If a woman aborted my child, I would probably go ape shit. Why are the feelings of the father...

[Brain357]

I bet there would be a lot less abortions with free childcare. I assume you guys are pushing for that?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

You will never find anyone who likes abortion. That's what you nutters keep pushing and its simply not true.

My favorite abortion

Very creepy that you find ways of making fun of abortion.

I cannot think of anything ore serious. When you can give it the respect it deserves, we

---

Naw, you are one sick little twitch. there will never ever be any basis for a conversation between you and me.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I bet there would be a lot less abortions with free childcare. I assume you guys are pushing for that?

Its pretty unforgiveable that in the US, we have hyuungry children, homeless children, women who cannot apply for/work a job because they have no safe place to leave their child and yet

The anti-choice jerks are against anything that would help children and single mothers are considered the scum of the earth while dead beat dads go find another woman who is foolish enough to trust him.

Ask Chuz Life and the rest of them what they have done to change that?

They've done nothing and will do even less in the future.

This thread or another, TemplarKormac said something about keeping her legs together - as though that's address any part of this tragedy.

They rant and rave about women but do a search for even one thread they have started to talk about the plight of poor children in the US. The best you'll find is them ranting against Michelle Obama for trying to help them.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now, in reference to Asclepias calling the fetus a parasite...

Let me just point out that a parasite is a foreign body living in the body of another organism at the expense of the host organism. Hence if we were to apply this to that of a pregnant woman, it would belie the whole "her body, her choice" argument. Because if we were to go by the description Asclepias gave, then it is in fact not her body or her choice, since the human fetus is a foreign body within her own body living off the nutrients of the mother.

Nice job. The destroys the entire "her body, her choice" argument.

The reason it is now thought to not be a parasite is that parasites are usually of a different species. Otherwise, it fits the definition.

But, really - what does it matter?

Aha, nice try.

Why does it matter? Because it works against the pro choice argument so well.

 

[Asclepias]

Now, in reference to Asclepias calling the fetus a parasite...

Let me just point out that a parasite is a foreign body living in the body of another organism at the expense of the host organism. Hence if we were to apply this to that of a pregnant woman, it would belie the whole "her body, her choice" argument. Because if we were to go by the description Asclepias gave, then it is in fact not her body or her choice, since the human fetus is a foreign body within her own body living off the nutrients of the mother.

Nice job. The destroys the entire "her body, her choice" argument.

You sound like an ignorant donkey. She has every right to rid her body of a parasite.

 

[Asclepias]

Now, in reference to Asclepias calling the fetus a parasite...

Let me just point out that a parasite is a foreign body living in the body of another organism at the expense of the host organism. Hence if we were to apply this to that of a pregnant woman, it would belie the whole "her body, her choice" argument. Because if we were to go by the description Asclepias gave, then it is in fact not her body or her choice, since the human fetus is a foreign body within her own body living off the nutrients of the mother.

Nice job. The destroys the entire "her body, her choice" argument.

The reason it is now thought to not be a parasite is that parasites are usually of a different species. Otherwise, it fits the definition.

But, really - what does it matter?

Aha, nice try.

Why does it matter? Because it works against the pro choice argument so well.

Only in your ignorance does it work against pro choice. in case you missed it the "body" in pro choice is her body not the babys.

 

[Dragonlady]

Now, in reference to Asclepias calling the fetus a parasite...

Let me just point out that a parasite is a foreign body living in the body of another organism at the expense of the host organism. Hence if we were to apply this to that of a pregnant woman, it would belie the whole "her body, her choice" argument. Because if we were to go by the description Asclepias gave, then it is in fact not her body or her choice, since the human fetus is a foreign body within her own body living off the nutrients of the mother.

Nice job. The destroys the entire "her body, her choice" argument.

The reason it is now thought to not be a parasite is that parasites are usually of a different species. Otherwise, it fits the definition.

But, really - what does it matter?

Aha, nice try.

Why does it matter? Because it works against the pro choice argument so well.

There's nothing that you can say that works against the pro-choice argument. There is no reason for anyone to inject themselves into a woman's choice as to whether or not to have a baby, except the father and he has no say in her final decision.

There are ways to reduce the reasons why women have abortions, like mandated maternity leave, job security during pregnancy, universal health care, child care tax credits, geared to income child care. But the anti-choice crowd doesn't want any part of anything that would reduce the reasons why women have abortions.

The real reason right wingers want to ban abortions is to punish women for having sex.

 

[Chuz Life]

Your anti-science stance is noted and held against you, lawyer.

I think he means that being a father is a lot more than just shooting cum in a woman.

But, on the topic of science, in creating a child, a man scientifically has only the burden of exerting himself during intercourse. Scientific fact. Also, it is a scientific fact that a woman is yoked with ALL the burden of bringing the child into the world. Again, scientific fact.

Laws can be changed. Scientific fact cannot (without major advances in technology).

For this reason, the person who will be bearing the greatest burden gets to decide on whether or not to continue. That includes fathers, grandmothers, government, Jesus/Buddah/Allah/Satan/Bono/Kek. That's the way it SHOULD be.

