Abortion
- Thread starter Canadian Dragon
- Start date
i agree that it takes two to tango, and i am not absolving men of any part they take in in unprotected sex.
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
i agree that it takes two to tango, and i am not absolving men of any part they take in in unprotected sex.
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
i agree that it takes two to tango, and i am not absolving men of any part they take in in unprotected sex.
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
anyone who has unprotected sex in an unresponsible way is doing a stupid thing.
but it's fact that the woman is the one that is going to be left to deal with the consequences.
therefore, she is the one who technically would have to be sterilized.
let's be real...i am talking about women who go in for 5, 6, 7 and more abortions.
but, hey, i don't care, let's sterilize the men too!
RB,
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
RB,
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
RB,
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
I just like people to be consistent in their arguements. That is if they don't want others to tell them how to live their life, then DON'T tell others how to live their lives.
With regard to the abortion discussion, if someone feels that a fetus has no rights because it can't survive without reliance on its mothers body, then be consistent with people on ventilators. In both situations, a human being is in a vulnerable situation. In one we generally agree(although, it is changing) that we need to do everything we can to help them(ventilators). In the other we completely ignore the human and when the discussion is brought up the person simply states, its not a human.
OK, in their eyes its not a human but even most pro-abortionists will admit that the fetus does become human at some point in the womb. Instead of discussing that time frame they stick their head in the sand and refuse to discuss because they know that once the "mass of cells" is legally recognized in the womb their whole arguement begins to break down.
I think even you and I can agree on these points.
RB,
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
RB,
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
RB,
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
Which points do you disagree with or do you disagree with all of them??
Do you want to see the people on ventilators treated the same as we do for those in the womb?? Does their reliance on others for live mean that they aren't worthy of legal recognition??
Are you saying that the child in the womb is never human and that you are perfectly OK with the fact that a person can kill an unborn child(without the mothers consent) and have no legal consequences?
I am saying, just like always, that abortion is between a woman and her doctor. Just like DNR orders are between a patient and his or her doctor.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
I am saying, just like always, that abortion is between a woman and her doctor. Just like DNR orders are between a patient and his or her doctor.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
I am saying, just like always, that abortion is between a woman and her doctor. Just like DNR orders are between a patient and his or her doctor.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
You are trying desperately to confuse the issue, tibear. Give it up.
RB,
I know you won't agree but your answer reminds me a person who when asked why they didn't stop a parent from abusing their child replies, "None of my business what the parent does with their child."
Rather than getting involved in a situation that makes them feel uncomfortable, alot of people choose to ignore the situation and hope it just goes away.
I know you won't agree but your answer reminds me a person who when asked why they didn't stop a parent from abusing their child replies, "None of my business what the parent does with their child."
Rather than getting involved in a situation that makes them feel uncomfortable, alot of people choose to ignore the situation and hope it just goes away.
RB,
I know you won't agree but your answer reminds me a person who when asked why they didn't stop a parent from abusing their child replies, "None of my business what the parent does with their child."
Rather than getting involved in a situation that makes them feel uncomfortable, alot of people choose to ignore the situation and hope it just goes away.
I know you won't agree but your answer reminds me a person who when asked why they didn't stop a parent from abusing their child replies, "None of my business what the parent does with their child."
Rather than getting involved in a situation that makes them feel uncomfortable, alot of people choose to ignore the situation and hope it just goes away.