Live By The Sword, Die By The Sword...
- Thread starter hellblazer
- Start date
- Status
If a man impregnates a woman he has the right to force the woman to have the baby through law even if she doesn't want it. There was a case about this a while ago, I'm not sure if it was setting a precedent - but it's how the one I read was ruled.
Take this with a grain of salt, I read this a LONG while back.
That's all fine and dandy and everything but you didn't really answer the question in a sensible manner. People fuck and, for whatever reason, don't always use protection. Women get pregnant when they don't want to.
Do you believe life starts at conception? Are you against the morning after pill? You can't very well call 2 or 4 or 16 cells or whatever exists a few hours later anything that resembles a human being. Egg and sperm brought together for a few hours is no more a viable human being than the egg and sperm on their own IMO.
Wrong. That decision was overturned shortly thereafter. I just love how, at the end, they state "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It came too late, though. Tanya Meyers has since suffered a miscarriage." Suffered??? She was going to kill it on purpose. Nice way to play the sympathy card, though... [/FONT]
Fact that you want to control women's choices? If you are angry that you can't have the baby and make the choice then maybe you can take that up with your god? I really don't know what to tell you, I'm dealing with the here and now and what make sense. It's never an ideal situation but when you take emotion out of the equation you are left with a much more logical solution on what's best for society.
Agreed. That's the problem with these debates. People come at from angry and emotional areas. From a pragmatic point of view, encouraging the ongoing generations created in an atmosphere of neglect, abuse, ignorance and poverty just doesn't make much sense to me.
Thanks, I actually wondered a few times about this.. tried looking for it earlier but didn't find anything. +rep for clearing that up.
Speaking of Choice, I've always found "pro-choice" groups to be a bit weird... if I 'choose' life, I'm pro-life... not pro-choice?
I guess "pro-choice" just sounds better than "pro-abortion"
Yeah it's the same on the opposite end as well. Really it seems more adequate to say Anti-choice because what we're actually legally talking about here is a women's right to choose. Even with semantics it's more appropriate. For example, I have a legal right to choose an abortion. I also have a legal right to choose not to have an abortion. Neither one makes me pro or anti abortion. If it did then I would be anti-abortion because I chose to have two babies. Right? So I'm anti-abortion and pro choice.
An author I like, pointed out (iirc) that as a Catholic he comes across people who are fervently pro-life, but have no problem with bombing pregnant women if they are foreign or brown. Some even cheer for it.
To me, pro-life means being pro-all innocent life. It's not ok to abort a fetus, I don't see how collateral damage [sic] can be viewed as acceptable or unavoidable.
To me, pro-life means being pro-all innocent life. It's not ok to abort a fetus, I don't see how collateral damage [sic] can be viewed as acceptable or unavoidable.
You know, all the pro choice people keep talking about how it'd be taking away their rights. The only RIGHTS we'd be taking away by outlawing abortion for convenience are the RIGHT to be irresponsible, and the RIGHT to avoid being held accountable for your own actions.
Taking away abortion for convenience does NOT eliminate your right to CHOOSE. A woman CHOOSES whether she'll participate in any form of birth control. A woman CHOOSES to have sex. Decide yes to the first, or no to the second, and you're still very much in control of your own body.
Very few prolife people are even remotely interested in taking away birth control. In fact, almost all pro life people are strong supporters of birth control. Imagine what we could accomplish if all the money spent on fighting late reactions to poor choices were instead spent on developing new and more convenient methods of birth control....
It's bull shit that a man has to be held accountable for his actions (choosing to have sex, especially unprotected), yet a woman does not. How is it right that a man who fathers an unplanned child can be held responsible, and doesn't have the option to change his mind afterward... yet a woman does? Bottom line, women need to make their CHOICE that they hold so dear before they jump in bed with someone, not afterward.
Taking away abortion for convenience does NOT eliminate your right to CHOOSE. A woman CHOOSES whether she'll participate in any form of birth control. A woman CHOOSES to have sex. Decide yes to the first, or no to the second, and you're still very much in control of your own body.
Very few prolife people are even remotely interested in taking away birth control. In fact, almost all pro life people are strong supporters of birth control. Imagine what we could accomplish if all the money spent on fighting late reactions to poor choices were instead spent on developing new and more convenient methods of birth control....
It's bull shit that a man has to be held accountable for his actions (choosing to have sex, especially unprotected), yet a woman does not. How is it right that a man who fathers an unplanned child can be held responsible, and doesn't have the option to change his mind afterward... yet a woman does? Bottom line, women need to make their CHOICE that they hold so dear before they jump in bed with someone, not afterward.
Try telling that to a liberal female. You'd be better off convincing Bill Clinton not to like fat chicks.
Still haven't answered my original question bb. How are you going to FORCE a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term?
Don't be a smartass, you know you can't.
If you would simply try to comprehend the pro-life argument here, it's about eliminating Abortion as a method of birth control, not forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies.
I've enjoyed watching my mom skate around this issue. She's of the relgious right. She always says something like those brown people were asking for it. (being educated and tactful it usually come out as something like "we have to defend our right to freedom" (by invading other countries and bombing the shit out of them) )
My uncle, who's an evangelical christian, is actually the only true christian I know. Anti-abortion, anti-war, anti-violence, anti death penality...etc.
I must be little slow, but I've read that sentence a dozen times and it still doesn't make any sense to me.
Good man. Not because I necessarily agree with the faith, but that it is hard to be consistently principled in this world. A lot of people talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.
- Status