[Abortion][REVISED POLL] If you had the power...

[Greater Gilead]

That is because they don't follow the teaching. It is still the result of the woman's choices.

That's a failure of the policy, you seem to have a real hate-boner for women here.
Everything is there fault right?

I do not hate women. The father of an unwanted baby is at fault too, but he doesn't figure into the abortion equation.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Lets make a comparison to explain this:
Did you want lung cancer? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (Smoking)
Did you want a baby? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that?

I love that babies are now lung cancer to you.
I'm sorry are you arguing FOR abortion now?

Babies are pretty cancerous, tbh.

[Genivaria]

I love that babies are now lung cancer to you.
I'm sorry are you arguing FOR abortion now?

Babies are pretty cancerous, tbh.

I work in a restaurant, the sound of screaming children when I'm trying to work is just evil.

[Greater Gilead]

If the baby is unwanted, why did the woman make the choices that lead to it?

Because sex is fun.

Duh.

The baby is the result of HER choices, obviously.

You keep saying that as if it means that women therefore should not be allowed to have abortions. But when I ask you if women lose the right to control their own bodies when they're pregnant you say no.

So which is it? Do women become slaves when they're pregnant because you want to force them to suffer the consequences of their choices? Or are they still free people, allowed to terminate their pregnancy if they so choose?

The baby is, although it is in their body, is a separate, living, human being. Killing another human being is MURDER.

[Omnonia]

...which are a severe contributor to unwanted teenage pregnancies. Oh the irony would be so, so sweet... if it weren't so depressingly heartbreaking.

Abstinence teaching is a contributor to teen pregnancies? That contradictory.

You... you really think so, right. That's your honest, straight-faced opinion. Not a joke.

Oh dear. Life must be really, really simple for you with such an incredibly naive and reductionist view to the world.

[Genivaria]

Because sex is fun.

Duh.

You keep saying that as if it means that women therefore should not be allowed to have abortions. But when I ask you if women lose the right to control their own bodies when they're pregnant you say no.

So which is it? Do women become slaves when they're pregnant because you want to force them to suffer the consequences of their choices? Or are they still free people, allowed to terminate their pregnancy if they so choose?

The baby is, although it is in their body, is a separate, living, human being. Killing another human being is MURDER.

A fetus is by no means at all separate from the mother, to assert otherwise makes you look silly.
And if it IS separate then it can live on its own.

[Esternial]

Sometimes you get something you don't want.

Like us showing you your faults in reasoning, unless you deliberately make these faulty arguments because you want us to do so. After all, this is the result of YOUR choices, obviously.

Lets make a comparison to explain this:
Did you want lung cancer? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (Smoking)
Did you want a baby? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that?

Did you want lung cancer? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (working in a coal mine)
Did you want to get electricuted? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (working on power lines)
Did you want to make errors in reasoning? No...or maybe you do. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (making shitty comparisons)

Everybody does things that they know carry some risk for a variety of reasons. Just because you think one reason is worth it and another isn't doesn't make it so. You're too hung up on your own personal conviction of "your reap what you sow" that you're not even bothering to properly think about the subject with such moral and legal complexity. Maybe first try to understand that your personal conviction is NOT LAW and not everyone is you. THEN, use some decent arguments to argue your position or I'm going to stop replying.

I'm a P2TM Mentor, not a debating mentor.

[Greater Gilead]

Lets make a comparison to explain this:
Did you want lung cancer? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that? (Smoking)
Did you want a baby? No. Then why did you make the choices that lead to that?

I love that babies are now lung cancer to you.
I'm sorry are you arguing FOR abortion now?

Lung cancer (from smoking, that is) is the result of your choices.
A baby is the result of your choices.
YOU are the one that causes the situation. Murdering someone because of YOUR choices makes no sense, they did nothing to deserve the death penalty.

[Genivaria]

I love that babies are now lung cancer to you.
I'm sorry are you arguing FOR abortion now?

Lung cancer (from smoking, that is) is the result of your choices.
A baby is the result of your choices.
YOU are the one that causes the situation. Murdering someone because of YOUR choices makes no sense, they did nothing to deserve the death penalty.

Trying to pull emotive words doesn't help you.
And yes actually you are allowed to fix the situation you've found yourself in.

[Ifreann]

Not really. People are only told to be abstinent and not taught how to have sex safely. So they have sex anyway and, surprise surprise, don't know how to do it safely. Bam, teen pregnancy.

That is because they don't follow the teaching. It is still the result of the woman's choices.

Teenagers don't always do what they're told.

---

Because sex is fun.

Duh.

You keep saying that as if it means that women therefore should not be allowed to have abortions. But when I ask you if women lose the right to control their own bodies when they're pregnant you say no.

So which is it? Do women become slaves when they're pregnant because you want to force them to suffer the consequences of their choices? Or are they still free people, allowed to terminate their pregnancy if they so choose?

The baby is, although it is in their body, is a separate, living, human being. Killing another human being is MURDER.

No, not necessarily. You'll recall that this conversation began with another poster talking about how he'd kill someone he found in his house, no questions asked, because maybe they might hurt him or someone else or take something he owns.

But this doesn't address my question at all. Are women slaves you can force to stay pregnant? Or are they free, permitted to choose abortion?

[Greater Gilead]

That is because they don't follow the teaching. It is still the result of the woman's choices.

Teenagers don't always do what they're told.

---

The baby is, although it is in their body, is a separate, living, human being. Killing another human being is MURDER.

