Do you own your body?

I don't understand, please tell me what you mean?
My apologies.

When folks are willing to blindly follow the Orange Jesus, and accept the fact that clearly he has never even opened the book to know it’s not two Corinthians…

Look at their new Bible...nice to see someone sees through it.

But, again, for these folks it’s okay it’s their “freedom” and the fact they aren’t smart enough or educated enough (one can see the attacks on education as well…) to know that they are so far away from where they think is their value center is the tragic part of all of this.

I really wonder what message they will accept as gospel next.
 

Trump touts overturning of Roe in remarks to Christian conservative group​


“I want to thank the six Supreme Court justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett — for the wisdom and the courage they showed on this long-term, very contentious issue. This has been a long time it’s been fought,” Trump said to applause from the crowd.
“We did something that was amazing,” Trump added. “The big problem was it was caught up in the federal government, but the people will decide, and that’s the way it should be. The people are now deciding. Some states are a little bit more conservative, and some states are much more liberal.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...overturning-roe-christian-conservative-group/
 
Yup. Much better with 50 state governments instead. So much more streamlined.

Fuck off asshole.
 
Nobody on this site is more bored than I am, but even I know better than to play with it.
 
No. What does that have to do with abortion?
Women are complaining that government is supposedly forcing them to have children by removing access to abortion.

The government also forces men to pay for children they don't want.

Why is one example labeled a hatred of the group, but the other is not?
 
Women are complaining that government is supposedly forcing them to have children by removing access to abortion.

The government also forces men to pay for children they don't want.

Why is one example labeled a hatred of the group, but the other is not?
Women are pointing out that abortion is healthcare. None of this has anything to do with child support, unless you think a man should be able to compel a woman to abort a fetus he doesn’t want.
 
Women are pointing out that abortion is healthcare. None of this has anything to do with child support
Both examples are of the government enforcing unwanted choices upon people where children are the issue. When it concerns women, it's "hate". When it concerns men, it's "responsibility".

Why is that?
 
Both examples are of the government enforcing unwanted choices upon people where children are the issue. When it concerns women, it's "hate". When it concerns men, it's "responsibility".

Why is that?
Who should pay to raise a child the father doesn’t want?
 
Men don't gestate and give birth. So men have no applicable choice for abortion.

Men impregnate. Their choice is to either have sex and release their sperm or to keep their sperm in control.
 
Who should pay to raise a child the father doesn’t want?
That's not the question. The question is why is government enforcement against men regarding children classified as "responsibility", yet government enforcement against women regarding children is "misogyny"?

You're insisting government enforcement against women regarding children is motivated by supposed hatred of women, but deny that is the case when government makes decades long enforcements against men regarding children.

Why is government enforcement against women "hatred", but government enforcement agaist men isn't?

Let me put it another way: two people have sex and an unintended pregnacy happens. Why is the argument "You made your choice risking and having sex" only applied to one side, while also insisting both sides get treated as equals?
 
I find it fascinating that there are those who will break down the minutia of a sports play or a fight into different aspects and different roles, and these same people will also die on the hill about how men and women are different, and yet for some reason they cannot understand the differences between the rights and responsibilities of those who gestate/give birth and the rights/responsibilities of those who impregnate.
 
I find it fascinating that there are those who will break down the minutia of a sports play or a fight into different aspects and different roles, and these same people will also die on the hill about how men and women are different, and yet for some reason they cannot understand the differences between the rights and responsibilities of those who gestate/give birth and the rights/responsibilities of those who impregnate.
I explained it clearly to you before, but you were incapable of/refusing understanding and instead complained I was just doing a 'gotcha' moment.
 
I explained it clearly to you before, but you were incapable of/refusing understanding and instead complained I was just doing a 'gotcha' moment.

No you tried to rationalize you not accepting the difference in the roles.

Men do not gestate or give birth. There is no choice for abortion for them.

Women do gestate and give birth. As such the choice to gestate and give birth is up to them.

Men impregnate. As such they have the choice to impregnate or not.

This is simple biology.

I know you think that men should be able to have sex with being able to walk away from an impregnation. Additionally you think it is unfair that women have an "out" with abortion. Further that it is the woman's choice for abortion. That men should be able to walk away as they did not make the choice to carry forth with the gestation. You believe it is unfair.

Your feelings don't alter the reality that the responsibilities and choices with each role are different.
 
Men do not gestate or give birth. There is no choice for abortion for them.
A silly axiomatic statement.
Women do gestate and give birth. As such the choice to gestate and give birth is up to them.
Correct.
Men impregnate. As such they have the choice to impregnate or not.
Correct.
I know you think that men should be able to have sex with being able to walk away from an impregnation.
Men have 0% responsibility for women'a bodies. That is uncontestable. You cannot logically assert 100% say, right, authority, power, choice and ownership over something, but then claim only 50% responsibility.
Additionally you think it is unfair that women have an "out" with abortion.
Nope, I've repeatedly asserted a woman can terminate a pregnancy at any time whatsoever for any reason.
Further that it is the woman's choice for abortion.
Correct.
That men should be able to walk away as they did not make the choice to carry forth with the gestation.
Correct. Men cannot be held to account on an issue they have 0% say, right, authority, power, ownership or choice over. That logically means 0% responsibility.
 
A silly axiomatic statement.

Correct.

Correct.

Men have 0% responsibility for women'a bodies. That is uncontestable. You cannot logically assert 100% say, right, authority, power, choice and ownership over something, but then claim only 50% responsibility.

Nope, I've repeatedly asserted a woman can terminate a pregnancy at any time whatsoever for any reason.

Correct.

Correct. Men cannot be held to account on an issue they have 0% say, right, authority, power, ownership or choice over. That logically means 0% responsibility.

If a man does not want to bear responsibility for impregnation then he simply needs to keep his sperm to himself. If his sperm is taken without consent then it is different - it is theft and he has rights to sue her for damages.

Men had a say. They decided to have sex and leave their sperm behind with the potential to impregnate.
 
Back
Top