If you don't want a baby, get your tubes tied.

Mayvbe the man should have his dick tied.

 

what ever helps you sleep at night. what ever you got to do to justify taking a humans life by dehumanizing the unborn. you know slave owners did the something to slaves they dehumanized them so to justify in their own minds to not feel any guilt owning them

 

A fetus is not a person, a fetus is not a human.

 

and slave owners said the same thing about the slaves they owned so to justify them owning them, but what ever you have to call that unborn human to help you sleep guilt free at night

 

You have to call a fetus "an unborn human" to help you sleep guilt free at night, i.e. free from the guilt of interfering in a woman's private life-changing decisions.

 

You and the slave owners can call it anything you like, that doesn't change the FACT that a fetus is not a human.

And I sleep quite well knowing that women cannot be made into slaves of "pro-life" fanatics who want to turn women into broodstock (as slave owners did).

 

That's what they said about the negro too.
In fact there are still various groups claiming Blacks are not human, if you can believe that. Just goes to show how in denial people can be, when they are trying to support their political ideology.

Now the subject of this thread is not about slavery, or whether fetuses are people. Can we please get back on topic?

Okay, but if he doesn't, he's not the one getting pregnant.
But I suppose if a woman does get pregnant, pro-choicers will just stick all the blame on the man.
"It's not her fault"

 

It does not matter what people think of blacks, blacks ARE human beings, they ARE people. ...that has nothing to do with abortion except that Anti-Choicers want to make slaves of women. Anti-Choicers want to take ownership of women and force them to give birth just as negro slaves were forced to do........

 

I call it an unborn human because that is what it is,
and Im using science to come to that conclusion not some warped sense of beliefs and morals

 

so tell me what is the scientific criteria to be considered an individual live human?

 

Viability determines when a fetus becomes A human. Why are you bringing in other terms? " "individual live human".....??




And I sleep quite well knowing that women cannot be made into slaves of "pro-life" fanatics who want to turn women into broodstock (as slave owners did).

 

Are you a woman? If not then please kindly SHUT THE (*)(*)(*)(*) UP. You have ZERO justification of any kind whatsoever for even HAVING AN OPINION on this subject. In fact, you have none whatsoever for having an opinion of any kind even if you are a woman and are talking about another woman.

This is one of the things that REALLY gets to me about conservatives. How DARE they have all these opinions about what other people should do with their own bodies? It's like telling someone when they should (*)(*)(*)(*) fer Crissake. Just how much of a busybody can you BE? Talk about control freaks on other people

And PULLEELZE don't give me this crap about the unborn. The unborn are the UN born, they do NOT exist. It's like talking about the UN dead. Vampires don't exist and neither do the unborn, it's just bull(*)(*)(*)(*) so the Republicans can have another wedge issue and reduce 51% of the population to second class status.

If you don't like abortions, don't have one, that is the full and entire extent of your justified concern for the matter in a free country.

 

Are you the fetus who is going to be aborted?

Seems a little hypocritical if you ask me. You're accusing conservatives of being busybody control freaks?

How convenient this would be for the woman with an unwanted pregnancy if it were true. But it's not.
We can SEE the little life moving around in there (with the help of modern technology).

Wouldn't want to reduce any of the population to second class status, would we?
Yet that is exactly what abortion-on-demand does.

If you don't like slavery, don't own slaves. If you don't like discrimination, don't discriminate.
If you don't like child abuse, don't abuse your own children.

 

no viability isn't one of the criteria to determine an individual live human in science
try again?

 

Except you are not using any science except bad science.

 

You can suppose whatever you like and still be fundamentally wrong.

 

This is what pro-choicers believe about a pregnancy– that it's just an inconsequential little clump of tissue. (but only if the woman doesn't want it)

 

Well, since one of your Anti-Choice buddies think all science is controlled by progressives (and you aren't one ) please present YOUR "science" to prove otherwise.







And I sleep quite well knowing that women cannot be made into slaves of "pro-life" fanatics who want to turn women into broodstock (as slave owners did).

 

Why are you so concerned about the reason a woman doesn't want to be pregnant? Is it that you want to check out her reasons to see if they meet with your approval? You don't trust women to know when they can handle a pregnancy/child-rearing so you want them to be required to get your stamp of approval?

 

It is because the abuse is so widespread. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most of the time, when an abortion is sought, it is for very inappropriate reasons.

 

Why do you think you are qualified to judge whether the reason is appropriate?

 

What is sickening on the site you have linked to is that they, along with most pro-lifers misrepresent a quote from Sanger, along with this idea of pro-choice people saying that a fetus is a "fish", mind you most of those quotes are historical and have little to no bearing on the present. eg the quote from Rabbi Wolfe Kelman is from 1984 a full 21 years ago. Neither does the Roe decision make a scientific judgment on whether the fetus is a person or not, it simply says that under the meaning of the 14th amendment the term person does not apply to the unborn in a legal sense.

The fetus certainly displays parasitic-like qualities, that is not to say it is a parasite per se, and again this is a historical argument (circa 1984).

The blog talks about dehumanizing rhetoric, which is ironic given some of your comments here, along with others, demeaning women as murderers, sluts and harlots.

Yes perhaps you should.

And what difference does it make if he is or not, or don't you think a man has to be personally responsible for his actions?

Nope I "stick" no blame on anyone, unlike you blaming the woman or others stating she should have kept her legs closed or she had sex she HAS to bear the consequences.

 

Well someone has to bear the consequences...

 

Why?


You make these silly statements and NEVER back them up .


I've asked you many many times why you think YOU are the Ruler of what is right and wrong, what is convenient and not convenient for OTHER PEOPLE, how you KNOW what's in each individual woman's mind, why anyone should knuckle under to your preferences.....and you never can answer.....all you do is start 2,3, 4 year old threads in a bad attempt to hide your losses and confusion....

 

Hmmm, who would that be? If the woman gets an abortion...