Here , I'll make post 207, which you ignored, more accessible so you can answer Why Anti-Choicers want to punish women for having sex. Why would else would the Anti-Choice faction make an exception if the pregnancy is due to rape? Why else would the Anti-Choice faction want to take away women's right to their own bodies? Why else would the Anti-Choice faction want to control women like cattle? Why else would the Anti-Choice faction want to ban abortion? If abortion is banned women who have them will be PUNISHED. There, no REAL reason to not answer those questions now
1) I don't want to punish women for having sex. I don't consider an unintended pregnancy a punishment. 2) Already answered. Mainly for practical reasons in obtaining broad support for limiting elective abortions. 3) A persons right to their own bodies is not unlimited. Especially when it has a broader impact on other life and society in general. 4) I don't want to "control women like cattle". a few months pregnancy hardly constitutes that. 5) Actually if abortion is banned I would prefer to focus punishments on the persons who perform the abortions. Much more efficient that way. Now, your self serving questions are answered. Don't ask them again.
Then have all the pregnancies you like but many women do consider it a punishment (especially if it's FORCED)and THEY are the ones who have to be pregnant. Anti-Choicers consider it punishment because they want to FORCE women to stay pregnant....but not if it's due to rape.... YES, deception and hypocrisy, the tools of the Anti-Choicers. Why do they think a fetus that exists due to rape doesn't have a right to life? . So someone can force you to give them your heart or other body part to sustain their life because YOUR right to your body is "limited"? Women are not obligated to care for the impact of their abortions on others or society...... The impact on "others" is all in "other's" tiny heads. FORCED breeding is treating women like cattle and continually denigrating what women go through with pregnancy shows a decided bent towards misogyny. Your denial of what pregnancy entails doesn't change the truth... MORE deception and hypocrisy ..... If a person hires a hitman to kill someone and they do, the person who did the hiring is charged the same as the killer. Anti-Choicers want to pretend that women are just helpless victims, it makes them appear as if they have an ounce of compassion and they don't.. If they did they wouldn't want women forced to gestate or have dangerous abortions and die or be maimed like they were in the past.....guess they DO!!!! That sounds so controlling and egotistical....oh, ya, an Anti-Choicer
I've never heard anyone suggest forcing women to "breed". and no one should be forced to suffer significant permanent physical injury on behalf of another. And as you well know, most pregnancies do not cause significant permanent physical injury. If you say otherwise you are being dishonest. Now I suppose you'll list those "possible" pregnancy complications that you love to trot out for your ethically bankrupt and morally abhorrent argument.
Your denial of science when it proves you so wrong is quite funny....and pathetic...but it IS all you've got Your ethical bankrupt and morally abhorrent argument allows you to let "murderers" go free (women who hire an abortion doctor) as does your support of making women suffer significant permanent physical injury on behalf of another when YOU don't ever have to.
WHY do women need prenatal care? YOU claim NOTHING happens to women during pregnancy.....why would they need prenatal care? Or have to go to a doctor?
Well, then you appear not to believe in the law. So you think anyone can hire killers to kill at will but the person doing the hiring is a nice guy and deserves no punishment?!!!!! But yet you want to punish women for getting pregnant!!!!!! Unbelievable.... Now DO tell me why you support prenatal care....that was hilarious!
RIGHT HERE! Dayton3 said: ↑ I've never heard anyone suggest forcing women to "breed". and no one should be forced to suffer significant permanent physical injury on behalf of another. And as you well know, most pregnancies do not cause significant permanent physical injury. If you say otherwise you are being dishonest. Now I suppose you'll list those "possible" pregnancy complications that you love to trot out for your ethically bankrupt and morally abhorrent argument.""""" Note: Use of the word "most".
WHY? You claim NOTHING happens to them during pregnancy.....WHY would they need prenatal care? Or any care? Why do they go to a hospital to deliver ? Can't they just pop it out on their sofa???
Prenatal care helps result in healthy babies. And I guess you didn't know that historically delivering a baby at a hospital is a pretty recent phenomena. For example President Carter was the first American president born in a hospital. And once again you are lying about what I claimed. I never claimed nothing happens to women during pregnancy. I said MOST pregnancies do not result in significant permanent damage to a woman's body. And that is true.
Why does your individual opinion matter more than the Law of the Land protecting the rights of women?
Just read some of the pro life posts on this forum Especially the ones that start " well she would not need an abortion if she kept her legs together"
It has only just begun....watch what happens in 2018. http://cawp.rutgers.edu/buzz-2018-p...s-congress-and-statewide-elected-executive#tx
Oh yes there it is. We just have an abortion because it’s just so convenient. We love the cramping, it’s a blast. But we just have an abortion because pregnancy is a minor inconvenience. To you a minor inconvenience is carrying a zygote to term, delivering a baby and the agony that goes along with it and then the minor inconvenience of raising it for 18 years when you can’t afford to .You are typical of those who think life begins at conception but it ends at birth
Putting a baby up for adoption is not an option? There are hundreds of thousands of adults in the U.S. practically climbing the walls trying to adopt a baby every year.
I do not derive my moral beliefs or opinions from whatever happens to be the Law of the Land at some point in time.
How? Is the woman only a vehicle to bring the fetus to the doctor to have it checked out? That IS what you're saying since you said pregnancy has no effect on women... So what? That has NOTHING to do with what we are discussing and the FACT that A. Many women DIED giving birth at home ( which you will DENY even though they really did) B. Women 's bodies are permanently effected by pregnancy and child birth.....women can be autopsied YEARS after they died and the doctor can tell how many kids they had...and that's just their bones. Before death the rest of their body weas effected, too. WHY do women go to the hospital now? Has pregnancy changed? NO.....so why do they need to go to the hospital if pregnancy has no effect on their bodies?? LOL! Ya, YOUR ""highly scientific, professional, factual"" opinion based on NOTHING (no facts, no science, no NOTHING) except a need to disrespect and denigrate MOTHERS and make light of their invaluable part in society, their strength and courage, to make yourself feel superior...
Thank you for admitting that Anti-Choicers are crude and unfeeling....you want "crude and unfeeling" people to control our laws, to control YOU...? Why? I think it' s crude and unfeeling to deny what happens to women during pregnancy....