pro life vs pro choice

Pro Choice.

 

Using the coercion of criminal law to force a person with a uterus to bear and deliver a child they don't want to is slavery and torture. I'm really glad the law is on my side.

So, as long as we're discussing the completely inhumane view that "abortion is murder," what would you like done to people who have abortions? What punishment should they suffer under the criminal law?

 

You need to find the egg-zit, and get the hell out of my jokes!










LOL.

I love you, Nychthemeron.

 

Pro-choice.

 

[/COLOR]

Why is an emotional stake in something (living or not, human or not) enough to allow a form of ownership to be perpetuated on another persons body? Does the other person, what, partially own the baby? What is the reasoning here? The words being used are suggestive of property rights. It is very empathetic, I applaud that, but it seems totally inconsistent at the same time.

 

I'm Pro-Life. Not because of G-d, but because I think it's bad for society to encourage abortion, and especially bad for women.

Oh, and I do believe in life from conception, but that's just one angle of my pro-life stance.

 

Says the man.

 

Well it seems like the 'slavery/property' issue is one that people do not want to address. Is this because they have no answer? Shrug.

 

:bang:

I don't play the privilege game that the left loves to play. Everyone has a right to an opinion, no matter what their gender, race, religion or social status is. You have a right to disagree with me, and there are legitimate arguments against my statements...but my gender is definitely not one of them.

I haven't met many women who run around happily telling everyone they had an abortion. In fact, in some cases a woman only has an abortion because the man she had sex with didn't have the balls to stay with her or support her.

Abortion doesn't "liberate" the woman, it liberates the deadbeat father to be who decided he wanted an easy way out. Life is too damn short to tell people that they can choose who gets to be born and who doesn't.

Now, there are always exceptions to everything, and most Pro-Lifers (myself included) take that position.

 

Terms like liberation are loaded, particularly when discussing something like the ownership and control of a human body and person.

 

you can have that opinion but recognize that you should not get to decide what a woman does with her body. life is too damn short to police peoples bodies and decisions especially at the risk that it sticks them with a small helpless human

 

Yes, so the solution is to force women to have children and force them to marry a selfish man who won't give any help.

You've solved the big issue! Everyone'll live happily ever after!

Yay! *fireworks*

 

The other person created the baby. By law you are legally responsible for the child until 18, food,clothing, and shelter. If parents are separated/divorced/don't live together they usually get joint custody because it's also the dad's child.
If a female can choose to abort without the baby's father's consent then why are dad's getting joint custody?By that logic females should always have full custody.
Using your property rights argument, I'm going to say a baby isn't anyone's property yet females are aloud to abort them. That basically implies babies are property when they're living human beings. In the womb, they aren't your responsibility yet but, they are still both parents child.

 

So by extension, continuing this line of reasoning, the male that has impregnated the female also has partial control or custody of the body (or part of it) of the female? Is this what you are saying?

 

Pro-life everyone should get a chance to live

 

Simple answer: In a case of abortion yes. Otherwise, no.
Long answer:A baby isn't anyone's property. Females are allowed to abort a baby that is living from day 1. A father has no say in this. She can use a threat of abortion to get what she wants. The father shouldn't have to say no to her, considering if she didn't want the baby he can have sole custody of THEIR child.
So yes a man who impregnated a women can control whether she has an abortion otherwise, he can't control anything else she does. He doesn't own the women and the women doesn't own the baby.
And the baby is separate from the women so the only thing he really is controlling is whether she goes to an abortion clinic.

 

I don't like the idea that many teenaged or generally young women get to the point of pregnancy in a bad situation and have to make the decision. Everybody has their own story, why should we make it harder for them? Anyways, there are too many people. Why bring another child, worse off, into this world? Yeah. That's basically my stance, aside from other things mentioned.

 

Oh, they get very broody Kaiser. My ex used to keep them and he knew the real meaning of hen pecked when he went hunting for eggs.