Disaster Death Penalty for Abortions Becomes Pivotal Issue in GOP Runoff in Texas - When you're so pro life you wanna end a ho

A bill that could allow the death penalty for women who receive abortions emerged as a pivotal issue in a state legislative race in Texas.

The legislation, which was filed last year by state Representative Bryan Slaton, would allow women who receive an abortion to be charged with assault or homicide, which carries the state's death sentence.

Texas already has one of the country's most restrictive abortion laws, but some Republicans have sought to add further limitations to the practice—while Democrats and some moderates have strongly opposed the laws.

The battle over how Republicans should handle the issue of abortion has become central in one GOP primary in Texas' 91st congressional district, which contains conservative suburbs north of Fort Worth. In the primary held earlier this month, state Representative Stephanie Klick was forced into a runoff with challenger David Lowe.

The two sparred over the abortion legislation during a Republican women's club luncheon on Friday, which was streamed on Facebook.

"I support Representative Slaton's bill," Lowe said. "Which was probably the strongest pro-life bill to ever enter Texas. The same law that protects Stephanie, you, me—I want those same laws to protect unborn children."

Klick, however, slammed the legislation, saying the idea of "sentencing women to death" is "absolutely abhorrent." Instead, she pointed to existing laws in Texas that have already reduced the number of abortions in the state.

"Abolishing abortion is important, but I think we can do that without giving women the death penalty," she said.

Lowe defended his support of the legislation, saying it has "nothing to do with the death penalty" and that he is "not even a fan of" it.

"Do we all agree that abortion is murder? Absolutely. There should be consequences for it," he said, pointing out that some women in Texas have traveled to other states including Oklahoma for the procedure.

In a statement to Newsweek, Lowe said that he supports "all pro-life bills including those that say unborn children have the same value as born children."

"Representative Klick, throughout her career, has exclusively supported bills that state the unborn are legally less than their born counterparts and has also helped stop legislation that would have banned child gender modification," he wrote.

The bill aims to make abortion a capital offense. It only includes exemptions for pregnancies that seriously threaten the life of the mother, but not rape or incest. It also instructs the state attorney general to "direct a state agency to enforce those laws, regardless of any contrary federal statute, regulation, treaty, order or court decision," according to the Texas Tribune.

Last September, a law went into effect in Texas that banned most abortions in the state.
The law ends abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which is typically around six weeks when a woman cannot even know she is pregnant.

During the primary, Klick received 49 percent of the vote—just shy of the majority needed to avoid a runoff—while Lowe won 39 percent. Regardless of who wins the runoff, the district is likely to remain in Republican hands, as former President Donald Trump won it by 20 points in 2020. The runoff election is scheduled for May 24.

Newsweek reached out to Klick for comment Sunday morning. This story will be updated with any response.

Link / Archive
 
You’re a disingenuous retard if you read her statement as “death penalty for men is okay.”
Am I not supposed to read it that way?

Putting aside that she's the disingenuous one for jumping to "death penalty" when you normally get years in prison for murder, as far as the article says, she's not making a case for why women receiving the death sentence for this is "abhorrent". She's not indicating that she disagrees with the death penalty as a concept, either.

I don't care whether she does, but "death penalty for women is abhorrent" is just a really stupid line. It'd even have been better if she just said she doesn't think women shouldn't be punished with death for getting an abortion (again, putting aside that they likely wouldn't to begin with) but it just reads like she dances around that declaration.
 
Last edited:
Am I not supposed to read it that way?

Putting aside that she's the disingenuous one for jumping to "death penalty" when you normally get years in prison for murder, as far as the article says, she's not making a case for why women receiving the death sentence for this is "abhorrent". She's not indicating that she disagrees with the death penalty as a concept, either.

I don't care whether she does, but "death penalty for women is abhorrent" is just a really stupid line. It'd even have been better if she just said she doesn't think women shouldn't be punished with death for getting an abortion (again, putting aside that they likely wouldn't to begin with) but it just reads like she dances around that declaration.
I’m sorry. I expected a disingenuous retard to realize they’re being a disingenuous retard. Please do better.
 
I’m sorry. I expected a disingenuous retard to realize they’re being a disingenuous retard. Please do better.
You're conflating "being disingenuous" with "not bending myself forwards and backwards trying to be as charitable as possible", and I'm already being rather charitable.

