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

[AProudLefty]

What a fucking moronic argument. The Federal Government sure thought they owned our bodies during Covid didn't they halfwit.

This isn't about a woman's body asshat; it's about making moral choices. Of course, the Democratic Party of Racist Jackasses love it when black women abort the babies by the hundreds of thousands.

What an idiot.

 

[AProudLefty]

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.

Not that bullshit again.

 

[Kafka]

Separate issue. You are conflating things and ending up with a logical fallacy.

Actually no. That is one of the primary critiques folks who wanted Roe overturned raised. That there is no right to privacy.

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.

No, it's leveraging the Right to Privacy which mysteriously goes missing every time you folks on the Right want to enforce abortion. But what if the shoe was on the other foot? Suddenly you guys value privacy rights more than anything.

That's because it is not about rights or the Constitution. It's about controlling women's bodies.

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.

Do you think that once you are done jizzing that her job is equally done? Are you unfamiliar with pregnancy? It's 9 months of her body changing in dramatic ways and limits on what she is allowed to do or not do. Also childbirth is a SERIOUS PHYSICAL THREAT to her life. Women die in childbirth all over the earth every day.

But the man got his rocks off and fell asleep.

If you don't know the difference between what men and women go through in bringing a child into the world then I am thinking you are too young to be on a discussion forum on the internet.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

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.

since you believe that a woman should have the right to choose whether to be a mother or not, do you also then believe that a man should have the right to choose whether to support that child or not?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I mean, you're making my point. Some policies DO belong w/ the states, based on circumstance.

A woman's right to choose is a much more inherent right than anything you mentioned. That's the idea. I'm actually not sure how you missed that.

did she choose/consent to an activity knowing that pregnancy is a possibility?

 

[TOP]

 

[ExpressLane]

The vast majority of Americans believe in preserving a woman's right to choose. Because it is her own body - which means it's an inherent right. We all have that right.

The vast majority of Americans believe that they can impose limitations on this "right to choose" different areas of people believe differently on what those limitations should be. . Allowing the states to choose gives the people the MOST freedom to choose what they want.

 

[christiefan915]

No, your statement implies rape. Sex between consenting adults can and often will result in pregnancy. That is a matter of biological and evolutionary science.

Women aren't "forced to give birth," but rather it's a matter of whether the man has any say in the pregnancy or not. The way the Left wants it (you) is "It's a woman's right to choose." It is her decision and hers alone to make whether the child is aborted or born. If she chooses to have the child then suddenly upon birth it's now the man's responsibility to pay 50% of the child's upbringing even though he had no say in the decision to have the child to begin with.

It is YOU that is a moron. Contract law holds that there are two parties involved and each has rights and responsibilities. You want to twist this in favor of the woman and essentially fucking the man over by giving him NO RIGHTS and EQUAL RESPONSIBILTY. That is a childish, stupid, and contrary to ALL contract law way to handle this situation.

But that's the Left for you. Not a rational, logical thought among them. Instead, it's a childish, selfish wanting of what they want without regard to fairness, equality, or equity.

The man had a say in the decision when he gambled on having unprotected sex. If the man was dead serious about no children, he would have used protection 100% of the time, because he's responsible about what he does with his own body.

 

[christiefan915]

did she choose/consent to an activity knowing that pregnancy is a possibility?

Did he?

 

[christiefan915]

The vast majority of Americans believe that they can impose limitations on this "right to choose" different areas of people believe differently on what those limitations should be. . Allowing the states to choose gives the people the MOST freedom to choose what they want.

Everybody chooses what they want in regard to their own bodies. They don't have the right to choose what others do with theirs.

 

[Earl]

The man had a say in the decision when he gambled on having unprotected sex. If the man was dead serious about no children, he would have used protection 100% of the time, because he's responsible about what he does with his own body.

The woman has a say about gambling on having unprotected sex too.

She can say no, Miss Marple.

 

[Joe]

Ah, so you're way behind on supporting your own spawn, it would seem.

So men have the freedom to run around implanting their seed wherever they can, like male deer or squirrels, but have zero responsibility for the outcome of that sexual encounter? Even if they are married to the mom? But women must be forced to give birth whether they want to or not, because you got a dick that gives you the right to dictate so? How very Neanderthalish of you. Wolves are more civilized than you.

The woman has more skin in the game even with child support so if she isn't in the family mood she should keep her legs closed.

And if she's too weak to do this then perhaps she should use one of the many high 90% effective birth controls available responsibly so they work.

But of course here is the conundrum. If she's of the abortion mind then responsibility isn't her strong suit. So her birth control usage is likely flakey and sporadic as well. I would wager that 95% of the women who got pregnant and claimed it was in spite of their birth control weren't faithfully using it.

Having said all that it really doesn't bother me if women want to kill their babies. At least the right crop is being exterminated.

 

[christiefan915]

The woman has a say about gambling on having unprotected sex too.

She can say no, Miss Marple.

My position has always been that both parties are responsible for using protection, Mr. Earl. It doesn't matter if the woman says she's on the pill, or if a man says he's had a vasectomy. I say everyone is responsible for trusting themselves and taking their own precautions each and every time. This is too serious an issue for one of the partners to say "let's just wing it this time. The odds are low that I'll get pregnant."

 

[christiefan915]

The woman has more skin in the game even with child support so if she isn't in the family mood she should keep her legs closed.

And if she's too weak to do this then perhaps she should use one of the many high 90% effective birth controls available responsibly so they work.

But of course here is the conundrum. If she's of the abortion mind then responsibility isn't her strong suit. So her birth control usage is likely flakey and sporadic as well. I would wager that 95% of the women who got pregnant and claimed it was in spite of their birth control weren't faithfully using it.

Having said all that it really doesn't bother me if women want to kill their babies. At least the right crop is being exterminated.

Love how you put the sole responsibility for birth control on the woman.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Stunned you so badly you couldn't reply hum? That happens when someone responds to a Leftist with a POV that is out of left field and completely anathema to Leftist dogma.

Your reply was not "out of left field"...or unique in any way. It is regularly proposed.

In any case, it is entirely possible that a woman should have the right to decide with her physician to terminate a pregnancy occurring in her own body...AND FOR the male who impregnated her to be required to pay support for that child.

Your argument fails.

 

[BartenderElite]

The vast majority of Americans believe that they can impose limitations on this "right to choose" different areas of people believe differently on what those limitations should be. . Allowing the states to choose gives the people the MOST freedom to choose what they want.

EVERYONE has the freedom to decide what they do w/ their own body, no matter where they live. And if someone doesn't believe in abortion or opposes it. they don't have to get one.

They don't have a right to decide what OTHERS do w/ their bodies. It's very simple, and it's about freedom.

 

[Ross Dolan]

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.

It is no more killing a child than breaking an egg is killing a chicken.

The right wants to pretend it has moral authority. Fact is, the American right is morally bankrupt.

 

[IBDaMann]

Everybody chooses what they want in regard to their own bodies. They don't have the right to choose what others do with theirs.

Exactly. No woman has the right to choose what procedures are to happen to the bodies of other living humans. Thank you.

 

[Ross Dolan]

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.

As I said...nonsense.

It is totally reasonable for both things to exist. One...the woman has a right to choice about her own body...and two...a man who impregnates a woman should be responsible for support.

Unless you people want to argue that a man who does not want to support a child can demand that a woman have an abortion...which makes no sense.

 

[TOP]

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/03/19/1238293143/abortion-data-how-many-us-2023 That's a lot of senseless termination of life.. And nothing at all like cracking eggs to make an omelet ...