does that is going to shout it from the rooftops? It doesn't matter anyway because the exception is there if the life is threatened ,though birth is the cure so ending the child again isn't necessary. It's coming out alive or dead so might as well be alive. It shouldn't be a legal option to make sure it doesn't occur. You're literally doing a meme "it's not happening so why make it illegal?" To make sure it doesn't happen. Edit: "Danger to the mother" at late stage includes mental health. As I said everything late stage that's dangerous to the mother is cured by delivery of the baby so ending it when it will most likely live is ridiculous. At that stage she'll still have to go through delivery which is the dangerous part so it makes zero medical sense.
1
The only time a 3rd trimester one should be allowed is if the baby has a condition that's not detectable until then that will cause the baby to suffer for a few hours or days and die. As someone that's had a couple of the medical conditions that would allow it for the life of the mother, I find it crazy for the reasons I mentioned. Most people that support it haven't had a baby or are not well informed on the conditions. I was simply induced and closely monitored with a surgery room on standby incase I required an emergency csection. Once you're in labor medications can be administered to control what's happening to the mother's body. She just can't breastfeed afterwards. With modern medicine and practices it's extremely rare for anything really horrible to occur that can't be prevented. You only see it in women that didn't seek prenatal care.
1
Laws aren't just based on your personal beliefs. They're based on the entire populations opinions on issues. It's decided based on what the majority of the population wants. You're welcome to live in one of the states that banned it, but you shouldn't push your beliefs onto the general population who does not agree with you. To want to do otherwise makes you just as much an authoritarian as the far left and just as dangerous.
1
@RobertMorgan So you're waiting for something that's never happened? Brilliant. Teddy was the youngest at 42 and JFK was 43. Of course Teddy wasn't elected and ended up there because the President died. The average age of the Presidents is 55. Thanks for continuing the idea that Millennials aren't very bright.
1
Which is fine, but by him challenging Trump he's making it a federal issue which it should not be.
1
Because of that, DeSantis wouldn't go over well with independents which he would need to win. This push by some, including it appears him, to put abortion right back at the federal level after it just went back to the state isn't a winning strategy. Only a tiny portion of the population supports that so it's crazy to make it am issue.
1
@sidpomy You don't get to force your beliefs onto others. Period. One extreme or the other is still an extreme and neither is supported by the vast majority of the population. That's how decisions are made in a democracy or republic. Don't like it then feel free to live somewhere where the laws better follow your personal beliefs. There are plenty of countries it's completely banned in. Edit: I would never have one, but it's not my place to decide for anyone else. They have a choice and will face the consequences for making it. Even God is against force and says every person is responsible for the consequences of their choices. Denying other people their free will doesn't make you the good guy.
1
You are perfectly capable of deciding that in your state. You don't get to dictate and force your personal beliefs onto others. Just like you don't want the state forcing crap onto your children, other people don't want the state forcing other people's morals onto them.
1