If you're supporting politicians or groups who actively support restricting a woman's access to choose then you are absolutely supporting restrictions on women's rights to choose.
Any reason why you don't have kids? I mean if your concern is maintaining the future of women (and hopefully men too) wouldn't having or adopting kids be a positive and easiest way to achieve that?
how many fucking times does someone have to say they would never vote for restricting abortions before it sinks in??? Does that mean the ramifications of abortion and when a fetus should be considered its own life, cant be discussed?? Complete bullshit..
There is no discussion about births. Everybody agrees that planned and wanted births are a necessity and joyous occasion. The ramifications of abortion are fully understood. That some are fighting in the face of those proven facts is disgraceful. Nobody is trying to prevent or stop the conversation. Being angry that men are actively trying to remove a woman's right to her own body is not the same as trying to restrict speech.
my wife and i married wanting kids. complex question but we decided not to for several reasons. One being, i still think i may need to take over my sisters youngest kids if she doesn't get her shit together, so there is a potential to have to be a parent to my niece and nephew. Another reason is we are seeing the devolvement of society and i honestly have concerns of civil war, of which trying to care for a toddler could be extremely difficult. but mostly, we decided we don't want our own and will decide to adopt, if/ when we are confident we can provide the child all the attention, care and education we believe a child deserves by their parent. We believe being a parent should be considered of the highest responsibility there is in life and we dont minimize it to just feel like ww. Sn be casual and get pregnant and then abort if we decide parenting isn't for us. We are responsible and take the necessary precautions to not be put im such a position. The responsibility of such a choice has been minimized by open abortions and not letting women know how we feel about it all. For the women to not want to listen, is just as fucked up as it is for a man trying to force a decision on women.
Show me where i ever said I'm trying to restrict their right? Until then this post is irrelevant. I sgree they aren't the same. However haw is attempting to restrict the conversation. She even said bow a out men nit discuss it and mind our own business.. the foundation of your argument doesn't exist. Try again.
first this is bullshit. Not all republicans are for restricting abortions. Second i e stated many times im now an independent because i dont care for some of what the republican goo has turned into. I vote for who i feel the best candidate is for the position. Period. Im not a single issue voter. But you can project this loose tie all you want. Ive heard it. “i vote to have people kill certain people.” Just such complete bullshit its not even worth addressing any further. by this logic i can say anyone for abortion is not for families and believes in the devolvement of the family household. I can say anyone for abortion is for selective process. i can say, whats next? Kill any baby we think wont reach a certain iq? these are all extreme responses i dont provide because im trying to be logical about the ramification of abortion and i try to keep the discussion open regarding when a fetus should be considered a life. The fact that a certain woman is against men discussing that and you support that restriction is just as sad as those who want to restrict abortions. Spin it all you want. Cant deny one restriction whole pushing for another. Its an inconsistent double standard. Then you top it off with such aggression as telling people to go fuck yourself and your defense of this behavior is laughable… Again. Rr7 and i were both discussing. Per her, were both villains and should mind our own business. Just complete bullshit. And honestly, i could see people turning the other way in spite when such a double standard is so prevalent.
No one was discussing rape or child pregnancies or anything, so crands’ “fuck yourself” comment was irrelevant… other than to toss out a passive aggressive jab. Her comment was not needed because no one was going there. But she still cant handle the conversation The dismissal of this in an attempt to defend her, is telling from some of you…. Not one of you told her no one is refuting that and thats not what was being discussed… because… bias.
Lol, no, it's really not. Why should a woman have to listen to you about anything having to do with her body? You say you don't want to control what a woman can do, but you post like you most certainly want to, you just don't want to make it a law.
because an intelliegent woman would understand that it requires a man to make a child and maintain the human race. So maybe we have an opinion, I can see the denial of listening to thst opinion prior to making a decision pushing some men to say fuck it. You wont even listen to me becore making oyyr decision? Then im nit gonna respect your decision Respect goes both ways. Period. Its not conditional. Women want men to respect their decision? Then the mature thing would be for the women to respect men enough to listen to them before making their decision. as a man, i expect such respect from women and in return i will always respect their decision. So yeah it really is..
The Supreme Court has no standing nor any authority to either create or erase a Constitutional right. The Left's Complete Ignorance of the basic structure, balance, limitations, and the absolute separation of powers that America's government consists of, is why they can always be instantly mobilized by the Deep State to create division, unrest and panic among the masses.
Hey! A male created this thread! He should shut the fuck up aNd mind his own business!!! I only want to hear from men who agree with me!!!!! the takes here are… interesting to say the least.
Jesus, your inability to ignore someone's throw away comment not directed at you and causing this sort of meltdown is amusing.
jesus the inability of someone else to ignore a respectable conversation without blurting out for people to go fuck themselves as a passive aggressive jab, is amusing. Your one sided view of it is hilarious. if it was the first time? Easy to dismiss, but this is a consistent pattern. You just dont acknowledge it because.. you know… bias.
This is a bit of a side comment, but it seems like a good time to point out that the human race is NOT in danger of extinction, at least not from excessive abortions. In fact the current danger is overpopulation. barfo
I typically stay out of abortion discussions because most people who debate the issue are totally entrenched on one side or the other and no amount of discussion is going to change those views. The salient issue that usually gets shoved aside in these debates is the legal basis that the Court relied on in deciding Roe v. Wade. The right to privacy was a very tenuous basis for the Court to hang the decision on. The presumptive right of a person to make a private medical decision in consultation with a doctor certainly has limits. We don't allow those decisions to include suicide outside of the limits imposed by reasonable state statutes. We don't allow the doctor to prescribe medications and treatments outside of those allowed under federal and state statutes. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a staunch pro-choice advocate, but she was not a fan of Roe v. Wade. She believed that the privacy underpinnings of the decision were too open to future legal challenges...as is being played out now. She thought that the better constitutional ground was under the equal protection provisions of the 14th Amendment. She felt that women could not have equality with men unless they were free to make decisions regarding reproductive health. Regardless of views on abortion, I would hope that we favor a Supreme Court that makes legal decisions on firm constitutional bases. I'm afraid that the Court, as currently constructed, will rule to weaken or do away with Roe v. Wade. That will do significant harm to our society by pushing the notion that the Court is just another political institution and will likely lead to liberal elements in the Democratic Party pushing for court packing, which will itself push the perception of the Court being just another bunch of political hacks. The optimal outcome, in my estimation, would be for the Court to redecide the issue along the lines that Ginsburg outlined. I doubt that will happen.
