A woman's basic right over her body doesn't "belong w/ the states"

BartenderElite said:
This is the right's mantra now: abortion is back w/ the states - "where it belongs."

Can anyone explain why such a sacred right "belongs w/ the states?" And we don't have to debate if abortion is "murder" here. Everyone is dug in on that, on both sides. And it's irrelevant to this discussion.

A woman's right to choose and to have that decision be between her & her healthcare provider shouldn't be something that's at the whim of whatever state she happens to live in. Freedoms are universal.
Click to expand...
We could start by it not being a "right" but a medical procedure. A Right is universal. Rights also don't have a price tag attached. Everyone has it. Since it is a medical procedure, it occurs at the point of service, it isn't interstate commerce.

Next, if it's a "woman's right to choose," then men shouldn't have to pay child support.

So, it's now a "freedom" and not a "Right?" Okay, you seem to flippantly use whatever term you like without regards to definition or meaning.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
We could start by it not being a "right" but a medical procedure. A Right is universal. Rights also don't have a price tag attached. Everyone has it. Since it is a medical procedure, it occurs at the point of service, it isn't interstate commerce.

Next, if it's a "woman's right to choose," then men shouldn't have to pay child support.

So, it's now a "freedom" and not a "Right?" Okay, you seem to flippantly use whatever term you like without regards to definition or meaning.
Click to expand...

Huh?
 
BartenderElite said:
This is the right's mantra now: abortion is back w/ the states - "where it belongs."

Can anyone explain why such a sacred right "belongs w/ the states?" And we don't have to debate if abortion is "murder" here. Everyone is dug in on that, on both sides. And it's irrelevant to this discussion.

A woman's right to choose and to have that decision be between her & her healthcare provider shouldn't be something that's at the whim of whatever state she happens to live in. Freedoms are universal.
Click to expand...
Killing your child isn't a "sacred right" and yes it's relevant to the discussion. It is the discussion.

Personally I don't really care if loose moral women want to kill off the next generations of themselves. The world and human race will be just fine.

Just don't pretend it's not what it is. Killing their kids.

Do whatever with your kids but cut the bullshit.
 
Stone said:
TWO BODIES.
Click to expand...

A clump of cells isn't a body. I'd agree that it gets more murky as a pregnancy moves along - but the 1st trimester was a good compromise.

You can't take that right away from a woman, completely. I'm fine w/ restricting it to the 1st trimester.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
We could start by it not being a "right" but a medical procedure. A Right is universal. Rights also don't have a price tag attached. Everyone has it. Since it is a medical procedure, it occurs at the point of service, it isn't interstate commerce.
Click to expand...

So you are of the opinion that some hold that there is no right to privacy anywhere in US governance, not even implied?

That's interesting. So you would be OK with a nationwide gun registry? That wouldn't be a problem since you have NO RIGHT to privacy or autonomy over your body.

Next, if it's a "woman's right to choose," then men shouldn't have to pay child support.
Click to expand...

Ummm, men are 50% responsible for EVERY abortion. EVERY SINGLE ONE. You want to stop abortion? Make it a problem for the MEN as well.
 
BartenderElite said:
I don't.

A woman's right to decide what to do WITH HER OWN BODY is a sacred, inherent right.
Click to expand...
No, it's not with reproduction unless you consider men nothing more than sperm donors. If so, then women have ZERO--ZERO-- right to child support. It's their decision whether to have a child or not, and it's their responsibility to raise and care for it if they do.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, it's not with reproduction unless you consider men nothing more than sperm donors. If so, then women have ZERO--ZERO-- right to child support. It's their decision whether to have a child or not, and it's their responsibility to raise and care for it if they do.
Click to expand...

You're comparing financial issues w/ someone actually carrying something in their body w/ all of the physical sacrifices that entails.

It's a non-starter. It's not even a good attempt at equivalency. It's completely male-centric.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
No, it's not with reproduction unless you consider men nothing more than sperm donors. If so, then women have ZERO--ZERO-- right to child support. It's their decision whether to have a child or not, and it's their responsibility to raise and care for it if they do.
Click to expand...

Aren't there more Incel and Mens Rights fora for you to post on?
 
BartenderElite said:
A woman's right to decide [to kill a living human] is a sacred, inherent right.
Click to expand...
People such as you argue that Mafia contract killings are a sacred, inherent right. After all, killing a living human who has not committed any crime and who has not expressed any desire to die is a very personal matter of choice to be made by the killer, and the victim is not to have any say in the matter.

People such as you are exactly the kind of shit that we must flush away from civilized society.
 
IBDaMann said:
People such as you argue that Mafia contract killings are a sacred, inherent right. After all, killing a living human who has not committed any crime and who has not expressed any desire to die is a very personal matter of choice to be made by the killer, and the victim is not to have any say in the matter.

People such as you are exactly the kind of shit that we must flush away from civilized society.
Click to expand...

I hope you don't mind - I'm going to completely ignore this baseless, silly comment.
 
Obtenebrator said:
So you are of the opinion that some hold that there is no right to privacy anywhere in US governance, not even implied?
Click to expand...

Separate issue. You are conflating things and ending up with a logical fallacy.
Obtenebrator said:
That's interesting. So you would be OK with a nationwide gun registry? That wouldn't be a problem since you have NO RIGHT to privacy or autonomy over your body.
Click to expand...

Now you're trying to use a complex question fallacy coupled to a strawman. Gun control is a separate issue from abortion. Conflating the two is irrelevant--TOTALLY IRRELEVANT.
Obtenebrator said:
Ummm, men are 50% responsible for EVERY abortion. EVERY SINGLE ONE. You want to stop abortion? Make it a problem for the MEN as well.
Click to expand...

But, it's "A woman's right to choose." Are you saying it's actually A couple's right to choose, and that the man is to be equally involved in a decision for a woman to have an abortion? If so, then the Left's / feminist's position is fallacious and needs to be altered.
 
BartenderElite said:
You're comparing financial issues w/ someone actually carrying something in their body w/ all of the physical sacrifices that entails.

It's a non-starter. It's not even a good attempt at equivalency. It's completely male-centric.
Click to expand...
That's a matter of biology, something the Left denies, versus legality. Government makes laws, it doesn't determine biology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top