Pro Life or Pro Choice?

If I had died, then obviously I would forfeit the "right to life". However, we're not given a "right" to live in the first place. It's a privilege to live because a "right" implies that everyone is guaranteed life. However, miscarriages, and complications in birth don't allow all human things to live (Infant Mortality being an example).

 

We aren't attacking you. We're using logic to outwit your logic as to why you think if someone gets sick they're unfit to live

 

Again, I don't know as much as you do about this, but isn't the flu an opportunistic virus. So with that said, having a better immune system would prevent that? don't kill me

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

I don't remember saying you? "outwit" you're a prime example of why Platonic was right.

 

Explain. You said "the Catholic " so I assumed me

 

Lol, it would, but the immune system is weaker in children and seniors, and those who are malnourished, etc.

Although it has been shown that vaccinations have been weakening our immune systems as a species, and creating tolerance in pathogens.

 

have i please you, mighty debate man

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

You know what they say about assuming.

 

On the contrary, it's a right to life because people (or sicknesses) aren't 'allowed' to take it away from you. In fact, any such action will be resisted (hence police, and modern medicine, and all these other wonderful things.)

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

Lol sure xD.

 

So the female doesn't want the child but since the male does you're going to make the female go through all the pain and labour of childbirth? If both parties have an equal say then how can the female win if the male chooses to keep it?

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

The idea behind "a right to live" is a human construct, nature doesn't care about your "right to live" or if you're human, if nature doesn't see you fit, then there's no need for it to keep you alive.

 

If two people have sex and they end up having a child it does not matter whether its the farther or the mother that wants to keep it the baby the male and female have equal says in the matter. If one disagrees with the other then bad luck.

However if the woman or man was forced to have sex, I believe it is the victims option to keep the child or not.

 

I'm not saying they shouldn't both have equal say, but how is a choice determined if both disagree?

 

If it's not their responsibility to "create" a child for me, then it's equally not my responsibility to raise that child, correct?

It's just as ok for a man to walk away without consideration as it is a woman to abort a future human being without considering the biological father, by this logic.

In my opinion this ideology is just as sexist as the opposite viewpoint.

A biological mother, and father have equal rights over the child and a women should consider the opinions of the biological father.

 

It can be determined by the one that wants to keep the child can and the other can do as they please when all is done.

 

Im on my phone so I can't quote specific parts...

I agree, the right to live is a human construct, and as we are humans, it would make sense that it exists, no?

I'm not sure what your point is... Yes dying is a thing that happens. It can and will happen to literally everyone.

 

I'm pro-choice for numerous reasons

1.) The fetus is not technically alive until brain function starts
2.) The already alive mother is more important than the not yet alive fetus
3.) Someone who is not yet ready to handle the responsibility of being a parent shouldn't be a parent

 

But it's legal to walk away from that. And as @LaminateDrake11 said, when both disagree why is the man's word more important in the disagreement? Why is what the man wishes more important than what the woman wishes, especially in matters concerning her own body?

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 11, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 11, 2016 ---

If I was the "little baby in the womb" I wouldn't have a thought process and would not care if I was aborted. What currently exists has always existed and what never came to be was never going to. Also, it is a bit sexist for you to assume I'll be lonely without a child and could only find comfort in a sexual partner. You can have family and friends too you know. A child and/or sexual partner isn't required for a full and happy life.

 

Couldn't have said it better lol

 

pro-choice it really doesn't effect you or me

 

Legality isn't that simple, a male who walks away is still responsible financially or is held criminally liable.

I'm not arguing that a man's word is more important, I'm arguing that it should be equal in this decision. A biological father should have equal say over the future of the organism that will become a human being. Males don't just contribute DNA, in an ideal situation they play an equal part of the child's life and do equal work; so why would anyone argue that his opinion in the beginning matters naught?

A man should not have final say in this matter just like a woman should not completely discount his opinion when it comes to an abortion of a child that is biologically his.

 

best post on these forums

 

tag urself im the feminist