Are children Constitutionally entitled to the equal protection of our laws?

Yes or no?

Does anyone fall for your childish games? Stay on topic.

This is not about children. Its about fetuses.

And YOU know that.

You're very welcome to hold a different opinion but that's all it is - an opinion. If you disagree with a woman's right to choose, you're very welcome to NOT choose for yourself, but never ever for anyone else.

In my OPINION only a leftarded fucking imbecile like you would think that a CHILD who is in the fetal stage of their life is anything less than a child just BECAUSE they happen to be in the fetal stage of their life. And.. .our fetal HOMICIDE laws back me up on that.

No they don't. They protect WOMEN who have chosen to have a child from those who would harm that unborn child, which may include the child's father.

I've seen a lot of instances where abusive partners would punch or kick a pregnant woman in the stomach.

The fetal homicide laws are to protect the woman and her fetus, should she choose to carry it.

Obviously you weren't paying attention when the laws were passed and when they were being debated.

We already have and always have had laws to " protect women" from assaults like being kicked in the stomach, moron.

The fetal HOMICIDE laws were passed to make the killing of "CHILDREN in the womb" a punishable crime in its own right.

They not only apply to criminal forced abortions but to any other criminal killings of children in the womb . Including DUIs, accidental killings during a robbery, etc.

 

[Asclepias]

I think he means that being a father is a lot more than just shooting cum in a woman.

But, on the topic of science, in creating a child, a man scientifically has only the burden of exerting himself during intercourse. Scientific fact. Also, it is a scientific fact that a woman is yoked with ALL the burden of bringing the child into the world. Again, scientific fact.

Laws can be changed. Scientific fact cannot (without major advances in technology).

For this reason, the person who will be bearing the greatest burden gets to decide on whether or not to continue. That includes fathers, grandmothers, government, Jesus/Buddah/Allah/Satan/Bono/Kek. That's the way it SHOULD be.

Are children Constitutionally entitled to the equal protection of our laws?

Yes or no?

Does anyone fall for your childish games? Stay on topic.

This is not about children. Its about fetuses.

And YOU know that.

You're very welcome to hold a different opinion but that's all it is - an opinion. If you disagree with a woman's right to choose, you're very welcome to NOT choose for yourself, but never ever for anyone else.

In my OPINION only a leftarded fucking imbecile like you would think that a CHILD who is in the fetal stage of their life is anything less than a child just BECAUSE they happen to be in the fetal stage of their life. And.. .our fetal HOMICIDE laws back me up on that.

No they don't. They protect WOMEN who have chosen to have a child from those who would harm that unborn child, which may include the child's father.

I've seen a lot of instances where abusive partners would punch or kick a pregnant woman in the stomach.

The fetal homicide laws are to protect the woman and her fetus, should she choose to carry it.

Obviously you weren't paying attention when the laws were passed and when they were being debated.

We already have and always have had laws to " protect women" from assaults like being kicked in the stomach, moron.

The fetal HOMICIDE laws were passed to make the killing of "CHILDREN in the womb" a punishable crime in its own right.

It not only apply to criminal forced abortions but to any other criminal killings of children in the womb . Including DUIs, accidental killings during a robbery, etc.

Yeah dummy Its only punishable when the mother didnt give permission for someone to terminate her pregnancy. You must be kind of thick in the head. I explained that before.

Feticide - Wikipedia

"These laws do not apply to legally induced abortions. Federal and state courts have consistently held that these laws do not contradict the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings on abortion."

 

[Chuz Life]

You will never find anyone who likes abortion. That's what you nutters keep pushing and its simply not true.

My favorite abortion

Very creepy that you find ways of making fun of abortion.

I cannot think of anything ore serious. When you can give it the respect it deserves, we

---

Naw, you are one sick little twitch. there will never ever be any basis for a conversation between you and me.

You poor simpleton. That wasn't me in the video. She isn't even anyone from my side of the isle.

You don't think it's funny?

Neither do I.

News for you. ..

She is one of yours. She shares YOUR views. Not mine.

 

[Chuz Life]

Are children Constitutionally entitled to the equal protection of our laws?

Yes or no?

Does anyone fall for your childish games? Stay on topic.

This is not about children. Its about fetuses.

And YOU know that.

You're very welcome to hold a different opinion but that's all it is - an opinion. If you disagree with a woman's right to choose, you're very welcome to NOT choose for yourself, but never ever for anyone else.

In my OPINION only a leftarded fucking imbecile like you would think that a CHILD who is in the fetal stage of their life is anything less than a child just BECAUSE they happen to be in the fetal stage of their life. And.. .our fetal HOMICIDE laws back me up on that.

No they don't. They protect WOMEN who have chosen to have a child from those who would harm that unborn child, which may include the child's father.

I've seen a lot of instances where abusive partners would punch or kick a pregnant woman in the stomach.

The fetal homicide laws are to protect the woman and her fetus, should she choose to carry it.

Obviously you weren't paying attention when the laws were passed and when they were being debated.

We already have and always have had laws to " protect women" from assaults like being kicked in the stomach, moron.

