i am. It just seems contradicting, the first senatnace compared to the last is all. Now i understand what you were saying was not to follow science per say, but if one wanted, thats where it would go.
How do you do that when there's a group that wants to take a woman's rights away? There isn't a middle ground there.
There already is. Women can't get an abortion past 24 weeks (with the exception that bringing the baby to birth would kill the baby or the mother, and such)
Well first, i think we need to get rid of these stigmas that people want to take a womans rights away. Yes there are male pigs out there who want to suppress women, but the bulk of anti abortionists are not against womens rights at all. Some are women them selves. They are against abortions and they see them as separate. So i think the first step in trying to get anywhere is get the negative labels out of the equation. But yeah the next would be trying to nail down the growth of the fertilized egg and where the majority feels life starts. As in most all things, there wont be a 100% consensus. But we can still find a majority consensus can we not?
It's not a man's business. How would you feel if the government tried to make a law saying you couldn't ejaculate unless you were conceiving a child? How would you feel if the government or let's say women tried to control your sperm?
For now Trying to control women there Not going to turn out good Only reason the new law gained any chance of coming to fruit is because of bunch of dudes decided they wanted to control women's bodies.
If you dictate the medical care that a woman can or can nor get, that is taking her rights away. Whether you it because of a fetus inside her or for whatever reason is irrelevant, IMO. It's dictating what she can or can not do with her body.
But, sperm are alive And you didn't answer You wouldn't be happy. You'd be against that wouldn't you?
To me this is semantics. This is like arguing a woman cant use birth control to kill her egg. Not the same as having an abortion to kill a fertilized egg. Again. Apples to oranges in my opinion. Sperm shouldn't be compared to a fetus. It should be compared to an unfertilized egg.
No. Its not medical care. Its not going to improve your health. Its a chosen medical procedure. Agaim you are comparing your unfertilized sperm to a fertilized fetus. Apples to oranges. A vasectomy is comparable to a woman having her tubes tied. Not an abortion….
To me abortion isnt medical care. Its not improving her health. Its a chosen medical procedure. Maybe semantics, but one is aimed at improving the health. The other is not.
Care is also used for maintaining health, not just improving it. An abortion would help a woman to maintain her current level of health.
preventative in what way? What of your health will deteriorate if you don't have a vasectomy or what health of a woman's deteriorates if she doesn't have an abortion?