Abortion

[The Hammer]

. Look up the Romanian orphans sometime.

I wish I hadn't.

 

[Pawpatrol]

And you can pretend they are what ever your agenda of the day says.

Doesn't change what they are

Indeed — they're women and they always will be. No amount of surgeries and therapies and medications will change that.

Having a tattoo?

That's also forbidden.....

and if your daughter saucily pulls up her burqa sleeve and shows a bit of wrist...what do you do? Beat her?

What I'd do depends on whether it was on purpose or not.

 

[SkepticThinker]

A baby isnt a woman's body. pro choice propaganda

An embryo/fetus is attached to the woman's body and feeds off her body and uses her body to develop and grow.

The only one peddling propaganda here is you.

 

[Ignatius A]

An embryo/fetus is attached to the woman's body and feeds off her body and uses her body to develop and grow.

The only one peddling propaganda here is you.

Still not her body

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nothing. It's perfect. (Consider that)

Cool. Then why so upset about seeing one?

Everything except face and hands.

Just women ... or men, too?

And why?

Also, you do know that your religion is for YOU and other people who don't follow it are going to do what they prefer, right?

Us women are forbidden to look at certain parts of other women' bodies (such as their thighs, for example). It's for dignity, purity and protection.

That's one of the silliest things I've heard in a while. How does viewing a human thigh violate anyone's "dignity, purity and protection?" What does that even mean? Are women allowed to look at their own thighs?

And why would I like to see another woman's thighs, belly or breasts?

For a myriad reasons that would be your own business and nobody else's.

I have no need for that and I'd rather not.

Good for you. But you do realize other people don't share your religious beliefs, right?

And I know they dress the way they do to look good — but they don't.

Well, that's certainly your opinion.
I would say they disagree with you and probably don't care what you think about how they look. I sure don't.

They look ugly. Why do they do that to themselves?

They look ugly to you.

But then again, you think women need to cover their entire bodies and live in some weird bubble of shame. So, there's that.

You think it's because "they're free", but it's not. It's because society told them "be pretty, be sexy, be cute. You'll be well received."

Well, that's certainly ironic here then, isn't it? Given that you want to live in a society that tells women to cover every bit of themselves save for their face and hands. Nothing free about that. In fact, that's one of the most oppressive things I've heard in a long time.

I've already answered that on the previous page.

Not really, no. Hence the reason I asked.
You still haven't really shown how any of this affects you personally, aside from violating your personal tastes and opinions. Also, you've not shown how any of this harms your children in any way.

Of course. That's the number one, no doubt.

Good. Then go worry about your own kids and leave others to raise theirs.

I wrote my sons might be influenced by the half naked women without any sense of dignity etc. and you read that as "they might rape someone"? That's not the issue with women's dress.

What I said was, "Teach your sons about consent and you won't have anything to worry about. Teach your sons that just because someone is walking alone in a dark alley doesn't mean it's okay to attack them."


Now, perhaps you can explain HOW your son "might be influenced" by seeing parts of another human being's body. What does that mean?

So what's the "issue with women's dress" then, exactly? Do tell. And please explain how other peoples' clothing negatively impacts your life.

I don't think that's the topic... But as for me, I'd like to live in a moral society.

It is the topic.

Me too. I find many of the views you've expressed here to me, to be misogynistic and immoral.

By the way, how do you determine what's moral and what's immoral? You make a lot of declarative statements of morality that don't make much sense to me.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Still not her body

It absolutely is part of her body. Attached to her body. Feeds off her body. Uses her body to develop and grow.

 

[SkepticThinker]

There are no children until they come together and fertilization/conception happens.

A blastocyst forms in a pregnancy, about five to six days after a sperm fertilizes an egg.

Do you think a man that masturbates is killing children? How many have you killed?

Every sperm is sacred ...

 

[SkepticThinker]

Indeed — they're women and they always will be. No amount of surgeries and therapies and medications will change that.

That's also forbidden.....

What I'd do depends on whether it was on purpose or not.

What if she, just wanted to?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well you thought wrong.

On what point?

My point was to the post of not having sex is killing children.
There are no children(no chance for children) until they come together and fertilization/conception happens.
So no children are being killed by not having sex.

Sure... but a reasonable basis for this position also implies that no children are killed when a blastocyst, say, is aborted either.

How are you defining a "child" so that an unfertilized egg doesn't clear the bar but a zygote does? In both cases, we're talking about something that's alive, human and unique but isn't much else.

