Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are not forced to work more or less. You are taxed on what you make regardless of how much you work.
What you are not forced to do is use your body, organs, tissues and blood to keep another physically alive. You are not forced to give blood or bone marrow even if someone will die without it. You are not forced to give your body over to another for any reason. And women should nto be forced to do so either.
If a woman has a child, is she not tasked with caring for it?
Are you arguing that mothers should not be responsible for the appropriate developmental welfare for their own children? Am I understanding correctly?
That's a HUGE can of worms. Maybe just kill all kids regardless of where they are on the developmental spectrum if it's too inconvenient and costly in the mom's opinion?
First, I’m ALL IN regarding the immeasurable joy and pleasure of sex. In fact, I have yet to experience bad sex ... its all good, some better than others . And its pure foolishness to even consider the idea that abstinence could be a viable solution to preventing unwanted pregnancy. Sex is too compelling, and there is a big reason for sex being so pleasurable ... that big reason has nothing to do with putting a big smile on your face. Its designed to be so pleasurable to PRODUCE OFFSPRING, to ensure the propagation of the species!
Now us modern humans are smart enough to realize how babies are made, and contrary to the insinuations otherwise, the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are not the failure of modern contraceptives, but in irresponsible sexual behavior. It is too much to ask of people to give up sex, but its not too much to ask of people to engage in sex RESPONSIBLY.
Here is the losing (liberal) formula for achieving that goal ... make abortion freely available, and paid for by the gov’t if you cant afford it. This eliminates the consequences of irresponsible behavior , with even more irresponsible and inhumane behavior.
The better (Conservative) formula is the REVERSE. Don’t eliminate the consequences .... make abortion a last resort, not an easy option, and that will provide motivation for people to act more responsibly, reduce unwanted pregnancies, which in turn will reduce the need for killing the innocent life some of you call clumps of cells that ought to be removed like a cancer growth.
If a woman has a child, is she not tasked with caring for it?
Are you arguing that mothers should not be responsible for the appropriate developmental welfare for their own children? Am I understanding correctly?
That's a HUGE can of worms. Maybe just kill all kids regardless of where they are on the developmental spectrum if it's too inconvenient and costly in the mom's opinion?
Oh, only women are responsible for these things in your world. Got it! You issues are becoming more and more obvious.
Who forces you to work. Please tell me where the government comes to your home, rouses you out of your bed, takes to your job, forces you to work, all under the penalty of jail or death if you do not.
Because unless you are forced to work or go to jail, than you are fibbing about the analogy.
Who forces you to have sex. Please tell me where the government comes to your home, rouses you out of your bed, takes you to a sex partner, forces you to have sex , all under the penalty of jail or death if you do not.
But if you do: Newsflash and spoiler alert since there seems to be a lot of ignorance on this thread:
My tax dollars go to welfare programs to take care of others. Fact.
I have to work to earn those dollars. Fact.
If I don't pay those dollars, the government would seize the fruits of my labor. Fact.
What is so confusing to you about this?
Actually not fact. If you decided today to quit your job and never work another day, would the state insist you find a job and get your ass back to work? No. It would be legal for you to choose not to work. You have 100% control over what you (your body) does or does not do.
But, you’re ok with taking the choice of what her body does or does not do away from a pregnant woman.
If a woman has a child, is she not tasked with caring for it?
Are you arguing that mothers should not be responsible for the appropriate developmental welfare for their own children? Am I understanding correctly?
That's a HUGE can of worms. Maybe just kill all kids regardless of where they are on the developmental spectrum if it's too inconvenient and costly in the mom's opinion?
No.
She can put it up for adoption, leave it at a safe haven, dump it on relatives or let the state take it.
If a woman has a child, is she not tasked with caring for it?
Are you arguing that mothers should not be responsible for the appropriate developmental welfare for their own children? Am I understanding correctly?
That's a HUGE can of worms. Maybe just kill all kids regardless of where they are on the developmental spectrum if it's too inconvenient and costly in the mom's opinion?
Parents can and do give their born children up for adoption. The woman is not tasked with raising a child if she doesn't want to take on that responsibility. Also a woman can hire people to raise the children once born, so that she is not the only one responsible for its development. Doctors, teachers, child care workers, nurses, other family members, and parents either biological or adoptive, are all taking care of a child once born.
Parents can and do give their born children up for adoption. The woman is not tasked with raising a child if she doesn't want to take on that responsibility. Also a woman can hire people to raise the children once born, so that she is not the only one responsible for its development. Doctors, teachers, child care workers, nurses, other family members, and parents either biological or adoptive, are all taking care of a child once born.
No but God forbid when a mother leaves a baby at a safe haven inn states with safe haven laws. Arizona has them and often the articles are entirely negative on the mother dropping off baby at the firehouse because she can't be the mother for whatever reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. And its pure foolishness to even consider the idea that abstinence could be a viable solution to preventing unwanted pregnancy. Sex is too compelling, and there is a big reason for sex being so pleasurable ... that big reason has nothing to do with putting a big smile on your face. Its designed to be so pleasurable to PRODUCE OFFSPRING, to ensure the propagation of the species!
