It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by yadda333
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by ErEhWoN
reply to post by lucid eyes
A zygote is not a child.
The GOP tried to introduce legislation that would protect that "life" even before conception
The second they outlaw killing sperm I'm screwed...as are 99.99999999999999999999% of all males
Exactly. What type of wording is involved and how far is the reach of such legislation?
I feel like a Libertarian or real Conservative by asking these questions. I feel like I should be yelling "smaller government.....you'll have my sperm when you scrape it off my cold dead..uh...keyboard? Paper towel?"
Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by captaintyinknots
In my eyes simply saying "Read the Constitution" is a bit disingenuous and misleading. I suggest that people read the Constitution, all of the amendments, and the SCOTUS decisions involving both of the above.
My sentiments at least.
~Heff
you take one mans words
why do you try so hard to justify the murder of children, then claim to hold the moral high ground?
such as,
Originally posted by ErEhWoN
reply to post by captaintyinknots
Wasn't trying to vilify abortion laws.
My point is, sometimes the SCOTUS has to make decisions the majority disagree with in order to protect the minority (womans right to vote, civil rights act, abortion, health care.....).
And those decisions supersede states rights. Or we would hae states that still allowed slavery.
Originally posted by lucid eyes
This would be good news if true, because it would mean the GOP finally has the balls to differentiate itself from the Dems. If you dont like it, vote for the Dems. Many people are getting disgusted of the Dems constant campaigning for Abortion and are looking for alternative, loving ways of relating to children.edit on 21-8-2012 by lucid eyes because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by roadgravel
Given men have basically making the decision of law direction for decades, isn't it time to let women decide this issue.
Supporters don't give a flying whatever about the kid, they just want it born to make them feel OK with some religious belief.
Originally posted by Charmed707
Originally posted by roadgravel
Given men have basically making the decision of law direction for decades, isn't it time to let women decide this issue.
Women are not any more a parent to their child than the father. If women have a 'right' to decide whether to let their child live or not, then men should not be obligated to support their children in any way i.e child support.
Supporters don't give a flying whatever about the kid, they just want it born to make them feel OK with some religious belief.
You don't have to be religious to be against the murder of an innocent being. You're basically making the false claim that people need religion to live morally.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
while it is in the womb, they most certainly ARE. Or can men now carry babies too?
Originally posted by Charmed707
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
while it is in the womb, they most certainly ARE. Or can men now carry babies too?
That's one of the dumbest notions I've ever heard. Location is not what determines parenthood. Genetics do. I wasn't any less my father's daughter in the womb than I am now. A child doesn't suddenly become both the child of the mother AND father as soon as it's born.
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by VaterOrlaag
Voters don't care about this crap at this moment. It's the economy and nothing more.
Beg to differ. This voter cares. And I know a whole mess of people who also care. Annoying when people tell me what I care about. Like either party is going to "fix" the economy.
Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by captaintyinknots
You don't have a point.
Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by captaintyinknots
You can't even explain how your point indicates your claim.
Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by captaintyinknots
I don't need to answer. Those aren't subjective questions. I've asked YOU to defend your point that carrying a child that depends on you for survival up to a certain point makes you more of a parent than the father.
TWO people gave life to that fetus.