A woman’s fundamental right of individual liberty, to her own life, grants her the authority to terminate her pregnancy if she wishes.

Financial obligations are totally different than physical rights. A woman has a right to do with their bodies whatever they want as it is a physical thing. It can sometimes be about life or death. Financial obligations have to do with money and as such, are bound by laws and not rights
Such laws were enacted when women had no choice, and made sense at that point in history. In the States that afford the right to abort the child, they no longer make for equality in the law and therefore must be abolished.

That being said, no law should be enacted that would prohibit a man to freely support a child should he wish to.
 
Such laws were enacted when women had no choice, and made sense at that point in history. In the States that afford the right to abort the child, they no longer make for equality in the law and therefore must be abolished.

That being said, no law should be enacted that would prohibit a man to freely support a child should he wish to.
I am not going to respond to any other of your posts on this subject. NOT INTERESTED in the topic.
 

A person’s fundamental right of individual liberty, to his or her own choices, grants the individual the authority to terminate one legged assholes from Wales if he or she wishes.​


Why? Because somebody says so.
 
No it isn't. A person's body has to do with his/her ability to survive. Economics does not affect one's ability to survive.

This is a ridiculous conversation.

End of story.
Thanks for telling us that you don't understand economics.
 

Forum List

Back
Top