You are not logged in. Please register or login.

buzzsaw
 Rep: 426 

Re: US Politics Thread

buzzsaw wrote:
slcpunk wrote:

How's those tariffs working out for everybody? lol, jesus.

If Obama did this, they'd call it "socialism" for bailing out the farmers and additional taxation on Americans via tariffs on China. Fox news would run it 24/7.

It's one day.

mitchejw
 Rep: 109 

Re: US Politics Thread

mitchejw wrote:

Alabama coming close to over turning Roe. V Wade....

“Who cares?” “Nothing Matters” “this doesn’t matter” “Barr is a reasonable guy” “don’t pay attention to what he says, pay attention to what he’s doing” “low unemployment” “stock market” “no collusion” “investigate mueller” “rules don’t matter” “alternative truth”

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 327 

Re: US Politics Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:
mitchejw wrote:

Alabama coming close to over turning Roe. V Wade....

“Who cares?” “Nothing Matters” “this doesn’t matter” “Barr is a reasonable guy” “don’t pay attention to what he says, pay attention to what he’s doing” “low unemployment” “stock market” “no collusion” “investigate mueller” “rules don’t matter” “alternative truth”

I live in Alabama. Pretty big waste of time. I am fine with what Georgia did.

PaSnow
 Rep: 197 

Re: US Politics Thread

PaSnow wrote:

They want it challenged, so it goes to the Supreme Court.

Rape is a bit much, even for a Pro-Lifer thats a tough argument to defend and one I feel people dont fully think thru, just that blanket 100% support.

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 327 

Re: US Politics Thread

Smoking Guns wrote:
PaSnow wrote:

They want it challenged, so it goes to the Supreme Court.

Rape is a bit much, even for a Pro-Lifer thats a tough argument to defend and one I feel people dont fully think thru, just that blanket 100% support.

Rape and Incest are the exceptions.

PaSnow
 Rep: 197 

Re: US Politics Thread

PaSnow wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:
PaSnow wrote:

They want it challenged, so it goes to the Supreme Court.

Rape is a bit much, even for a Pro-Lifer thats a tough argument to defend and one I feel people dont fully think thru, just that blanket 100% support.

Rape and Incest are the exceptions.

I thought it was only life of the Mother?

buzzsaw
 Rep: 426 

Re: US Politics Thread

buzzsaw wrote:

While I am philosophically pro-choice, the issue I always have with this debate is one nobody has ever been able to give a good answer to.  I don't want to debate the right cares about the unborn until they are born and the left doesn't care about the unborn until they are born...those are ridiculous arguments. 

What I would like to know is why in a marriage where the couple has consensual sex does the wife have the right to abort the child with no say so from the husband?  Even outside a marriage if the sex is consensual...abortion should not be a form of birth control as there are many other ways to effectively do that.

I completely understand rape, incest, teens ruining their lives, etc.  I get it whether I fully agree with it or not.  I don't want to sit here and tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body, but at the same time why does the father have no rights, especially in a marriage with consensual sex situation?  At some point even if you're going to say the embryo/fetus/whatever doesn't have rights yet, certainly the father does assuming consensual marital sex, right?  Or is that considered a man trying to tell a woman what to do?

I don't think abortion should be illegal, but I also don't think the rights of all of those involved are being protected either.

mitchejw
 Rep: 109 

Re: US Politics Thread

mitchejw wrote:
buzzsaw wrote:

What I would like to know is why in a marriage where the couple has consensual sex does the wife have the right to abort the child with no say so from the husband?  Even outside a marriage if the sex is consensual...abortion should not be a form of birth control as there are many other ways to effectively do that.

My answer to this would first come with the caveat of: how often does this happen?

In general my response would be that we have far more fathers bailing on their responsibilities in this society than we do women. Women have far less of a choice. You have the same assholes trying to encourage mom to not have an abortion but then ridiculing the mother for using food stamps and whatever else.

There's two ways to look at it. Whose right matters? Mom or Dad

Or you can look at it as what is the cost to society if/when one of them bails? Who bails more often?

You cannot have a group of people who are pro-life and then also do not hold both parents accountable.

I completely understand rape, incest, teens ruining their lives, etc.  I get it whether I fully agree with it or not.  I don't want to sit here and tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body, but at the same time why does the father have no rights, especially in a marriage with consensual sex situation?  At some point even if you're going to say the embryo/fetus/whatever doesn't have rights yet, certainly the father does assuming consensual marital sex, right?  Or is that considered a man trying to tell a woman what to do?

I don't think abortion should be illegal, but I also don't think the rights of all of those involved are being protected either.

It's really a matter of how you frame it. I feel that government policy should be predicated on what it will cost the government first...if we all agree that the fetus is more important (than the mother's rights) then we need to agree as a society that we are all responsible for that fetus.

But we don't. And so I don't think you can have it both ways. It shouldn't matter how the child was conceived. Too many people in this country are pro-life until it costs them something. Then it's 'pull yourself up by your own boot straps.'

I don't feel it's appropriate to interject yourself into someone elses' life unless you're willing to foot the bill for the consequences. I would be pro-life if it meant that every time the government intervenes in someone's life and forces them to have a child; then the government is now partially responsible for that child....then I'd be pro-life.

mitchejw
 Rep: 109 

Re: US Politics Thread

mitchejw wrote:

It  seems as though we’re trending toward harsher penalties for people who have an abortion than for  those who commit rape. At least in parts of the country. Strange world.

Aussie
 Rep: 281 

Re: US Politics Thread

Aussie wrote:
buzzsaw wrote:

While I am philosophically pro-choice, the issue I always have with this debate is one nobody has ever been able to give a good answer to.  I don't want to debate the right cares about the unborn until they are born and the left doesn't care about the unborn until they are born...those are ridiculous arguments. 

What I would like to know is why in a marriage where the couple has consensual sex does the wife have the right to abort the child with no say so from the husband?  Even outside a marriage if the sex is consensual...abortion should not be a form of birth control as there are many other ways to effectively do that.

I completely understand rape, incest, teens ruining their lives, etc.  I get it whether I fully agree with it or not.  I don't want to sit here and tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body, but at the same time why does the father have no rights, especially in a marriage with consensual sex situation?  At some point even if you're going to say the embryo/fetus/whatever doesn't have rights yet, certainly the father does assuming consensual marital sex, right?  Or is that considered a man trying to tell a woman what to do?

I don't think abortion should be illegal, but I also don't think the rights of all of those involved are being protected either.

Ive often pondered this point too.

Why does the man not get some input also and have some type of rights?  The eventual baby is essentially half made by him and certainly he will be financially jointly responsible too.  I mean if the man feels he isn't going to be able to support the child and the mother adequately financially and emotionally etc and feels it's not best to bring a child into such a relationship, then why does he get no say?  I know I know,  if he feels like this then he should have used a condom in the first place but there are always exceptions (condom broke or she said she was on the pill but forgot to take it - or worse intentionally didn't take it). Then the reverse, what if the man wants to keep the child and raise it, he still doesn't get a say if the woman wants to abort it.  You see plenty of women that decide they suddenly want a child and will have one with someone regardless of whether the partner wants it or consents to it, but a man can't.  They can't even stop the wife aborting it even if they want to raise it themselves without any input (financial or otherwise) from the mother.

It's just odd that the man essentially has no right in what happens to his unborn child.  I dare say in today's "women's rights" environment if the situation was reversed I'm damn sure there would be hysterical protests about changing this.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB