• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In re a Women's Rights

A well regulated health care, being necessary to the security of a women's right to choose, the right to contraception and abortion shall not be infringed.

According to your own reasoning, this would allow for common sense abortion control laws.
 
According to your own reasoning, this would allow for common sense abortion control laws.
What would such laws look like? Where is the line of "common sense?"
 
Ah....good. Someone that advocates for what the leftists should have been working on for the last 40 years. Well...better late than never...get to stepping. All you have to do is get it past congress and 3/4s of the states.
 
According to your own reasoning, this would allow for common sense abortion control laws.
Common sense? Civil Rights are never allowed in nations such as Russia, China, N. Korea and other nations that are not of the people, by the people, for the people. Today we are facing another attack by autocrats, such as many of the Republican Governors and leaders in RED State Legislatures.
 
What would such laws look like? Where is the line of "common sense?"

Common sense abortion control would mimic common sense gun control, which is something all progressives support.
 
Common sense abortion control would mimic common sense gun control, which is something all progressives support.
Don't deflect with meaningless double talk or partisan nonsense. What would be "common sense" abortion laws.
Or men's for that matter.
Possibly. But when the issue involves abortion, it's solely a matter of women's health.
 
Doesn’t the sperm donor have rights too?
 
A well regulated health care, being necessary to the security of a women's right to choose, the right to contraception and abortion shall not be infringed.
Yep. That's what we thought, too. Then the Republicans, being led by the nose by the Religious right crusaders said, "Hold my beer".
 
Unfortunately, there are those who do not care about women's health, choices, or rights.

Those people think the most important inanimate objects are those the real Second Amendment allows them to carry.
 
Doesn’t the sperm donor have rights too?
Is the donor the one getting pregnant? What rights does he not have exactly?
 
Is the donor the one getting pregnant? What rights does he not have exactly?
The sperm donor is on the hook for supporting the child even if he didn’t want one. Even if she said atbthe time she didn’t want one either. His financial future is subject to her decision making and her’s alone.
 
The sperm donor is on the hook for supporting the child even if he didn’t want one. Even if she said atbthe time she didn’t want one either. His financial future is subject to her decision making and her’s alone.
That occurs after birth and is an issue of child rearing. The abortion issue is about child bearing.
 
Common sense abortion control would mimic common sense gun control, which is something all progressives support.
That's still vague. Specify what such a law would look like!
 
That occurs after birth and is an issue of child rearing. The abortion issue is about child bearing.
The decision to keep the child happens before birth and the male has no say in it. You asked what right if his isn’t respected and there it is. His right to not have a child.
 
The decision to keep the child happens before birth and the male has no say in it. You asked what right if his isn’t respected and there it is. His right to not have a child.
As I've said before, when he gets pregnant, then he'll have a say.
 
As I've said before, when he gets pregnant, then he'll have a say.
That’s a childish dodge. He doesn’t have to get pregnant to have an interest in the outcome.

And btw I am very much pro choice. But a position that says the man get’s no say in the decision but must bear the responsibility of that decision is simply wrong.
 
That’s a childish dodge. He doesn’t have to get pregnant to have an interest in the outcome.
If he's not pregnant, he has no say, plain and simple. One one gets to dictate the health or personal decisions of another.
 
Back
Top Bottom