Abortion Doctor George Tiller Reportedly Killed at Church

[Nik]

men are already forced to be
its only the women that have a choice

To a point...once a child is born each parent is equally responsible for its upbringing.

so, if the woman doesnt want the child, but the man does, he has to let her kill his child, but if he doesnt want the child and the woman does, he is forced to be financial support for a child he doesnt even want

nice double standard

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

To a point...once a child is born each parent is equally responsible for its upbringing.

so, if the woman doesnt want the child, but the man does, he has to let her kill his child, but if he doesnt want the child and the woman does, he is forced to be financial support for a child he doesnt even want

nice double standard

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

It is exactly a double standard. It can be either a child or an unviable tissue mass depending on the convenience of the economics.

 

[DiveCon]

To a point...once a child is born each parent is equally responsible for its upbringing.

so, if the woman doesnt want the child, but the man does, he has to let her kill his child, but if he doesnt want the child and the woman does, he is forced to be financial support for a child he doesnt even want

nice double standard

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

as much as the 18 years of support?

 

[Nik]

so, if the woman doesnt want the child, but the man does, he has to let her kill his child, but if he doesnt want the child and the woman does, he is forced to be financial support for a child he doesnt even want

nice double standard

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

It is exactly a double standard. It can be either a child or an unviable tissue mass depending on the convenience of the economics.

Umm, thats not what I was responding too, sweetcheeks.

 

[Nik]

so, if the woman doesnt want the child, but the man does, he has to let her kill his child, but if he doesnt want the child and the woman does, he is forced to be financial support for a child he doesnt even want

nice double standard

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

as much as the 18 years of support?

Sure...the woman has to pay for 18 years as well.

 

[DiveCon]

You think we should not consider the 9 months the woman is carrying the child?

as much as the 18 years of support?

Sure...the woman has to pay for 18 years as well.

but she choose to keep it
remember?

 

[Nik]

as much as the 18 years of support?

Sure...the woman has to pay for 18 years as well.

but she choose to keep it
remember?

Yes, and she has to go through the 9 months to balance that out.

 

[DiveCon]

Sure...the woman has to pay for 18 years as well.

but she choose to keep it
remember?

Yes, and she has to go through the 9 months to balance that out.

but in this hypothetical, the man didnt want the child
remember
where is his choice?

 

[Pyrite]

but she choose to keep it
remember?

Yes, and she has to go through the 9 months to balance that out.

but in this hypothetical, the man didnt want the child
remember
where is his choice?

For a potential father to be able to impose a medical procedure on a potential mother, or to be able to withhold it from her, would in any other situation (excluding ones where she is incapable of making decisions due to unconsciousness or delirium) be just as wrong.

Pregnancy is a life threatening event, even in the best circumstances. In nearly all circumstances, it is severely debilitating. To allow any person or government to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will would be wrong.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes, and she has to go through the 9 months to balance that out.

but in this hypothetical, the man didnt want the child
remember
where is his choice?

For a potential father to be able to impose a medical procedure on a potential mother, or to be able to withhold it from her, would in any other situation (excluding ones where she is incapable of making decisions due to unconsciousness or delirium) be just as wrong.

Pregnancy is a life threatening event, even in the best circumstances. In nearly all circumstances, it is severely debilitating. To allow any person or government to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will would be wrong.

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

 

[Pyrite]

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

It becomes against her will the moment she no longer wishes to be pregnant. That's how consent works in civil society, no matter how much you would like to preserve pregnancy as a means to punish women for having sex.

 

[DiveCon]

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

It becomes against her will the moment she no longer wishes to be pregnant. That's how consent works in civil society, no matter how much you would like to preserve pregnancy as a means to punish women for having sex.

ah yes, that Obama line of kids being a punishment
LAME

 

[Article 15]

but in this hypothetical, the man didnt want the child
remember
where is his choice?

For a potential father to be able to impose a medical procedure on a potential mother, or to be able to withhold it from her, would in any other situation (excluding ones where she is incapable of making decisions due to unconsciousness or delirium) be just as wrong.

Pregnancy is a life threatening event, even in the best circumstances. In nearly all circumstances, it is severely debilitating. To allow any person or government to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will would be wrong.

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

 

[DiveCon]

For a potential father to be able to impose a medical procedure on a potential mother, or to be able to withhold it from her, would in any other situation (excluding ones where she is incapable of making decisions due to unconsciousness or delirium) be just as wrong.

Pregnancy is a life threatening event, even in the best circumstances. In nearly all circumstances, it is severely debilitating. To allow any person or government to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will would be wrong.

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

LOL
yeah, sure

if she was willing to do the act, then she should have been willing to accept the results
if she wasnt willing to do the act, then she was raped

 

[Pyrite]

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

It becomes against her will the moment she no longer wishes to be pregnant. That's how consent works in civil society, no matter how much you would like to preserve pregnancy as a means to punish women for having sex.

ah yes, that Obama line of kids being a punishment
LAME

The Obama line? WTF? I've been calling out pro-lifers for that since long before I knew anything about Obama.

 

[Pyrite]

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

LOL
yeah, sure

if she was willing to do the act, then she should have been willing to accept the results
if she wasnt willing to do the act, then she was raped

By that logic, if you were willing to step into a car, you should have been willing to accept the results of an accident. And therefore should have no right to be treated for wounds incurred in one.

 

[DiveCon]

It becomes against her will the moment she no longer wishes to be pregnant. That's how consent works in civil society, no matter how much you would like to preserve pregnancy as a means to punish women for having sex.

ah yes, that Obama line of kids being a punishment
LAME

The Obama line? WTF? I've been calling out pro-lifers for that since long before I knew anything about Obama.

ah, so you were where he got that lame ass line
figures

 

[DiveCon]

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

LOL
yeah, sure

if she was willing to do the act, then she should have been willing to accept the results
if she wasnt willing to do the act, then she was raped

By that logic, if you were willing to step into a car, you should have been willing to accept the results of an accident. And therefore should have no right to be treated for wounds incurred in one.

thats fucking stupid, even for you

 

[Article 15]

it wasnt against her will, unless she was raped

thats the thing where your premise fails

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

LOL
yeah, sure

if she was willing to do the act, then she should have been willing to accept the results
if she wasnt willing to do the act, then she was raped

Humans don't have sex simply to procreate.

You don't get to decide what consequences other people should be willing to accept.

 

[DiveCon]

One doesn't have to be raped to become pregnant "against their will."

LOL
yeah, sure

if she was willing to do the act, then she should have been willing to accept the results
if she wasnt willing to do the act, then she was raped

Humans don't have sex simply to procreate.

You don't get to decide what consequences other people should be willing to accept.

when you have intercourse, there is ALWAYS a chance of creating a child
even if you take precautions

if your not willing to take that risk, keep your pants on