Reply to Official Abortion Thread

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Official Abortion Thread"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
LOL at the PP saying that “people” shouldn’t be having sex if they aren’t 100% ready to have a child.

Come on, now. We all know you are referring to women. You think that WOMEN shouldn’t be having sex unless they are 100% ready to have a child. Because this reasoning will never deter men from having sex. Ever.

Well yeah the woman has the baby inside her and can only change that with medical intervention. A man - while he shouldn’t - can walk away and no one is the wiser. Might be unfair but it’s pragmstic that the person carrying the baby needs to carry greater responsibility bc there’s always a chance she’ll end up the solo parent. Is your problem that it’s unfair that the woman must carry the child? Bc I think God has something to do with that.

Religion has no place in this argument, separation of church and state. I am an atheist, I equate your god with Santa Claus. I do not require you to live by my morals and I should not have to live by yours. I do not believe that a bunch of cells is more important than my life and my goals for my life. Why don't we worry about all of the children in the foster care system, all of the children being raised in poverty and the children being detained at the border before there is any concern about abortion. Let's show more concern about the children and mothers that are already here.

And if I don't have complete sovereignty over my body, I have no freedom at all. My body, my choice!!!!

It's obviously not that simple. None of us have complete sovereignty over our bodies: we can't take certain drugs without prescriptions, for example.

Moreover, and more importantly for this discussion, we can't use our bodies to physically harm another person. My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.

The whole debate comes down to whether and to what extent a fetus should be considered a "person" vs. a bundle of cells no different (legally) than a fingernail or an appendix.

It's not an easy question and I think that those who pretend otherwise (on both sides of the debate) do a disservice to us all.

But it IS an easy question. It’s as easy as answering whether a parent should be required by the State to donate their blood/organs to their child if it would save their life. Pretending that it is complicated and difficult is why we are in this position. The State can either force you to sacrifice your body to save another or it can’t.

I understand that it's easy for you (and, ironically, for those who disagree with you), but for me it's a very, very difficult question indeed. I'd suggest that the level of disagreement about this issue is an indicator of it's complexity.

Your example is interesting, and one I've not heard before. FWIW, I'd think that a parent SHOULD be required to donate blood to save a child's life. [b]But an organ or anything life-threatening to parent? I'm not sure.[/b][/quote]

I'm pretty sure and I'm a parent.  I'm pretty sure I don't want the government deciding whether or not I have to give my life for my child's life and donate that organ.  There's a reason you put on your own oxygen mask first on the airplane before helping your child.  Maybe the government should change the airline regs on that?  
[/quote]

Fair enough.  But you didn't address the other example:  should a parent be required to donate blood to save a child's life?

That's an easy "yes" for me.  What about you?
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics