"Moderate." Recently I've been trying to figure out what it means to be a "moderate" of a particular ideology. It seems a bit vague.
Yup, it's the same...the fetus IS using the woman's body to sustain it's life which BORN people can't do. Which is why I always say that Anti's want the fetus to have more rights than born people.
You agreed that an abortion is "a matter of self-determination of a human being over her own body," a definition of bodily autonomy and now you are trying to back out? You lost what little credibility you had.
No, I responded by saying: that is YOUR understanding of "bodily autonomy." There is no formalised definition for the term.
How can it be the same if the fetus is not using the woman's body by "FORCE?" You say that, and you are totally wrong, because you simply don't understand our argument. They don't have more rights than born people. In fact, they have less. That's why when it comes between choosing whether the baby lives or the mother lives, an abortion is performed to save the life of the mother, and the mainstream pro-life position is that this is totally okay. Babies DO have the right to life though, just like anyone else. And that is why we believe that they should not be killed in the vast majority of circumstances.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Yup, it's the same...the fetus IS using the woman's body to sustain it's life which BORN people can't do. If she is FORCED to gestate due to abortion being banned then she is FORCED to use her body to sustain the life of another. THEY don't have any rights but Anti-Choicers want them to have the right to us another's body to sustain their life.....a right NO ONE ELSE HAS. The woman chooses which it will be..HER value system, no one else's Babies do, fetuses don't. But you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life"
So then it's NOT the same as a person forcing someone to give them their heart or kidney. The FORCE is what the person would be doing who is forcing someone to give them their heart or kidney. And in your analogy this person forcing someone to give them their heart or kidney is the fetus who is using the mother's body. Your analogy simply doesn't work I'm afraid. They have the right to life, and this is only possible by them using the mother's body, which is a perfectly natural process which the mother started by getting pregnant in the first place. You mean she can choose to die from the pregnancy? Define "baby." Is making an exception to save the mother's life a "total denial" of this?
FoxHastings said: ↑ If she is FORCED to gestate due to abortion being banned then she is FORCED to use her body to sustain the life of another. It does not matter WHO is forcing someone to use their body to sustain the life of another....a person still does NOT have to use their body to sustain the life of another....but Anti-Choicer want to deny that right for women giving fetuses MORE rights than born persons.. This is a true statement: If she is FORCED to gestate due to abortion being banned then she is FORCED to use her body to sustain the life of another. ...forcing her to gestate. Totally irrelevant.... farting is a perfectly natural process....please don't do it at the dinner table.. There is is !! Blame the woman for getting pregnant and have her PUNISHED!!!! Misogyny ALWAYS rears it's ugly head with Anti's... YES, there are times when the choice is the woman's life or the fetuses life and the woman can choose to save the fetus....isn't CHOICE good !?? OMGAWD....you debate abortion and don't know what a baby is!!!!! Oh gee gosh you forgot to answer or address this: """But you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life""" A true statement.....that you dodged yet again
chris155au said: ↑ You made no attempt to refute my argument. Now THAT'S a strike out! roflol: Nailed it
Ok, so you admit that it's only about "FORCE" when it is a person in the totally hypothetical scenario where they somehow FORCE someone to give them their organ. And of course, in this scenario, a person does not have to use their body to sustain the life of that person. No, it's just that the fetus's right to life overrides the woman's desire for convenience. However, the woman's right to life overrides the fetus's right to life, which is why an abortion is justified if it is required in order to save the woman's life. A woman is not being "FORCED to gestate" by abortion being banned. People do not have the right to someone else's labor. And someone's labor is required in abortion. If a woman wants to take matters into her own hands and somehow stop herself from gestating, she should be free to do so, but it would not be advised. Tying a woman up for 9 months so that she has no freedom to do what she wants to her own body - now THAT would be forcing her to gestate. Who else is to blame for the woman getting pregnant? And we don't see it as punishment. It's just a natural consequence of getting pregnant. I don't think that it has ever been the case that a woman must die in order to save a fetus. Feel free to cite such a case. No, I know what a baby is. But I was asking for YOUR definition/understanding. You know perfectly well that this is what I was asking, but you pretend to not know in order to distract! Let's see if you can give your definition/understanding in your next reply. I won't hold my breath! Well, for example, I make an exception to save the mother's life. How is that a "total denial" of this?
FoxHastings said: ↑ If she is FORCED to gestate due to abortion being banned then she is FORCED to use her body to sustain the life of another. It does not matter WHO is forcing someone to use their body to sustain the life of another....a person still does NOT have to use their body to sustain the life of another....but Anti-Choicer want to deny that right for women giving fetuses MORE rights than born persons.. This is a true statement: If she is FORCED to gestate due to abortion being banned then she is FORCED to use her body to sustain the life of another. ...forcing her to gestate. Totally irrelevant.... farting is a perfectly natural process....please don't do it at the dinner table.. There is is !! Blame the woman for getting pregnant and have her PUNISHED!!!! Misogyny ALWAYS rears it's ugly head with Anti's... YES, there are times when the choice is the woman's life or the fetuses life and the woman can choose to save the fetus....isn't CHOICE good !?? OMGAWD....you debate abortion and don't know what a baby is!!!!! Oh gee gosh you forgot to answer or address this: """But you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life""" A true statement.....that you dodged yet again Uh, duh, ya....that's what I posted....you just can't address my post , can you LOL
FoxHastings said: ↑ It does not matter WHO is forcing someone to use their body to sustain the life of another....a person still does NOT have to use their body to sustain the life of another.... I don't have to "admit" anything ...this is a statement of fact: a person still does NOT have to use their body to sustain the life of another... but Anti-Choicer want to deny that right for women giving fetuses MORE rights than born persons.. What scenario? No, it doesn't. No one is allowed to harm another without their consent....Anti,s want fetuses to have MORE rights than women. THEN WHY BAN ABORTION ??? No, but the "someone ese" is free to give their labor if they choose to... Please, your wet dreams are TMI.. FoxHastings said: ↑ There is is !! Blame the woman for getting pregnant and have her PUNISHED!!!!""""" Maybe your mysterious "we" don't see it that way but it's taking away a woman's rights....Anti's may delight tin that but it's still not right. It's stupid to live by the "rule" that people have to obey nature....Humans don't....been fighting "nature" since time began. Yup, there have been...again you don't seem to know much about women and pregnancy if you've never heard of that....AND it STILL is the woman's right to CHOOSE in that situation no matter what you" think" LOL, you've been talking to that poster who thinks if we call a fetus a "baby" it somehow changes things? No, it doesn't. There are stages in human life and there is NO "baby" inside a woman...nor a watermelon , nor a "bun"....just a ZEF Foxhastings:Oh gee gosh you forgot to answer or address this: """But you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life""" In that case you deny the fetus the right to life AND you also included rape as an exception so you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life"""
Where is that right to life enshrined and by who? Right, she is just not being allowed to ot be pregnant. Think before you post. Who the **** said that anyone is mandated to performa free abortion? Who gives a ****? Nobody gives a ****. On what principle?
It's a natural right. It's the same reason why murder is illegal. Why is murder illegal if we do not have the right to life? What do you mean she is not allowed to be pregnant? Not me. You can see what I said in the above quote above the quote of your words. As you can see, there is nothing about "free abortion" there. Okay, so clearly you agree that the woman is to blame, unless it is rape. Wrong. I do. I was accused of wanting to "punish" women, and I am defending myself. Are you asking on what principle I make an exception to save the mother's life? Uh, because I do not think that the mother should die. What an absurd question if that is in fact what you're asking.
Correct. And if a woman has a way of independently stopping her body from sustaining the life of her baby, she should be able to do so. The hypothetical scenario where a person somehow FORCES someone to give them their organ. Oh, so you believe that a fetus DOES have the right to life, but you just don't believe that it overrides the woman's desire for convenience! Otherwise, why didn't you just respond by saying that a fetus has no right to life? Oh, so abortion should only be provided in the event that the woman is being harmed by the baby? Because if it was banned, then less babies would be killed. Pretty simple really. Not if that labor is banned. We don't recognise a "RIGHT" to abortion. Neither does the law. So therefore we do not believe that a woman has this right. Yes it definitely would be stupid to live by that rule, which is why I said nothing like it! Yes, in that situation, of course a woman should be able to choose to die in order to save her baby. It would be one hell of a sacrifice. And there we have it! STILL no definition/understanding of "baby!" Maybe the next reply? Again, I won't hold my breath! Yes of course! I'm certainly not going to deny the mother's right to life!
No, it does not need to be "independently"... if a person opts to have surgery of any kind they don't do it themselves.. ..why do you always want women treated differently than other people ?? That is quite strange.. What about it? What can't you get about the fact that no one is allowed to use another's body to sustain their lives? It is simple and a fact. Nope, never said that...it's just you desperate attempt to get some kind of agreement that isn't there... I have consistently said a fetus has no right to life but , of course, YOU only see what you want to see... ALL pregnancies harm women. YOU said: "" chris155au said: ↑ A woman is not being "FORCED to gestate" by abortion being banned."" So how would less "babies" be killed if women are NOT forced to gestate as you claim? No, there is no "right to abortion" but there is a right to bodily autonomy...something most people prize and evil people wish to take away from women. No, I will not provide you with a definition of bodily autonomy as it is quite simple to look up even for you And who TF is this "we" you need for backup? Yup, you did... From post 4095 Chris: """Who else is to blame for the woman getting pregnant? And we don't see it as punishment. It's just a natural consequence of getting pregnant."" Gee, you LEARNED something !!! Women DO have to sometimes make that decision .. Well, maybe it is outside your capabilities... chris155au said: ↑ Well, for example, I make an exception to save the mother's life. How is that a "total denial" of this?"""" In that case you deny the fetus the right to life AND you also included rape as an exception so you make exceptions which is a total denial of " a fetus has a right to life and is an innocent life"""
Bullshit. Ignorant drivel. For the safety of the members of society. If she is not allowed to get an abortion she must remain pregnant. It can not be wished away, so she if ****ing forced. The why the **** did you raise the issue of labor? No, I blame morons who can not stay the **** out of other people's lives.
