Miss Lacy
NFL Draft pick
Professor
In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back.
Posts: 1,242
|
Post by Miss Lacy on Apr 11, 2013 17:39:02 GMT -5
Let me clarify, as my response seems very simple: If the child is yours, there is a discussion to be had. On a policy level, men have absolutely no right. This is what I was referring to. Thank you, Nick. Men debating this subject on a hypothetical level as a matter of public policy seems both irrelevant AND irreverent . Quite frankly--whether a man is for or against--it is not their decision to make, and they have no real power (in a concrete context) to stop a woman from choosing the path that is right for her. You could outlaw abortion in all 50 states, but I would still find a way to terminate my pregnancy, if that's what I really wanted to do. Alternatively, you could mandate abortion because of policy limits in population growth or passing a law against children conceived out of wedlock, but I would still find a way to have my child, if that's what I really wanted to do. In my mind, the more important aspect in this discussion is that I would never presume to speak for ALL MEN in this same context. As a woman, I would hope to be afforded the same respectful consideration. Walk a mile in my shoes-- yes, my 5" gold-tipped black stilettos ;D -- AND carry a child around in your belly for nine months before enduring the pain of childbirth-- then, we can talk.
|
|
Miss Lacy
NFL Draft pick
Professor
In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back.
Posts: 1,242
|
Post by Miss Lacy on Apr 11, 2013 17:57:02 GMT -5
Some one who uses it instead of condoms, birth control pills, or any of the other forms of contraceptives such as the morning after pill aren't physically or mentally responsible for raising a child. Ironically, a federal judge in New York has ordered the FDA to make the morning-after pill available to people of ANY age (that means minors don't need parental consent) AND to make it over-the-counter (no prescription required). The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists appears to approve this ruling. Read the CNN story here www.cnn.com/2013/04/05/health/morning-after-pill/index.html
|
|
|
Post by NickWorthem on Apr 11, 2013 19:57:14 GMT -5
I'm happy to be on a similar wavelength. No matter how pro-choice I am, on a policy level, I have no personal right to regulate a uterus as I do not possess one.
|
|
|
Post by lostabroad2 on Apr 12, 2013 19:54:23 GMT -5
Are you prepared to prevent pregnant women from leaving the country? Will you make medical examinations compulsory for any women suspected of having an abortion or otherwise terminating their pregnancy? Will legal penalties be enforced on women found to have taken such actions? If not trying to prevent abortions through the law is pointless.
|
|
|
Post by NickWorthem on Apr 12, 2013 19:55:51 GMT -5
Are you prepared to prevent pregnant women from leaving the country? Will you make medical examinations compulsory for any women suspected of having an abortion or otherwise terminating their pregnancy? Will legal penalties be enforced on women found to have taken such actions? If not trying to prevent abortions through the law is pointless. Well, to be fair, doing any of those above, is stupid, but I get your point .
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Apr 12, 2013 20:38:07 GMT -5
"I have no personal right to regulate a uterus as I do not possess one."
Well, assuming that the "I" in this is a politician, than yes, "I" do. If a person commits a murder with a gun, then he can't own one anymore. IF abortion can fairly be described as the murder of another person, than it can be regulated regardless of whether it's in a woman or not. I'm not trying to force my opinion on anyone, as I am actually very pro-choice, but men not owning a uterus provides absolutely no firewall in regulating them.
|
|
|
Post by NickWorthem on Apr 12, 2013 20:53:12 GMT -5
"I have no personal right to regulate a uterus as I do not possess one." Well, assuming that the "I" in this is a politician, than yes, "I" do. If a person commits a murder with a gun, then he can't own one anymore. IF abortion can fairly be described as the murder of another person, than it can be regulated regardless of whether it's in a woman or not. I'm not trying to force my opinion on anyone, as I am actually very pro-choice, but men not owning a uterus provides absolutely no firewall in regulating them. Actually, in a lot of ways (as faith is the only thought process that calls it "murder"), then we have to argue it from rational thought. Rational thought describes it as NOT murder, thus based on the First Amendment, it holds water.
|
|