Here’s Tom saying that married heterosexual couples have to STOP HAVING SEX COMPLTELY so that he can say what women do with their bodies.I'm also Pro-Choice.
As long as we understand that Choice includes refraining from potentially fertile sex.
It’s not about the abortion, it’s about controlling sexuality.
He says, proclaiming that a 2-cell entity has the rights of a person.Once two people have Chosen differently, they aren't the only ones involved any more.
Why? Why?
Why do you name a 2 cell entity, or a 64 cell entity to have the right to another person’s body.
And the morality play here… “They chose,” Oh, those shameful women. Wanting to have sex and not be parents.
But you know, here is the kicker, Tom. Even if you choose to drive drunk, and hit a car and injure the driver such that she needs a kidney, and you have one that matches, Even if you chose to get behind the wheel, there are laws - constitutional rights - that prevent anyone from forcing you to donate your kidney, even if that women will die without you.There is a 100% safe, effective, and free form of birth control. Pregnancy is always the result of Choice.
Tom
Because… in America you have an inalienable right to say what happens to your body, even if someone dies due to your choice.
Yet you think women don’t have this right that you have.
We’re not really human. Are we. Just sex-vessels, right?
You can say “no” to a blood donation needed by someone you caused to need blood. But as soon as she has sex, she doesn’t get the same rights as you.
You can say “no” to an eye donation if you poke out someone else’s, but women who have sex don’t have the bodily autonomy that you get.
Women who have sex are your property, right? Even if they didn’t even have sex with YOU, you still want to own their bodies, and stand on their necks, and claim they don’t get the same rights as you have.
The male is not a parent, Tom. No one is a parent that early.The way things are now(RvW) the male parent has no say.
The female parent could decide:
"I just wanted the sex. Not the baby. It's a clump of cells. Kill it."
And the male parent has no say.
I’m not a mother of 5. I’m a mother of 2. And the three pregnancies that didn’t take - they were pregnancies that didn’t take.
And the male does not get to say that another human has to sacrifice their body to his wishes.
No one, in any case, anywhere in America, is forced to use their body or organs or blood against their will; even if another person needs it, even if they are the reason another person needs it. But you want to take that from women - who have sex.
How come you’re not going after all the violent criminals in prison to forcibly remove their organs if it benefits one of their victims? They choose to commit a crime; aren’t you arguing that they should be forced to donate blood, liver slices, marrow, skin grafts, eyes, lungs whenever needed?
How come you “pro-lifers” never argue for that?
You just have a deep disrespect for women who have sex.
Sure is. You should work on that. I suggest changing child welfare laws so that women don’t need to ask for it.Or:
"My baby is a gift from God. I want to be a mother. Everyone from the taxpayers to the father owes me 18 years of income."
And the male parent has no say.
It's pretty blatant gender discrimination.
Tom
But your barbaric idea that women lose their rights when they have sex and become vessels for YOU to insist that they should be forced to submit to another person’s use of their body against their will is, and has always been, unjust.
Last edited: