#Sexstrike

Also, I don't think you support a "woman's right to choose"....

Your like to play dumb mind games so I  I will keep repeating.

Read My Lips/Text Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily  business unless they give you there consent to stick your snotty nose in their bodily business. 

Do you understand the words/text coming out of my mouth/finger tips?

Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily

Read My Lips/Text Keep you Friggin Nose Out of pregnants womens bodily  business unless they give you there consent to stick your snotty nose in their bodily business.  

Do you understand the words/text coming out of my mouth/finger tips?

So; here’s the problem. They’re not really different things in any meaningful context.

In both cases a “life” is being ended by the action or inaction of another. Simply repeatedly processing that they are different things doesn’t make it

true.

An unborn fetus is neither a baby, nor a person, it’s different from a born human, and so causing it to be removed, or removing it from the mother is not murder at all, and any comparison is a false analogy. See it’s easy to just assert your case. 

The issues are very similar; it’s bodily autonomy, a woman has the right not to control her body, and thus decide not to be pregnant, and do so in a way that is least harmful to her. 

That an organ recipient is dying anyway, and an unborn child is removed is largely an irrelevant distinction when you put the focus on the value of the life they entail. You put your own bodily autonomy rights over other people’s all the times, and in this case women are putting their bodily autonomy rights over a life does not have the sufficient properties to deserve specifics rights.

Congrats, you literally explained to yourself why they're separate scenarios and an absolutely illogical comparison.

It's irrelevant because it's convenient for you to draw two ENTIRELY different scenarios of murder and an inaction as the precise same thing. Bodily autonomy is put over another's life because they are ALREADY dying, and because it isn't under the definition of murder. 

They’re only different scenarios if your draw arbitrary ethical distinctions. The end result in both cases is you do something that directly leads to an additional death in the world. Simply asserting that they’re different, then sticking your fingers in your ears isn’t particularly helpful to anyone.

They are not precisely the same thing, they are broadly the same thing. They are not entirely different scenarios, they are variations of scenarios where an individual agency of one brings about a death of another.

Like I said; i can do exactly the same thing and arbitrarily assert any number of differences. An unborn fetus is not a person, and is simply an organism being grown by the mother that will end up human, but isn’t now - so it isn’t murder.

The issue here is that you’re trying to manufacture some absolute line : there’s is no such line......There is no line that makes one okay and one not. It’s just people like you arbitrarily asserting that there is some magical line.

Now I am a leftist? Maybe you need to quit telling women what to do with their own bodies and sex life. Bigot.

The closest the right comes to saying how a woman should use her body is requesting they don't murder babies with them, but we also equest that males don't murder babies as well, so we are pretty consistent at applying the principle no matter what genitalia you have.

Now I am a leftist? Maybe you need to quit telling women what to do with their own bodies and sex life. Bigot.

The closest the right comes to saying how a woman should use her body is requesting they don't murder babies with them, but we also equest that males don't murder babies as well, so we are pretty consistent at applying the principle no matter what genitalia you have.

...they don't murder babies....

Are you on or off some prescribed medication?  A conceptualized egg or any term of fetus/baby is not and independent invidudal that breaths and conntected to woman via umbilichord and floating in womb of liquied.

Your obviously not playing with a full deck on this issue.  When you want grasp reality and play fair, please share.  We wont hold our breath waiting for any rational, logical common sense from you. 

 A conceptualized egg or any term of fetus/baby is not and independent invidudal that breaths and conntected to woman via umbilichord and floating in womb of liquied.

I don't think I got an answer from you but when do you want abortion to be legal up to? 

When do you support abortion rights up until?

Seriously. Are you and Wylted brain both on or off prescription medications?

Read my lips/text. Get you friggin nose out of a womans bodily business unless she gives gives your her consent to stick your nose in her bodily  business.

What part of those comments do you not grasp? 

PLease, have somehuman decency and

Keep your friggin nose

Out of a womans

Bodily business

Unless she gives you

Her consent, to allow you to

Stick your nose

Into her bodily business.

This above is simple to grasp, unless a human as mental issues and has been repeated for your problematic brains and lack of moral integrity.

Several people have made this clear, in many different ways, to your immoral, infantile brains. Now, STOP IT!

you keep mentioning babies and babies are not even a part of the question.

Anti abortionists always avoid the real question.

Get you friggin nose out of a womans bodily business

PLease, have somehuman decency

 Now, STOP IT!

Several people have made this clear, in many different ways, to your immoral, infantile brains

I'll assume that you support abortion rights up until birth.  If this is wrong, you can deny it and state an alternative position.

A woman cannot be trusted with a fetus.

Please keep your friggin nose out of a womans bodily business unless they give you their consent.

A woman cannot be trusted with a fetus because she might kill the fetus in the form of an abortion