Also, I will not do butter. That's gross.
 
You're conflating "being disingenuous" with "not bending myself forwards and backwards trying to be as charitable as possible", and I'm already being rather charitable.

Also, I will not do butter. That's gross.
You aren’t being charitable. You claimed she said the death penalty for men is okay. Stop bending forwards and backwards trying to weasel your words into not being the words of a disingenuous retard.
:heart-full:
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: ICanLurkNoMore
Hey everyone, Megaton Punch here with a completely unrelated Fun Fact about Kiwi Farms:

Did you know that Kiwi Farms has an ignore button? You can ignore any user you want, and you'll stop seeing their posts! Say, for example, some sperg is engaging in Reddit-tier trolling by name-calling and strawmanning. If you ignore that sperg, you never have to read their useless, useless posts ever again!

That's it for today's Kiwi Farms Fun Fact, which is not relevant to this conversation at all, much less to one particular user shitting up this thread by acting like anyone outside of Twitter thinks sassy one liners and sarcasm are valid replacements for a personality.
 
Am I not supposed to read it that way?

Putting aside that she's the disingenuous one for jumping to "death penalty" when you normally get years in prison for murder, as far as the article says, she's not making a case for why women receiving the death sentence for this is "abhorrent". She's not indicating that she disagrees with the death penalty as a concept, either.

I don't care whether she does, but "death penalty for women is abhorrent" is just a really stupid line. It'd even have been better if she just said she doesn't think women shouldn't be punished with death for getting an abortion (again, putting aside that they likely wouldn't to begin with) but it just reads like she dances around that declaration.
Maybe it has to do with the fact that ONLY WOMEN CAN HAVE ABORTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE
stupid incel
 
You aren’t being charitable.
Me "not being charitable":

1. Earnestly asked whether I wasn't supposed to understand it that way:
Am I not supposed to read it that way?
2. Proceeded to acknowledge that the article may be incomplete in its representation of her statement...
Putting aside that she's the disingenuous one for jumping to "death penalty" when you normally get years in prison for murder, as far as the article says, she's not making a case for why women receiving the death sentence for this is "abhorrent".
2. ...then specified why this was the understanding I came to given what was written:
She's not indicating that she disagrees with the death penalty as a concept, either.
3. Clarified that I seized on it being a stupid-sounding line:
I don't care whether she does [disagree with the death penalty as a concept], but "death penalty for women is abhorrent" is just a really stupid line.
4. Suggested that she just say that women shouldn't be put to death for procuring an abortion instead of what's seemingly a dance-around (i.e. I suggested she make a better statement, and then suggested a better statement).
It'd even have been better if she just said she doesn't think women shouldn't be punished with death for getting an abortion (again, putting aside that they likely wouldn't to begin with) but it just reads like she dances around that declaration.
You shove your lack of theory of mind in my face, and you do it all while Klick, for sure, deliberately miscast Lowe as wanting to put to death women who procure abortions despite most murderers not being sentenced to death, and despite the actual bill proposing that women who procure abortions be charged the same as those who are accused of assault or murder.

You're arguing that I'm being disingenuous (I'm not) for the sake of a woman who's blatantly disingenuous.

Get a damn grip, and then get a damn grip on a book.

Maybe it has to do with the fact that ONLY WOMEN CAN HAVE ABORTIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE
And when they do, it's usually by a man's hands, with tools made by men, in a jurisdiction where the practice was sanctioned by laws made by males.
 
Last edited:
If abortion is murder then it should be treated as murder is. It somewhat undermines the entire argument of 'abortion is murder' that pro-life hinges on if you want to punish it differently from murder. If the state in question has capital punishment for murder, maybe don't murder your baby in that state. I'd say the same to any other kind of premeditated murder - maybe don't do it in a state where you'll get killed for it, just in case you get caught. That said, I believe even with existing laws in Texas, it's hard to get a death penalty for murder, so I'd imagine the abortion would have to be particularly cruel or extremely repeated - such as some rogue doctor doing a whole bunch of abortions getting the chair, rather than the mother who got the abortion herself. I'm not normally one for increasing the severity of punishment for crimes, since punishing a lesser crime like a more severe one only encourages the more severe crimes, but if you're gonna treat abortion like murder it should also be sentenced like murder.

