BREAKING NEWS - Abortion Ban Passes

How do you punish the man? The only way you can do it is financially if he does not wish to voluntarily help raise the child. Im not really sure why you keep harping on this. What do you have in mind stuffing a melon in his colon. If woman have the same sovereignity, then men should have an equal say in the killing of their child. You are aware that the father has NO say in it right? How would that make you feel if you couldnt stop your child from slaughter?

Well, why did he fuck her in the first place then?

Every man knows the law - the woman bears the profound risks of pregnancy, including death, and she has the right to decide what to do with her bosy, just as he has the right to decide what to do with his body. If he doesn't want to obey the law why should be the one who gets all the benefits while she bears all the burdens?

It's just as much a choice on the mans part that leads to an unwanted pregnancy as it is the womans.

I "harp" on this to demonstrate that your argument inevitably defines women as second class citizens.

You are clueless. I guess you dont know anyone who has had to pay child support for a mistake for 18 years eh?

politics drain me

However, I'm happy to stipulate that as long as the law is fair I have no problem in saying a father should have legal input into the decision on wether or not to abort, as long as he can put up a sufficient bond and guarantee for his share of the costs involved.

I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make.

However, I did pay child support untill my daughter was 18, and have given her a great deal of money since to help her get started in the world.

Im not sure, but are you high on meth or something?

Yes they should have to secure large amounts of cash in order to have a child. Fuck that life liberty and pursuit of happiness crap.

You are distorting my argument. Misrepresting it actually.

I didn't say they should have to put up a realistic amout of cash guarantees to have a child. I said they should put up a guarantee to contest a woman's sovereign right to her own body, and to choose to have an abortion if they want.

If they care about their fatherhood so much they should be willing to pay for it.

And, not to belabor a point so glaringly obvious, what about the womans right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

Again, we are brought back to the subtext of your argument, which is that women should be treated as second class citizens, subject to the property privilidges of the men who fuck them.

What about the childs right to Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is the crux of disagreement. Some of believe children have the right to live, and others dont.

So you are saying the potential childs right to those traditional US rights outweighs the rights of the woman?

What do you think the punishment should be then if a woman does have an abortion?

And by the same argument, the father, who is 50% responsible, should also be held responsible for the abortion, because wether or not he agrees to it, he was an accessary.

No I am saying they are equal to hers. One persons rights should not outweigh anothers.

I just find conservatives fun to play with. They are so predictable, and always follow the party line. If you would actually read the posts you would see that I am personally against abortion, but it's not up to me to tell someone else what to do.

That's the difference between us. I believe we are adults and can make our own decisions in life. You on the other hand, need some government help. Most republicans don't know how to think on their own, that's why you voted that dolt into office again.

And I'm asking you, like I've been asking you from the very beginning, HOW do you assign the responsibility, the cost, and the punishment?

I'm arguing that you haven't finished thinking out the chains of consequences involved. You feel abortion is wrong, but you haven't thought about the actual process of making it illegal.

Abortion is a simple and safe procedure, relatively speaking. Women will still choose to get them, even if it is difficult and expensive, because it's a horrible choice between the lesser of two evils.

And, the only alternative to allowing women to get them, is forcing women to have unwanted babies and give them to strangers.

So, _HOW_ are you planning to administrate the forcing of women to have unwanted babies?

Just to add to my previous response, I'd like to point out something that seems to get missed in discussions about abortion.

When we're talking about abortion, we're talking specifically about human life. Their is a difference between human life, sperm life, and egg life. This distinction is necessary to understand why fertilization of the egg is crucial to the argument of killing a human life.

The sperm life cycle begins with being created in the testes. It remains in the scrotum until it dies and is re-absorbed into the body or it is ejaculated and dies when air dries it up.

The egg life cycle is similar. It stays in the womb until it dies.

The human life cycle begins when a sperm is connected to an egg. In other words a human life begins with a fertilized egg. The cycle continues in stages where limbs, brain, heart are formed. Eventually the baby develops lungs and is passed thru the womb into the outside world. It finally grows hair, teeth, and develops motor skills and language skills. It grows older, gets married, has kids, and then it dies.

Acts such as masturbation is not killing of human life. It is killing of sperm life. Human life requires combining the sperm with an egg. This is why the discussion on where human life begins is far from arbitrary. It's crystal clear. It begins at fertilization.

If eggs stopped being fertilized by sperm the human race would die out in the next 100 years. No new babies could be born. Why? Because that's where human life begins.

I've never heard anybody describe abortion in this way. But when I go back to first principles this is the conclusion I arrive at and it seems to make the most sense.

Also people confuse stages of human life with determining what is human and what is not. The fact is, it doesn't matter what stage of development the human is in, it's still a human. Categorizing development into stages is purely a human invention to help us understand development. Outside of this invention is the reality that human life is a continuum that begins when a sperm fertilizes and egg. Without this, no human can ever come into being.

Does it matter that in a human life during old age bones become weaker , hair falls out, skin becomes non-elastic. Does it matter that during the infant stage of human life that we have no teeth, no hair, few motor skills. No, it doesn't. We're still human with or without the ability to talk, see, or hear. The same holds true for the fertilized egg. It is a human at a human's earliest stage of development.

I didn't realize abortion was such a big issue.

FACT: If men got pregnant instead of women we could get abortions while getting an oil change.

Federal control of the states is one of the things that helped to start the civil war.

You are cutting deep but it is kinda of true.

hey, isn't this just wonderful?

Hey that's something to be proud of... let's defy an entire nations constitutional rights. Shouldn't these fuckheads be worrying about the economy and ... oh I don't know... the fucking war and not a constitutional right that was established in 1973?

Atleast we haven't started drilling for oil in the fucking arctic yet... oh wait.. give that some time.

There is still 49 other States you can kill your un-born. Why are you bitching?