Then that would be "pro-state choice to regulate and even ban post viability" per RvW section 11.
Hey,.. I'm just as pro-choice as you are on elective abortion, Mag.
We simply differ on what the consequences for some of the choices people make should be.
Oh, please share your opinions. I am very intrigued.
Oh, please share your opinions. I am very intrigued.
I can clear this up: he's "pro" the "right" of a fetus to occupy the body of an unwilling human host, and extract her to bodily resources without her consent, unless this will result in her imminent death. And except in cases of rape (gotta love the consistency, lol).
In other words, he's for "rights" that do not exist, and against rights that do exist, ie the right of a woman to control her own reproductive functions.
I think a lot of people fail to realize the circumstances in which this might be an issue. Most people's responses are "the both should have been more responsible" . . . which is a true point. However - a lot of these types of paternity-fights happen with MARRIED couples who fall apart during pregnancy due to one reason or another.
The nature of the relationship and the situation surrounding the pregnancy STRONGLY dictates what can and cannot happen.
If a couple is married and she's pregnant and *then* something happens - they split - he absolutely should have the right to demand she carry that baby if he 100% will take care of the child.
Also the man should not have a legal say because at that point he can not legally prove he is the biological father.
So in essence at present, a mother has sole choice over whether to abort...
That is never likely to change.
--
I've already stated my position regarding a father being able to rescind responsibility during gestation if he does not wish to be a father - however what about those fathers who do want the child?
A man who wants children should find a woman who wishes to bear his children and help him raise them, and then marry her. Until then, he simply should not get attached to children that might not be his.
So when a man wants to get a vasectomy, should his wife also have to approve of the procedure before he gets it?
Are you saying having a child is equal to severing a vein in the male genetalia?
I get your point, however I disagree with the "majority" it would seem. I believe that if it took two to create the child, it should take two to make the decision to fulfill or terminate the pregnancy. Women's body/right/etc is B.S. Just as much as Men's body/right/etc. They are BOTH required for the conception, they should BOTH be required for the DECISION.
In the current legal situation, your point makes pragmatic sense.
However, it could be construed as "be careful who you have sex with, especially unprotected sex, and be aware there may be consequences involving either unwanted pregnancy or abortion, because those decisions may be made without you but still affect you profoundly."
I can clear this up: he's "pro" the "right" of a fetus to occupy the body of an unwilling human host, and extract her to bodily resources without her consent, unless this will result in her imminent death. And except in cases of rape (gotta love the consistency, lol).
In other words, he's for "rights" that do not exist, and against rights that do exist, ie the right of a woman to control her own reproductive functions.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?