- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 67,371
- Reaction score
- 30,561
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
You said that you couldn't take a life without due process. That would be due process for the person killed, not the person who killed them. And soldiers are paid to kill people. Doesn't matter "how often" that is done, especially not when your claim, again, was that you can't do that without due process. And yes, soldiers are granted power to kill them all in certain situations. Orders are not due process.You can only claim self-defense if charged with a crime - it’s rather useless otherwise and includes (requires?) due process. Soldiers (or police officers) are not “paid all the time” to take lives without orders (or self-defense reasons) to do so. Soldiers (or police officers) are not granted the power to ‘kill them all and let God sort them out’.
BTW, the father wanting nothing to do with the child can still be ordered by the state to pay 18 years (or more) of child support - earning those funds requires sacrifice of his time and other resources (bodily effort).
After birth. The father is not required to give any part of their actual body. To put their health or life at risk for the child. Forcing women to remain pregnant does do that, forces them to give another life, their bodily resources directly to the entity. Your described situation is not that. Only an identified father has to pay for the child and how he chooses to do so would come out of the same way he would do so for his own monetary needs.