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.
Since murder is illegal in all 50 states, why is it legal to destroy human life inside the womb within those states?
If you support such destruction, then why are you against equal rights for all?
Let's create life equality! -------------
Yet Harrier accepts the murder and life inequality if allowed state-by-state. His beef is really with the method of authorizing murder and life inequality, not the destruction of human life inside the womb. Hypocritical much ?
No - because Harrier doesn't believe that life equality would be banned throughout the republic if it were left to the several states to decide.
Some left wing blue states would ban life equality, and would become magnets for those who wish to destroy human life.
Harrier supports the U.S. constitution, which does not mention the life equality issue as being in the purview of the federal government, and thus the determination is left to the states or the people, per the Tenth Amendment.
What's so magic about the number 20? C'mon, now, really...at 19 weeks it's ok to kill it, but at 20 weeks it's not? How about our definition of when a human life is "over" in terms of "usefulness".
Let's look at the other end of the life span. When should a person be said to have lived long enough?
What criteria are used? How should we value someone's life? By $$ signs, or by the contribution they've made to society, or according to whom they know/how "important" they are?
Should we put 5 people in a boat, ages 1 to 100 years and ask, "whom shall we toss overboard, because we don't have room for 5?"
Pro abortion arguments don't make any more sense than that, and neither do government end-of-life arguments. When we allow laws and regulations to determine at which point value of life begins and ends, then we've given government way too much power and have lost something immeasurably and significantly human, which separates us from the rest of the animal world.
Since murder is illegal in all 50 states, why is it legal to destroy human life inside the womb within those states?
If you support such destruction, then why are you against equal rights for all?
Let's create life equality!
The current policy of the country is to take the word of these so called doctors who are one step above the witch doctors of 600 years ago when they say that a fetus isn't human.
They understand very little of human anatomy and they know less about the origin of human beings or do they have a clue of the mind of the creator, but they say a fetus isn't human and it's "ok" to kill it.
I am convinced we are still living in the dark ages. Sure we have more technology, but we are still as ignorant as we've ever been.
In 200 years, people will be as shocked and appalled at the very idea of abortion as we are at the idea of burning people alive for witchcraft and heresy which was a common, accepted practice 500 years ago.
The current policy of the country is to take the word of these so called doctors who are one step above the witch doctors of 600 years ago when they say that a fetus isn't human.
They understand very little of human anatomy and they know less about the origin of human beings or do they have a clue of the mind of the creator, but they say a fetus isn't human and it's "ok" to kill it.
I am convinced we are still living in the dark ages. Sure we have more technology, but we are still as ignorant as we've ever been.
In 200 years, people will be as shocked and appalled at the very idea of abortion as we are at the idea of burning people alive for witchcraft and heresy which was a common, accepted practice 500 years ago.
While I lean in favor of your side on this, I will need to disagree with you here. Many/most medical experts and/or medical professionals nowadays acknowledge that the development of a new whole human specimen begins at conception/fertilization.
While I lean in favor of your side on this, I will need to disagree with you here. Many/most medical experts and/or medical professionals nowadays acknowledge that the development of a new whole human specimen begins at conception/fertilization.
I wish more had the courage to speak up then if they really believe that.
Regardless.....if I was never born I wouldn't know or care, would I?
Do you think I would be a little ghost fetus floating around in the netherworld crying my eyes out because I was never born......or do you think I would be a happy little fetus resting in "God's" arms?
First of all, I am not sure that God even exists.
Secondly, the same points which you just made here could apply to you if you were (painlessly) killed as an infant shortly after birth as well.
1. It is pretty easy to have an opinion on something when you know that it can NEVER happen to you....
2. and you will never convince me that many anti-choice men wouldn't become pro-choice if the tables were turned.
3. For the record, I didn't live my life celibate even though I never wanted children.
4. If my BC had failed......I would have aborted.....even before it was legal. (I was sexually active before Roe v Wade}
5. And....if you want a sex change.....go for it as long as it makes you happy.
6. If I could have chosen, I would have been born a male.
7. No periods, no cramps, no menopause, no hot flashes......
8. taller, bigger, stronger.....
9. I could get more things done around here all by myself.
1. Yes, of course it is, and this also applies to at least some females in regards to specific issues. However, this does not make these individuals' positions on these issues any less valid.
Also, for the record, any male theoretically might be able to eventually get a full sex change, and thus, there is no guarantee that an accidental pregnancy will never happen to any current biological male.
2. I never said that there would certainly not be some such males. However, not all males would become politically pro-abortion choice if the tables were turned.
You can ignore this fact all of want, but the fact of the matter is that there are many fertile females who are politically anti-abortion.
Also, for the record, I would think that this statement of yours would apply to other issues as well. For instance, I think that it is very possible that some females who are currently anti-choice when it comes to forcing males to pay child support would at least somewhat change their position(s) on this issue if they became males.
3. And that's your life decision, not mine. Of course, I wonder if lesbian sex was illegal back then.
4. Would you have aborted illegally or traveled somewhere else where aborting was legal in such a scenario?
5. Thanks. Will do!
6. You might still be able to get a sex change sooner or later.
7. Can't males still have cramps? Also, as for menopause, as I previously said, I am willing to deal with it and/or with the male equivalent of it by getting myself castrated (Yes, castrated, as in permanently removing all of my testicles).
8. Perhaps. Of course, my younger sister is stronger than I am.
9. Perhaps, but not necessarily.
Anyway, it appears that you are interested in being a male, while I am strongly interested in being a female.
2. I support the right for women to have control over their own bodies. He does not.
3. He wants to force women to risk their lives against their will to be an incubator and give birth to unwanted children.
4. He also does not care about children being born unwanted or being unable to be cared for -and the negative impact on the children's health and development.
5. He has no respect for women.
6. He does not care about children.
1. I don't think that this is true, but I don't speak for him, so yeah.
2. Actually, one can still be politically anti-abortion and still support the right to bodily autonomy.
Personally, I don't think that the right to bodily autonomy should be this broad for anyone, male or female.
3. I am not so sure about risking their lives, considering that many politically anti-abortion people, including myself, support a maternal life exception. Also, not all of these children will be unwanted, considering that there probably are cases where males want to raise children but females end up getting abortions anyway.
4. This is an appeal to hypocrisy fallacy.
5. I don't think that this is true, but once again, I don't speak for him.
6. I am not going to comment on this part, since I am not him.
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.