 

[We Never Know]

On what point?

The point where you tried to tell me what I think.
You were wrong.

Sure... but a reasonable basis for this position also implies that no children are killed when a blastocyst, say, is aborted either.

How are you defining a "child" so that an unfertilized egg doesn't clear the bar but a zygote does? In both cases, we're talking about something that's alive, human and unique but isn't much else.

Again...
"My point was to the post of not having sex is killing children.
There are no children(no chance for children) until they come together and fertilization/conception happens.
So no children are being killed by not having sex"


I could have changed 'children' to cells, blastocyst, a fertilized egg, an embryo, etc.... But the post I responded to used 'children' so I used 'children'. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The point where you tried to tell me what I think.
You were wrong.

I'm not telling you what you think.

I pointed out the rational implication of your position, but I never made the argument that you're being rational.

Again...
"My point was to the post of not having sex is killing children.
There are no children(no chance for children) until they come together and fertilization/conception happens.
So no children are being killed by not having sex"


I could have changed 'children' to cells, blastocyst, a fertilized egg, an embryo, etc.... But the post I responded to used 'children' so I used 'children'. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?

Sounds like you missed my point.

 

[crossfire]

Still not her body

Her body is not the fetus's body.

 

[We Never Know]

I'm not telling you what you think.

You did.

You apparently think one of them is a child;

You were wrong. Move along.

I pointed out the rational implication of your position, but I never made the argument that you're being rational.


Sounds like you missed my point.
.

You don't have a point. Why? See below.

How are you defining a "child" so that an unfertilized egg doesn't clear the bar but a zygote does? In both cases, we're talking about something that's alive, human and unique but isn't much else.

Because I am not defining or trying to define what a child is.

I used 'children' to address the other posters post that used 'children'.

If they had used embryo, I would have used embryo
If they had used blastocyst, I would have used blastocyst.
If they used fertilized egg, I would have used fertilized egg.
They used children, I used children.

None of the above exist until the egg is fertilized by the sperm. So not having sex isn't killing any of them.

 

[crossfire]

Pregnant women usually don't like to be called pregnant people. It sounds ridiculous

Would you call the 10 year old girl who was raped and got pregnant a "pregnant woman?" She was a pregnant person. Why do you say pregnant people sounds ridiculous? Pregnant people don't give up their personhood (or personal rights) while they are pregnant, although some seem to be hell-bent to take their personal rights away and make pregnancy and childbirth third-world dangerous again.

 

[We Never Know]

An embryo/fetus is attached to the woman's body and feeds off her body and uses her body to develop and grow.

The only one peddling propaganda here is you.

Why do many states have laws about drug or alcohol use by women while pregnant?
Its her body so she can do drugs and drink if she wants right?
So what if it leads to a miscarriage or death of the fetus, it has no rights and isn't a baby anyway right?

 

[We Never Know]

Would you call the 10 year old girl who was raped and got pregnant a "pregnant woman?" She was a pregnant person. Why do you say pregnant people sounds ridiculous? Pregnant people don't give up their personhood (or personal rights) while they are pregnant, although some seem to be hell-bent to take their personal rights away and make pregnancy and childbirth third-world dangerous again.

She was a pregnant girl(young female, adolescent female).

 

[SkepticThinker]

Why do many stayes have laws about drug or alcohol use by women while pregnant?
Its her body so she can do drugs and drink if she wants right?
So what if it leads to a miscarriage or death of the fetus, it has no rights and isn't a baby anyway right?

What are you going on about?

Those aren't any laws that I'm aware of.

 

[crossfire]

Why do many stayes have laws about drug or alcohol use by women while pregnant?
Its her body so she can do drugs and drink if she wants right?
So what if it leads to a miscarriage or death of the fetus, it has no rights and isn't a baby anyway right?

The American Medical Association opposes such laws, as it deters pregnant people from getting help to get off drugs.

Don’t criminalize pregnant patients with substance-use disorders

An Ohio mom was prosecuted after disclosing her illicit drug use upon giving birth. Learn why an appeals court was right to overturn her conviction.

www.ama-assn.org

 

[crossfire]

She was a pregnant girl(young female, adolescent female).

This demonstrates that not all pregnant people are pregnant women.

 

[We Never Know]

What are you going on about?

Those aren't any laws that I'm aware of.

Make yourself aware.
Google "how many states have laws about a drug or alcohol abuse while pregnant"