- Moderator
- #321
You are dodging the issue.In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.
That would be a false equivalency. So in effect a woman carring a child with such severe defects it will die at birth would have carry it to term knowing it is dead? That is cold.
Biology fail.
How can it be dying if it is already dead?
In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.In this particular situation shoul she be forcrd to carry it to term by the law?Should a woman be forced to carry it to term?
She shouldn't be forced to do anything.
However, if she violates a child's rights AT ANY AGE. . . She should be held accountable for that.
The answer is still the same.
Furthermore, i reject the idea that Denying women the right or ability to pay Planned Parenthood to murder their child is tantamount to "forcing a woman to carry to term."
It's like trying to claim that laws against child molestation are only an attempt to force child rapists into celibacy.
That would be a false equivalency. So in effect a woman carring a child with such severe defects it will die at birth would have carry it to term knowing it is dead? That is cold.
Biology fail.
How can it be dying if it is already dead?