No, not necessarily. You'll recall that this conversation began with another poster talking about how he'd kill someone he found in his house, no questions asked, because maybe they might hurt him or someone else or take something he owns.

But this doesn't address my question at all. Are women slaves you can force to stay pregnant? Or are they free, permitted to choose abortion?

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder. A woman should not be allowed to murder the baby because she doesn't want it anymore.

[Genivaria]

Teenagers don't always do what they're told.

---

No, not necessarily. You'll recall that this conversation began with another poster talking about how he'd kill someone he found in his house, no questions asked, because maybe they might hurt him or someone else or take something he owns.

But this doesn't address my question at all. Are women slaves you can force to stay pregnant? Or are they free, permitted to choose abortion?

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder. A woman should not be allowed to murder the baby because she doesn't want it anymore.

We kill humans all the time.
Like that ISIS fighter we bombed after he uploaded his position to social media.
Good times.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder.

False.

[Genivaria]

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder.

False.

The State of Texas agrees.
*flips switch*

[Ifreann]

Teenagers don't always do what they're told.

---

No, not necessarily. You'll recall that this conversation began with another poster talking about how he'd kill someone he found in his house, no questions asked, because maybe they might hurt him or someone else or take something he owns.

But this doesn't address my question at all. Are women slaves you can force to stay pregnant? Or are they free, permitted to choose abortion?

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder.

No it's not.

A woman should not be allowed to murder the baby because she doesn't want it anymore.

Why not? It's literally inside her body. There's no way to get it out that won't kill it. If she has the right to bodily sovereignty then she can remove it.

[Genivaria]

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder.

No it's not.

A woman should not be allowed to murder the baby because she doesn't want it anymore.

Why not? It's literally inside her body. There's no way to get it out that won't kill it. If she has the right to bodily sovereignty then she can remove it.

And if she DOESN'T have bodily sovereignty in Gilead's twisted view then she has been reduced to something less than a legal person.

[Greater Gilead]

Killing a human, no mater the age, is murder. A woman should not be allowed to murder the baby because she doesn't want it anymore.

We kill humans all the time.
Like that ISIS fighter we bombed after he uploaded his position to social media.
Good times.

That ISIS fighter was committing a crime, right? Is the baby commiting a crime? NO. Then why should it get killed?

[Greater Gilead]

No it's not.

Why not? It's literally inside her body. There's no way to get it out that won't kill it. If she has the right to bodily sovereignty then she can remove it.

And if she DOESN'T have bodily sovereignty in Gilead's twisted view then she has been reduced to something less than a legal person.

Look, I said before, I'm talking OOC.

[Genivaria]

We kill humans all the time.
Like that ISIS fighter we bombed after he uploaded his position to social media.
Good times.

That ISIS fighter was committing a crime, right? Is the baby commiting a crime? NO. Then why should it get killed?

Not a crime but it is infringing on her most basic rights as a person.
The woman is enforcing her rights.

The better question is why do you want to reduce women to brood mares?

[Genivaria]

And if she DOESN'T have bodily sovereignty in Gilead's twisted view then she has been reduced to something less than a legal person.

Look, I said before, I'm talking OOC.

No shit. Not an answer to my question.

[Greater Gilead]

That ISIS fighter was committing a crime, right? Is the baby commiting a crime? NO. Then why should it get killed?

Not a crime but it is infringing on her most basic rights as a person.
The woman is enforcing her rights.

The better question is why do you want to reduce women to brood mares?

I don't. The thing is we are (I think.) talking about pregnancies out of wedlock. The pregnancy is the woman's fault then, and why should the baby be killed because of her choices? I can find no exceptions to this logic.

[Alvecia]

Not a crime but it is infringing on her most basic rights as a person.
The woman is enforcing her rights.

The better question is why do you want to reduce women to brood mares?

I don't. The thing is we are (I think.) talking about pregnancies out of wedlock. The pregnancy is the woman's fault then, and why should the baby be killed because of her choices? I can find no exceptions to this logic.

Because bodily sovereignty trumps right to life.
Unless you're in favour of forced organ/blood donation and believe a you should just let rape happen if the only other option is to kill the rapist.

Edit: or any kind of assault which puts a life at risk really.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Not a crime but it is infringing on her most basic rights as a person.
The woman is enforcing her rights.

The better question is why do you want to reduce women to brood mares?

I don't. The thing is we are (I think.) talking about pregnancies out of wedlock. The pregnancy is the woman's fault then, and why should the baby be killed because of her choices? I can find no exceptions to this logic.

Have you ever stopped to think that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy?

[Greater Gilead]

I don't. The thing is we are (I think.) talking about pregnancies out of wedlock. The pregnancy is the woman's fault then, and why should the baby be killed because of her choices? I can find no exceptions to this logic.

Have you ever stopped to think that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy?

Anyone who wants sex without pregnancy is taking a risk, and when the gamble fails, it's your fault.

[Ifreann]

Not a crime but it is infringing on her most basic rights as a person.
The woman is enforcing her rights.

The better question is why do you want to reduce women to brood mares?

I don't. The thing is we are (I think.) talking about pregnancies out of wedlock. The pregnancy is the woman's fault then, and why should the baby be killed because of her choices? I can find no exceptions to this logic.

Because with our current medical technology there is no other course of action to remedy this unwanted pregnancy, and it is patently unjust to force someone to remain pregnant when they do not want to be.