The myth that pro-life views oppress 'women'

Throwing your name-calling (of those who can't even defend themselves, no less) aside for the moment, what about that 10% ?
10% of a million is still a large number.

 

I have not engaged in any name-calling. Please do not falsely accuse me of things.

In my country, that 10% happens before about 20 weeks, so they still are not what is depicted in the photograph, but why are you trying to deflect from the point of my post, which is your dishonesty?

 

well...

seems kind of like the new N-word to me... a bit derogatory to the unborn, at the very least.

 

The zef doesn't mind.

It's only offensive to those who want to control the discussion using only emotive terms, like your own personal favorite, "little baby fetus."

 

I want to know how a man with a uterus who has not had the surgery would get pregnant. They didn't go over that in sex ed in my school.

 

That would be a "woman" who is transitioning to a man. There actually was a case not too long ago where a "man" wantabe gave birth. Anyway the remark was meant to be humorous, perhaps my sense of humor is wacky.

 

That's right, like SpaceCricket says, pro-life laws don't discriminate against anyone. Women, transgender, men with uteruses, all must comply.
Just like a man without a uterus is not required to go through with a pregnancy, a woman without a uterus (one who has had a hysterectomy) is not required to either.

 

Could a hermaphrodite impregnate themselves during masturbation?

 

There are no known cases of a hermaphrodite impregnating themselves, usually because one of the "sexes" is not developed to the state of being fertile. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_hermaphroditism

- - - Updated - - -

ZEF is nothing more than shorthand for zygote/embryo/fetus, if you find that as "name calling" then you are just looking for a reason to argue over nothing.

 

Darn. I was hoping for an new awesome reality show to come to TLC about a chronic masturbating hermaphrodite and its 21 children.

 

Bruce Jenner.

 

How the feck is an acronym offensive???? You are just looking for something to whine about, IMO.

 

Okay, so how about I start a new user account under the name of "Niggy" and post in the Race Relations section?
How bout that, hmm?

 

Is Niggy an acronym .. nope, so again another fail for you.

 

That would be your choice but what does it have to do with what we are discussing?

 

Answer the question and stop running away

Is Niggy an acronym?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zef

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Zef

 

ZEF in the context of abortion debates is also an acronym for Zygote, Embryo & Foetus it offers nothing demeaning or derogatory to the unborn.

 

Please define you criteria for life? Then we can get into a discussion of just which life you find valuable. If is just human life, is it just intelligent life, is it just life that hasn't committed offenses against you or your country. How far does your commitment go. Are you a vegetarian, anti war, against capital punishment, anti gun?

 

An Excellant arguement for cutting the military budget.

 

Murky grounds...

In instances such as this, I am really not very partial towards abortion since it is murder and I do see abortion for some of the more liberal reasons as a reckless procedure that kills life calloulsy...

But at the same time, it is a surprising argument for conservatives to bring up since it essentially violates the intimate privacy and physiology of the mother as well and runs counter to the conservative hard line of less government. Essentially, they are trying to get government to force their ideology on women in the country according to their moral standards.

Me...there is no innocent party in this. An action either way violates the mother or the child and even if the child should live, some will complain about the costs to the state or nation to raise it since the mother will likely abandon the child she did not want...unless another law is made to force the mother to raise it.

I very much understand the morality behind the conservative argument, but it is perhaps just as immoral to force the woman to commit to these things she does not want to do and it allows the government an almost irretrievable advance into forcing decisions of a private nature on an invdividual citizen. I really don't see a plus in this argument...

 

Sorry abortion is not murder, murder is a legal term that only applies in law and means "the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought", in order for that to apply you would have to prove that the ZEF is in fact a human (noun) being, furthermore even if you could prove that you would still have to show that abortion does not fall under consent and self-defence laws.

Neither does abortion violate any "rights" of the fetus. Every person has the right to defend themselves, up to and including deadly force, against non-consented injuries, a pregnancy without the consent of the woman is no different to a person injuring you without your consent and you defending yourself against those injuries even to the point of killing them.

 

Your own description is a sort of legalized definition of every word or phrase, and it's still the same type of word play, but in the end, the mother, fully aware that a child is developing inside her, wishes to kill it.

I do agree with your description of the violation of the woman. I've often described the pro-lifer sentiment as a sort of rape of the woman- physically, mentally, and emotionally. However, at the same time, baring something akin to having been actually raped, an abortion simply and purely for the act of killing a child you do not wish to have, does not really square with my moral viewpoint I understand that is not applicable, but that is also my point. The aboriton question largely centers on what each side thinks is right or wrong, and largely tries to force the situation on everyone else using the government or the law as the arbiter. Much like euthanasia...plenty of moral sentimentality in that argument, and plenty of ways that the practice or the rejection of the practice can destroy or impair the individual or society as a whole...

 

"""""The aboriton question largely centers on what each side thinks is right or wrong, and largely tries to force the situation on everyone else using the government or the law as the arbiter"""

No, the Pro-Choice side does NOT wish to FORCE anything. Pro-Choice stands for women having the Freedom to decide for themselves what to do with their bodies.

Pro-Choice is only forced to use the law when Anti-Choicers try to take away rights of women. (Canada has NO abortion laws and lower abortion rates.)

The Anti-Choice side want to FORCE women to conform to their idea of what is right or wrong and what THEY consider moral or immoral.


Oh, and abortion due to rape is NO different than any other abortion.

And , no "child" is killed in abortion.

And," society as a whole" is quite used to abortion ( it's been around for thousands of years) and has not been destroyed or impaired by it's use.