If this leads to people who want to kill their babies moving back to California and New York, I can see this only as a win for Texas.
 
Last edited:
Even in Islamic dictatorships women don’t get fucking murdered for having an abortion this is incredibly barbaric even if their is no chance it would pass.

And lol at Texas Republicans thinking doing these things will stop women from having an abortion my cousin owns an abortion clinic in New Mexico and a huge chuck of her clients since the ban have been from Texas.

All that will have happen is that their non-white population will explode and Texas will turn blue after that and abortion will be legal for more then 6 weeks again.
 
Last edited:
Did he plan or drive her to the back alley? Sounds like accessory to me.

This needs to be more consistent. You have people being charged with double homicide for killing a pregnant woman but an abortionist can drag a baby out and listen to it feebly cry as it struggles to breath until it stops. Happens every day.

Because in Feminists view Baby is the PROPERTY of woman, thats why the feel nothing wrong with grooming them or pedophilia as well, They believe they OWN them.
 
The entire push-back against the death penalty for abortion comes from the argument that an unborn child is less of a human than one that's born. In general, nobody would be against the idea of the death penalty for mothers who dismember their babies when they want to go back to the old childless freedom time, especially if it's a mother that repeatedly has kids and then kills them with no remorse. People keep reframing it to be 'you're killing a woman for having an abortion' when the reality is 'murder is a capital crime in Texas, and under the current law, Texas recognizes abortion as murder'. There is no in-between on the matter. Either you believe that a baby's humanity is dependent on whether it's born or not, or you don't. In the former case, abortion should be treated differently from baby murder. In the latter, it shouldn't be. Simply saying 'making it illegal won't stop them' is a stupid argument and has always been so. Murder has never been legal and yet it being a crime has never stopped it from happening. Although penalties for crimes can be deterrents, they're chiefly punishments, which is why they have to be reasonable and fitting for whatever crime was committed.

Furthermore, there are already laws on the books in many forms for when people attempt to go beyond a given jurisdiction to commit crimes: like buying banned weapons or circumventing age of consent laws. It would be a simple matter, if such a law doesn't already exist, to ensure that anyone crossing state lines to procure an abortion is treated the same way any other criminal attempting to circumvent state laws would. The only solution would be that people who want to have or give abortions would need to leave the state permanently to do so. And I can only see that as a positive thing for Texas.
 
"Which was probably the strongest pro-life bill to ever enter Texas."

Fun fact: The Texan "heartbeat" bill was signed, if I am not mistaken, one day after an execution took place (the guy executed was a former drug-addict who had murdered his grandma for 30 dollars in cash. His family, i.e the victim's own family!, had forgiven him and did not want him to be executed. My state is so messed up, it is shameful. It is not the "worst of the worst" who get executed for the most part). So, yeah, "sanctity of life", whatever.

Personally, I am pro-life from cradle to natural death: No abortions, no euthanasia, no capital punishment (but very much pro-gun). If you need a reason without resorting to being a moralfag: Look at our representatives. Do you seriously think these people should have the right to terminate a human life, expecially for political gains? I don't.

BTW, there is an execution scheduled for the 27th of this month (April), of a woman called Melissa Lucio, who is the mother of 14 kids (yeah, won't discuss this point further, think of it what you want). Even her one daughter who thinks that she is guilty of the death of her youngest daughter does NOT want the Lone Star state to murder her mom.

Apparently, there are just to options in today's US of A: 1. Poor murderers+how dare you tell me I can not abort my unborn kid as I please, you fascist!
2. Poor unborn children+what, social security? Caring for people after they are born, respect the right to life of everyone, even a criminal? How dare you, stupid social justice warrior!

Yeah, fuck both of them.
 
"Which was probably the strongest pro-life bill to ever enter Texas."

Fun fact: The Texan "heartbeat" bill was signed, if I am not mistaken, one day after an execution took place (the guy executed was a former drug-addict who had murdered his grandma for 30 dollars in cash. His family, i.e the victim's own family!, had forgiven him and did not want him to be executed. My state is so messed up, it is shameful. It is not the "worst of the worst" who get executed for the most part). So, yeah, "sanctity of life", whatever.

Personally, I am pro-life from cradle to natural death: No abortions, no euthanasia, no capital punishment (but very much pro-gun). If you need a reason without resorting to being a moralfag: Look at our representatives. Do you seriously think these people should have the right to terminate a human life, expecially for political gains? I don't.

