ABC moderator lied, several babies were left to die under Walz after birth

Werbung:
Men and women should control their own bodies and not kill other humans as if other humans do not have precious bodies of their own.
Controlling your body incudes terminating your pregnancy else you are talking from both sides on your mouth.
 
Controlling your body incudes terminating your pregnancy else you are talking from both sides on your mouth.
Unborn babies have bodies also and no amount of human logic justifies the idea that mothers own their unborn babies like white slave owners owned black slaves.
 
Unborn babies have bodies also and no amount of human logic justifies the idea that mothers own their unborn babies like white slave owners owned black slaves.
You are taking from both sides of your err mouth. Either women have control of their own body or not. If they have control over their own body they should be able to terminate their pregnancy. but you deny them then right to terminate their pregnancy. it means you are denying term control over their own body.

However it is evident from your posts that either you do not understand elementary logic or you do not debate honestly.
 
The man should also be in control of his own body.
with out his seed there would be no baby he has some right s also you just do not like it . And its a state's rights issue no one is going to ban it that is a lkie its up to each state as many laws should be. Often the feds will blackmail the states also.
 
with out his seed there would be no baby he has some right s also you just do not like it . And its a state's rights issue no one is going to ban it that is a lkie its up to each state as many laws should be. Often the feds will blackmail the states also.
Exactly it is his seed not his body. Spell out the right that you think the man should have.
 
Exactly it is his seed not his body. Spell out the right that you think the man should have.
the father has rights as a father and parent on the decisions that affect his child and he should have the option of taking care of it for one, That absolves the woman of all rights And Yes I know several men who have done so, I anther should also have some limited right not saying a woman has not got rights I am just saying the father should have some . As for the decision to make the aborting I also think there should be a medical reason for it and yes I do accept the inability to support a child as long as the aborting is done early in the cycle not 6 months and above no way its human then,.
There is nothing wrong with certain checks and balances that are reasonable .
 
the father has rights as a father and parent on the decisions that affect his child and he should have the option of taking care of it for one,
Of course. He would have all of those once the pregnancy comes to term and a child is born. But before that it is only her body that is in question. And either she has control over her body or not. Why don’t you be “man enough,” and outright say she does not have control over her body while she is pregnant?
That absolves the woman of all rights And Yes I know several men who have done so, I anther should also have some limited right not saying a woman has not got rights I am just saying the father should have some .
But you did not spell out exactly what right. For example, should the man be able to veto the woman even when she has a legal right to terminate her pregnancy? Be”man enough” and say it rather than continuing to insinuate it.

And what if we both the woman and the man want to terminate the pregnancy? (I know I know your head just exploded hearing that question. Now do your best to avoid answering it.)

As for the decision to make the aborting I also think there should be a medical reason for it and yes I do accept the inability to support a child as long as the aborting is done early in the cycle not 6 months and above no way its human then,.
fair enough. Give us a number. And you want a woman be able to murder her baby just because she cannot afford it? This is how your right wing extremist comrades sound like.
There is nothing wrong with certain checks and balances that are reasonable .
I am willing to go with this. But would you agree 6 weeks which is before the overwhelming majority of women even know they are pregnant is an insincere and cruel policy?
 
You are taking from both sides of your err mouth. Either women have control of their own body or not. If they have control over their own body they should be able to terminate their pregnancy. but you deny them then right to terminate their pregnancy. it means you are denying term control over their own body.

However it is evident from your posts that either you do not understand elementary logic or you do not debate honestly.
Either slave owners own slaves and women own unborn babies or not.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top