The fetal HOMICIDE laws were passed to make the killing of "CHILDREN in the womb" a punishable crime in its own right.

It not only apply to criminal forced abortions but to any other criminal killings of children in the womb . Including DUIs, accidental killings during a robbery, etc.

Yeah dummy Its only punishable when the mother didnt give permission for someone to terminate her pregnancy. You must be kind of thick in the head. I explained that before.

Feticide - Wikipedia

"These laws do not apply to legally induced abortions. Federal and state courts have consistently held that these laws do not contradict the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings on abortion."

Did anyone deny that our fetal Homicide laws do not apply to "legally" induced abortions, fucktard?

 

[Chuz Life]

The real reason right wingers want to ban abortions is to punish women for having sex.

I don't know if it is sad, scary or fucking hilarious that you might actually believe that shit.

 

[Chuz Life]

I bet there would be a lot less abortions with free childcare. I assume you guys are pushing for that?

Define "free."

Then, answer the question. . . "If we were able to provide "free" childcare. . .Will you then support a ban on abortions?"

If your answer is No. . .Then we know just how fallacious your red herring attempt really was. Don't we.

 

[ChrisL]

Who are you to dictate to her what she should or shouldnt do with her own body?

Unless she was forcibly raped, brainwashed or etc, SHE was the one who made the conscious decision to open her legs and have unprotected sex. Her mistake, not his.

Why is it just her mistake? A man is just as much responsible for who he has sex with.

See we're playing on the logic of "her body, her choice", so, she made that choice the moment she chose to engage in sexual intercourse with the man. Thus she needs to bear the consequences of that choice. If we're to believe that a person is responsible for who they have sex with, that is...

And so did he, and so does he. If he has sex with a woman he doesn't know well, and she decides to get an abortion, he has no say in the matter. That is one of the consequences of having sex for the man.

 

[ChrisL]

I've just noticed that six scumbag liberal pro-aborts have marked my OP as "funny."

What is "funny" about a father being emotionally devastated about an abortion of his child?

The fact that you THINK it's funny proves the point I made on another thread, which is that Democrats will end up in hell.

Unless you repent.

Or they just find YOU funny maybe. Unless you repent . . . .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

...never discussed, or even considered?

There must be all kinds of stories of fathers who wanted to keep their child, but the mother aborted and they could do nothing to stop it.

I am convinced the pro-abort media is censoring these stories, which must be in the millions by now.

I do have a story of a friend of mine, who was blackmailed into a very bad marriage.

She said, "Marry me, or I will abort your child."

So he married her, even though I told him the marriage would never last, even though his father told him he'd get an all-expenses paid trip through Europe if he didn't marry her.

Of course, none of us knew about the abortion threat, because he kept that a secret.

And, sure enough, the marriage was very unhappy, and as I predicted, ended in divorce.

Why doesn't the media cover a story like that?

I find the story very interesting, don't you?

Because it is the woman's body. Period. Love it or hate it, that's the best standard we have.

 

[Chuz Life]

...never discussed, or even considered?

There must be all kinds of stories of fathers who wanted to keep their child, but the mother aborted and they could do nothing to stop it.

I am convinced the pro-abort media is censoring these stories, which must be in the millions by now.

I do have a story of a friend of mine, who was blackmailed into a very bad marriage.

She said, "Marry me, or I will abort your child."

So he married her, even though I told him the marriage would never last, even though his father told him he'd get an all-expenses paid trip through Europe if he didn't marry her.

Of course, none of us knew about the abortion threat, because he kept that a secret.

And, sure enough, the marriage was very unhappy, and as I predicted, ended in divorce.

Why doesn't the media cover a story like that?

I find the story very interesting, don't you?

Because it is the woman's body. Period. Love it or hate it, that's the best standard we have.

The differing DNA says you are full of shit.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

...never discussed, or even considered?

There must be all kinds of stories of fathers who wanted to keep their child, but the mother aborted and they could do nothing to stop it.

I am convinced the pro-abort media is censoring these stories, which must be in the millions by now.

I do have a story of a friend of mine, who was blackmailed into a very bad marriage.

She said, "Marry me, or I will abort your child."

So he married her, even though I told him the marriage would never last, even though his father told him he'd get an all-expenses paid trip through Europe if he didn't marry her.

Of course, none of us knew about the abortion threat, because he kept that a secret.

And, sure enough, the marriage was very unhappy, and as I predicted, ended in divorce.

Why doesn't the media cover a story like that?

I find the story very interesting, don't you?

Because it is the woman's body. Period. Love it or hate it, that's the best standard we have.

The differing DNA says you are full of shit.

English, please.

 

[Brain357]

I bet there would be a lot less abortions with free childcare. I assume you guys are pushing for that?

Define "free."

Then, answer the question. . . "If we were able to provide "free" childcare. . .Will you then support a ban on abortions?"

If your answer is No. . .Then we know just how fallacious your red herring attempt really was. Don't we.

Sounds fair.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"Then, answer the question. . . "If we were able to provide "free" childcare. . .Will you then support a ban on abortions?""


That's idiotic logic. The goal is fewer abortions, not more unsafe abortions.