If you think abortion should be illegal then you should leave MY country alone. HERE we have freedom and liberty and rights for all citizens ...including women .
AGAIN, so you want the father to be able to force the woman to have an abortion....THAT is "HAVING A SAY"
Okay, so now we're arguing in circles. I want the father to have an equal say to the mother. You can't seem to understand that without a male set of genes, conception of any kind is impossible. That plays a critical role, whether you like it or not.
You're missing my point. As the fetus develops, it begins forming its own independent systems from the mother. Those systems function on their own, with only certain functions being connected to the mother. The fetus is a genetically distinct being from the mother. That difference is why I say the child isn't connected to the mother.
You are right, you are going in circles to evade the question. IF a woman 's say is to abort or not and you want men to have an equal say then the man can say the women has to gestate or has to have an abortion.... YOU just think that "equal say" means the man can force the woman to gestate. NO, he can force her to have an abortion, too, THAT is equal say. Here's a shocker for you: The days of the caveman are OVER....just because a man has sex with a woman does NOT mean he owns her. Just because a woman gets pregnant does NOT mean she loses her rights.........
No, in this country (and the rest of the INTELLIGENT world) the unborn have no rights... YOU want super rights for unborn ....that's not going to happen..
I never said anything about a woman losing her rights. What about a man having equal say with the woman equates to her losing her rights?
And I said nothing about women being treated as objects or property. What part of "equality" don't you get? You spent most of your time preaching it for the woman, but you're all the more willing to deny the man equal say in the fate of the child. Sounds like a pretty hypocritical argument if you ask me.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Just because a woman gets pregnant does NOT mean she loses her rights......... It would be easier if you EVER explained what you mean by a man " having his say". You haven't. You want a man to "have a say" and when I ask if that means you want him to force the woman to either gestate or abort you have no answer. IF a man's "say" means he can force her to gestate or abort that means she lost the right to her own body....and her own decisions and freedom and liberty. If you insist the father have a say or some silly "right to have a say" ( which NOT a right !!!) then you believe because a man has sex with a woman he owns her, has a right to force her to abort or getstate ....and he doesn't. So WHAT is the PURPOSE of this "say" you keep on about ??
It would be easier for you to understand if you would simply read my posts instead of reacting to them. I already explained what equal say is and you continue to parrot the same talking points. Like I just got through saying, you apparently aren't fully comprehending my posts or you're just reacting to them with knee jerks. As a classical liberal, Fox, I value individual rights that are equal in terms to both individuals, not just one over the other. No special circumstance grants you more of an advantage over another. Besides, I said nothing about a man forcing her to gestate. People in the "intelligent world" (as you call it) devise solutions to seemingly impossible problems. This for example. We could use government funding to subsidize surrogacy. Willing and able women would be compensated for becoming surrogates for other women who themselves are not ready to have a child on their own, or are in conflict with their partner/spouse about having a child the old fashioned way. A good method for that would be to implant an already fertilized egg via in-vitro into a willing surrogate. Problem solved. The child retains the genes from both of parents. It may sound like a crude method, but it would alleviate forcing the woman to gestate and would allow her to keep the rights to her body. And the surrogate would be doing the work on her own free will, thus preserving the rights for all parties involved. Also, there was a child born recently from an embryo frozen in stasis since 1992. If we can perfect that method, we could preserve embryos for lengthy periods of time. The possibilities are endless, we can give both the woman and the man an equal say in the matter without sacrificing unborn life in the process, that is if we pursue humane methods instead of outright barbaric ones like aborting a "fetus" in the middle of development.
NO, you have not. You have said a man who makes a woman pregnant should have equal say BUT you have NEVER said how or what that consists of. BUT the pregnant woman would have to AGREE. ....so AGAIN the father has NO say. He can SAY he wants her to do this but that "say" is not law, he can't FORCE her to do this. It's HER eggs, not his, and NOT yours and NOT the governments! BTW, women already have this option so I don't know what the man has to do with it. They can do it with or without his "say". AGAIN, you have to get the pregnant woman to agree....she cannot be FORCED by anyone's "say"...or that would be women losing their rights to their own bodies. You have ONLY presented options, not any example of how a man would have a "say".... NONE.
You claim to be pro choice but categorically reject any other choices the woman has other than abortion. You're being unreasonable. I have also come to the conclusion you are a misandrist. I think it's time to go now.
I didn't reject any choices, I said it's the pregnant woman's choice, three words you can't seem to grasp ... ONLY because you couldn't explain what you meant by the father having a say. I think once you realized how silly that was because if the father has a say then he should be able to "say" have an abortion....you just didn't think it out... Hence I'M "unreasonable" ????...Hilarious!!! ...and , like your other statements, you have nothing to back that up with .... Or come back with FACTS.....
Did you forget that only one person's body is put through the trauma and risks of gestation and childbirth?
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, in this country (and the rest of the INTELLIGENT world) the unborn have no rights... YOU want super rights for unborn ....that's not going to happen.. Oh baloney! Forcing women to gestate because it makes YOU feel good is inhuman selfishness....saying a fetus should have more rights than anyone on earth is NOT intelligent
