You must spread some reputation around before giving it to HoughMade again.
Same boat, someone get him for me.
You must spread some reputation around before giving it to HoughMade again.
What about consent?
Doesn't a person have a right to say to another person: "I don't want you inside my body anymore"? I believe we do.
Pregnancy changes a woman's body permanently. Motherhood changes a woman's life permanently. What if she has weighed the potential costs and benefits and she does not want to experience these changes? For me, a person who will never have to choose whether or not to have an abortion, that is ample reason to keep legal abortion on the table.
Once a baby has been born it no longer requires the consent of its mother to survive. For me this changes a great many things about the situation.
All this chatter about what a woman should do and to the best of my knowledge not a woman among you.
How about men stop telling a women what to do with there body and start telling other men to be more particular with how and whom they deliver their seed to. No fish = no pregnancy... What a novel idea.
jamil said:I think the area is greyer than you present it.
All this chatter about what a woman should do and to the best of my knowledge not a woman among you.
How about men stop telling a women what to do with there body and start telling other men to be more particular with how and whom they deliver their seed to. No fish = no pregnancy... What a novel idea.
When confronted by a "pro choicer" I ask, why do you hate babies?
Their ultimate goal is abortion on demand at any time. One of the cornerstones of the DMC.
All this chatter about what a woman should do and to the best of my knowledge not a woman among you.
How about men stop telling a women what to do with there body and start telling other men to be more particular with how and whom they deliver their seed to. No fish = no pregnancy... What a novel idea.
Aren't we all equal? The blame lies equally on both. Men make the choice to have sex just as women do. Both parties, going into that decision, know what the outcome is.
We must defund Planned Parenthood. We can't have women running around getting cancer screenings and Pap smears!
If only that were the purpose of PP. There are plenty of avenues for women to receive that sort of care, and financial assistance for them if they can not afford it. To support an organization that facilitates the murders of a million children a year in the name of cheap health care borders on the insane. Does Hitler get to gas Jews as long as he gives prostate exams and colonoscopies to "Arians"?
Hopefully we are all equal, but all the pro life men here don't ever seem to blame the men the same as women get blamed.
alas abortions have been done since what time in history say around 1550 BCE, so along time to say the least. It's always been the woman's fault, more so in modern times.
Like old Dr Phil says, How's it working out so far for the right to life so far ?
It's ain't working, that's how it's working.
How about blame the men who can't control their deposits for the next 50 years and leave the women alone.
We must defund Planned Parenthood. We can't have women running around getting cancer screenings and Pap smears!
Comparing abortions to genocide is absurd and intellectually dishonest.
If you hate abortion so much, then start a movement to get PP out of the abortion business completely. You don't have to kill the fly with a bazooka, PP offers many other vital services aside from abortion.
What about consent?
Doesn't a person have a right to say to another person: "I don't want you inside my body anymore"? I believe we do.
Pregnancy changes a woman's body permanently. Motherhood changes a woman's life permanently. What if she has weighed the potential costs and benefits and she does not want to experience these changes? For me, a person who will never have to choose whether or not to have an abortion, that is ample reason to keep legal abortion on the table.
Once a baby has been born it no longer requires the consent of its mother to survive. For me this changes a great many things about the situation.
Comparing abortions to genocide is absurd and intellectually dishonest.
If you hate abortion so much, then start a movement to get PP out of the abortion business completely. You don't have to kill the fly with a bazooka, PP offers many other vital services aside from abortion.
To be certain, there are different thoughts about this. I appreciate the time and thought you have put into this issue. Here are a few more thoughts of mine.
Supersede? Only if the baby is trying to kill the mother. "Putting a woman through" pregnancy and birth (because women may then give away the baby if they like) is not, in any way, equivalent to killing the child. To be clear- abortion allows the mothers rights to kill the baby. Not allowing abortion allows a baby to inconvenience the mother and maybe cause embarrassment for a few months if she wishes to end the relationship after birth, she may. There is no equivalence. These are two humans and one's right to be rid of discomfort and inconvenience do not justify killing.
I don't know why religion is a necessary discussion in the abortion debate. A good secular humanist should be in favor of not killing humans. The atheists, secular humanists, agnostics, I know all value human life. Every one of them. The logical (not supernaturally revealed, but logical) end to valuing human life is that every human life is worth protecting. What is magical about the moment of birth that the full force of the law will now protect a life that all science agrees was present months before? Balancing the value of one human life versus another? Sounds like a dangerous road. I wonder what human lives will be deemed of less value next. No religion- humanism.
Different people can have different beliefs and I love that about about our society. My issues is simply that one belief system ends lives for convenience.
This is by no means an objective standard that can be applied legally. This varies with each individual and is subject to change as science advances. What is a thought? What is "feeling". Does reflex to stimuli count? If not, why not?
And we certainly agree on this.