BTW, there is an execution scheduled for the 27th of this month (April), of a woman called Melissa Lucio, who is the mother of 14 kids (yeah, won't discuss this point further, think of it what you want). Even her one daughter who thinks that she is guilty of the death of her youngest daughter does NOT want the Lone Star state to murder her mom.

Apparently, there are just to options in today's US of A: 1. Poor murderers+how dare you tell me I can not abort my unborn kid as I please, you fascist!
2. Poor unborn children+what, social security? Caring for people after they are born, respect the right to life of everyone, even a criminal? How dare you, stupid social justice warrior!

Yeah, fuck both of them.
The reason for the two executions in that case is because when a felony is committed it's considered to have also been perpetrated against the state, so the actual victims/family of victims don't need to press charges. The state can decide 'this crime must be punished' on its own, generally. The child saying 'don't kill my mother for killing my sibling' isn't being listened to for the same reason the girl who was kidnapped and raised for 18 years by another woman wasn't listened to when she asked for her kidnapper-slash-adoptive mother not to be prosecuted. Most people don't want to see close family they love lost or killed. Sometimes they'd even rather forgive and live with someone who murdered other family members than lose that other family member and the murderer. That's why it's the state's role to step in sometimes and decide if the crime can simply be ignored or not. (one can argue whether the state should have that right, but the fact remains that it does, currently, have it)

I'm also against capital punishment, partly because I don't trust our legal system and there has been more than one case where a person was convicted of murder and served decades in prison before it was eventually revealed that person didn't do the crime after all. Capital punishment in that scenario could only say "Oopsie woopsie, we killed an innocent person!" - not bring them back and give them a performative apology. However, the subject here is not 'should murder carry a potential death penalty in Texas', but 'should the murder of an unborn baby carry a potential death penalty in Texas'. From my understanding, if abortion is already being considered murder in Texas, the laws currently say 'yes', it's not a new law being made. If the abortion law hasn't passed yet, then they're just throwing up smoke to try to derail a bill that must be getting too much traction for their liking.

The duality you speak of is mostly just nonsense spouted by pro-choice advocates. People who are pro-choice and people who are pro-life fall all over the spectrum when it comes to their beliefs about euthanasia, gun control and welfare. Simply believing abortion is murder doesn't require any other belief set to be attached to it. I agree, however, that both of your stated extremes are stupid and terrible people.
 
I am sure this wouldn't be abused at all, nope not even, I mean look at mexico its teeming with women who have murdered, their babies, oh who the fuck am I kidding?
mexico has an imprison women for abortion law, and a lot of women get sent to prison for merely having a miscarriage's, that they suspect was abortion, its really hard to prove an abortion from a natural miscarriage. this will be abused, and many innocent women will go to their ends, for merely having a miscarrage. espeically if you go for the witch doctor diy route. I've known prolife people who were anti death penalty because they believed only god had a right to end a life, not humans, or the state. Also how would they penalize someone for going to another state to end a pregnancy? this is just tryanical, I used to think that people sperging over the handmaids tale was just sperging, but I am pro choice, I much rather have a young irresponisble mother abort than raise a kid.
 
Me "not being charitable":

1. Earnestly asked whether I wasn't supposed to understand it that way:

2. Proceeded to acknowledge that the article may be incomplete in its representation of her statement...

2. ...then specified why this was the understanding I came to given what was written:

3. Clarified that I seized on it being a stupid-sounding line:

4. Suggested that she just say that women shouldn't be put to death for procuring an abortion instead of what's seemingly a dance-around (i.e. I suggested she make a better statement, and then suggested a better statement).

You shove your lack of theory of mind in my face, and you do it all while Klick, for sure, deliberately miscast Lowe as wanting to put to death women who procure abortions despite most murderers not being sentenced to death, and despite the actual bill proposing that women who procure abortions be charged the same as those who are accused of assault or murder.

You're arguing that I'm being disingenuous (I'm not) for the sake of a woman who's blatantly disingenuous.

Get a damn grip, and then get a damn grip on a book.


And when they do, it's usually by a man's hands, with tools made by men, in a jurisdiction where the practice was sanctioned by laws made by males.
You're an idiot
 
Back