Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
well, considering there's probably 100 million women at a sexually active age, who probably have sex at least once a week, that's 5 billion sexual acts here in the usa for them in a year....a million unwanted pregnancies a year seems small in comparison....seems like they are being precautious for the most part.... i would like to see it as NIL, and this is what we should be focusing on....this doesn't take the government though.
care
And after all, the unintended consequences of living in a world where human life is now seen as no more valuable than a bacterium's is SOOO much better than the unintended consequence of making people be more circumspect in their behavioral choices. After all, if women had to face the prospect of giving birth to Dev's child, they might decide to forego[sic] happy hour and find a guy who's hot when they aren't falling down and puking. We can't have that.
what SEEMS small to your opinion matters not. All those women HAVE the power to choose to have sex or not and the authority to CHOOSE to have sex responsibly or not. That is what your bra burning ancestors wanted; not some blank check baby killing machine.
for the most part my ass. And yes, the killing in the old west didn't end without the government and neither will the cycle of irresponsibility that provides us with dead feti every year.
second: genetic material is not a human being. it may be looked at as potential human life, but...
congrats, you just lost the genetically distinct human debate. a cup full of semen is not a human. THAT is "material". a fertilized zygote is not "material". In relation to pointing out how pro-life is the ORIGINAL Pro-choice and your callous verbage, you'd lose your ass.
..not that the supreme court isnt already being primed anyway.
as with the men having sex with them, i agree!
you need to check in at the nurses' station. the meds are ready.
the men are already wearing condoms if the woman puts her foot down. THIS is the choice you get. Not the choice to flush the human evidence of irresponsibility.
you think it's flushed, that's not what i have read, at least not for all of them that abort....many go on to have problems dealing with their own choices.
methods of disposal do not validate the irresponsibility that prompts the occasion. As well they should. Killing a human just because one was too horny for dick to be responsible about their behaviour SHOULD illicit a negative response. Again, in this day and age with every option at ones fingertips, from pills to rubbers to morning after pill, there is simply no excuse for abortions.
and insisting that women be as marginally responsible as they DAMN WELL EXPECT a man to be in order to avoid child support is not a matter of keeping you down... equality is a bitch.
Are you supporting an unwanted child outside of marriage Shogun?
No, he equates the live ones with cable bills, remember?Are you supporting an unwanted child outside of marriage Shogun?
adoptive parents would. And thats such a lame excuse anyway. As if we take orphans out back and kill them becuase they are more expensive than abortions.
No, he equates the live ones with cable bills, remember?
Such a predictable idiot.dont blame me if THAT is exactly the kind of threat you use in order to make a man wear a condom. If you had any self respect you wouldn't even need to factor in a mans motivation to use a condom since such SHOULD be your own standard choice. But, as it is.. not too much self esteem at the truck stop, eh ravier?
the question was whether you have gotten a woman pregnant, and are being forced to pay child support for such child? i'm just trying to understand your position better on a more personal level....but truly, it is NONE of my business, i was just thinking out loud in my wondering!
appealing to emotion will change any facts. I am not arguing that it would not be effective on some levels. What I am arguing is for sanity and reason.
here we go: choices are individual. Legislating personal choice(s )is what you desire of the government? I am not excuses for abortion. People are not data---they make poor choices. I am not one who is angry or worse and who thinks people N-E-E-D to suffer for their every mistake in judgment. The options to prevent pregnancy are few or many, but so what? I am still puzzled by the concern for what other people do and do not do that does not affect the perennially angry.
Genetics avoids nothing. You do not yet know what genetics is going to say and when it has it's say we will reevaluate things. Then the law of unintended consequences will kick in. I ask:
What is death? What is life? Is death the end of life and why?
think!
butchered? I guess we butcher dead animals all the time. Does that bother you? The term 'butcher' has many connotations and I choose to ignore many. To butcher is but to commit an action. What one is butchering is another question altogether.
The arguments about potential human life that you make are interesting. So you are arguing about the rights of a potential life?
thank you for the clarification
personal responsibility starts at home. It starts with honesty, integrity and openness. personal responsibility would be to admit things one hides behind words with.
Pregnancy, whether you like it or not, whether you legalize abortion or not, is ALWAYS the woman's responsibility ultimately.
We're the ones who carry the baby, there's just no way around it.
If everyone agrees that we need to get the government out of our hair, why are so many so-called conservatives willing to let the goverment assume control over women's wombs?
Do you guys just hate women, or is just that you think that women who have sex need to be punished?
