Sure. Why not? What’s a little personal freedom where the rights of the unborn are concerned?
And leftist nanny-staters are ALL ABOUT the rights of the unborn, right?
Right?
...
No. This is not the business of the government.
Sure. Then fine them for killing them too. Fair is fair.
Let me get this straight — you are outright kill the baby, but can’t smoke?
I hate smokers in general for their stupidity, but in this case I cannot support the hypocrisy.
Should Judges be fined and indicted for violating
the US Constitution, first?
How about everyone mind their own business?
Just imagine how peaceful things could be.
People need to quit thinking up laws and fines for just about everything.
Should the Left demand No Smoking signs in abortion clinics?
Per the Hildahag's book; It Takes a Village Idiot
Isn’t being punished with a child enough?
I assume this article is referring to both tobacco and marijuana?
Seems like a legitimate concern. The Child is certainly injured by such indulgence.
The government should not fine them.
Their family, the doctor, and the baby daddy should slap them.
Their insurance provider should withhold payments for premature delivery and low delivery weight.
While I do not believe that government should be involved, I believe in family and capitalism.
Why not just get it over with and assign us all personal minders to follow us around 24/7 who will make sure we’re living and thinking “well.”
People aren’t caring about the child in this case. They are using the child to extort money from people because they some how feel their governments aren’t bringing in enough money. Look at the California fines for driving. While this is not the same and I understand that, this is about getting every last ounce of money they can wherever they can. Should a woman stop smoking when pregnant, science says yes. If we take the argument used in abortion debate, it is the woman’s body (forget all the other argument’s here) then one must logically assume that if a woman chose to smoke whilst pregnant its her body and no one can her what to do with her body. Hmmm... maybe this should be the argument for bans on large sized drinks and other stuff we shove into our mouths. Give a person the choice and let them decide.
On the flip side to this argument, the woman, who is smoking, will eventually burden the tax payers in one of two ways, 1) when the baby is born with defects that need care but can’t afford the care so the child becomes a public charge or 2) the woman when she gets older will need taxpayer money for care but can’t afford the care because she no longer works. Which in the second case Obamacare will take care of her because of the death panels will say she chose to smoke and we told her not to, so we chose not to extend her care anymore. And just like that her death is signed sealed and delivered.
Let’s see how the Libs twist themselves around on this one — does their hatred of smoking outweigh their blind belief that what is in the woman’s womb is just a clump of cells that is no different than a finger nail?
If we can’t keep people from slaughtering children in the womb or allowing children to be adopted into buggery unions, why in the world would we care about smoking?