In the past here on this forum, I've heard pro-choicers say women should not be treated like animals. But then I've also heard them say women are like animals and can't control themselves. So which it?!?
No you didn't see pro-choicers say women are like animals and can't control themselves.. But here is another Anti-Choicer insisting women ARE animals by insisting they are all alike.....so it's only YOU who are calling women animals..
Uh, WHERE EXACTLY is your proof that "" them say women are like animals and can't control themselves."" SHOW IT
It goes something like this: "Humans are animals with animal instincts, and can't control themselves. So it's not fair to expect people to use abstinence as a substitute for abortion." I'm paraphrasing, of course, but that's the argument that has been repeated so oft from the pro-choice side. Several pro-choice members here in the past have specifically compared humans to animals (in the context of a woman's choice not to start a pregnancy).
NO, you did NOT "paraphrase" you "misrepresented" and "purposely rewrote what was NOT said" . YOU: """""""""In the past here on this forum, I've heard pro-choicers say women should not be treated like animals. But then I've also heard them say women are like animals and can't control themselves. So which it?!? kazenatsu, Yesterday at 11:28 PM Report""""""""""""""""" SHOW THE EXACT WORDS WHERE THAT WAS POSTED OR ADMIT YOUR PREMISE WAS NOT TRUE. No, they haven't...
"I've heard" is quite a a poor start for a thread. If you want really to launch a discussion on that, you should quote specific sentences. Clearly, it's an extremely poor beginning of a thread, and it can't lead to any constructive discussion.
Here's one of them: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...e-pro-choice-movement.281389/#post-1062106459 (post #17) Here's another: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/self-awareness.289624/page-2#post-1062303511 (post #32) One more: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/fetus-female-relationship.318066/#post-1063037974 (post #24) Three different pro-choice members, three different threads.
YOU CLAIMED : "" But then I've also heard them say women are like animals and can't control themselves."" NO WHERE did anyone say that....it's your own twisted "misinterpretation".
I'm assuming all the pro-choicers reading this will admit then that women are not like animals and they can control their behavior?
Both. Humans have more rights than animals, also humans vary in their sense of responsibility, some are responsible and some irresponsible.
Isn't it possible (at least from a totally hypothetical theoretical standpoint) that those not responsible enough to be able to control themselves also are not deserving of the right to necessarily control all aspects of their reproduction?
How would this arbitrary scale be implemented? Why are people so obsessed with controlling others? I find it takes up quite a bit of my time to tend to my own life. I have neither the time, interest or inclination to control somebody else's.
There are already numerous nearly endless laws to control other people. You think people should just be allowed to bring into the society as many other people as they want, or snuff them out of existence right before they can be born? And that doesn't have any big effect on anyone else? Why don't we toss out the laws on domestic violence while we're at it, because you know, "it's none of our business".
Laws exist within civilized society so people don't encroach on others (civil laws) or cause harm to "society" (criminal laws). I do not believe that people should have the right to tell someone else what they "should" do with their own body. I am also against suicide being illegal. Nobody has the right to tell someone how to feel and how much they "should" be able to endure. Basically, people need to stop minding other people's business.
Yet you ignore that there are numerous (nearly endless) other laws that do not just cover those two things (at least not in a strict sort of way). Well, again, that retort sort of completely ignores the point I was trying to make. Even that comment of yours could ultimately be seen as hypocritical, because any time a law is enforced, someone is (potentially) being made to "endure" something. In a strict logical sort of way, these comments of yours are expressive of double standards - one when it comes to abortion, one when it comes to lots of other things. But I do not wish to take this discussion too far off topic. These threads ultimately seem to have numerous deflections that take our discussions off-topic.
What nearly endless laws exist that are not either civil or criminal? Your point seems to be the same as what runs through all of your posts on this subject matter - controlling how/when/where a woman can make choices about her body. Did I misread your posts?
We've had other threads about this. I'm not going to let the discussion in this thread go off-topic. You were the one who threw up the deflection in the first place. Not going to go down that rabbit hole in this thread. I notice that pro-choicers can never seem to stick with the topic in these threads. Always have to bring up some other discussion. (or maybe that's just the inherent nature of these discussions, but let's please try to make some effort to stay on topic)
YOU CLAIMED : "" But then I've also heard them say women are like animals and can't control themselves."" Didn't you read your own OP ??????????? NO WHERE did anyone say that....it's your own twisted "misinterpretation".
NO, rights aren't based on what YOU think is "responsible" or "irresponsible". Who do you think should control other people's reproduction? The Gestapo? Church ladies? The government (make it bigger) ? If irresponsible people shouldn't have control of their reproduction does that mean they should be forced to HAVE AN ABORTION ??
