tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-689721533782867620.post7883609113913076854..comments2024-03-17T23:38:59.305-07:00Comments on Thinking About It: Tremendous, Huge, Big, it's going to be Trump Aaron Kenneth Schwarzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17269701875376295116noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-689721533782867620.post-38888034513166119942017-02-20T14:21:12.901-08:002017-02-20T14:21:12.901-08:00Equality would consider rights of the father. At ...Equality would consider rights of the father. At this point in history, in western societies, women have an abundance of choice in parenthood but men have almost none.<br /><br />• A woman chooses to have an abortion; men cannot choose.<br />• A woman chooses to give the child to the state; men cannot choose.<br />• A woman can change her mind at any time and drop a child off no questions asked under Safe-haven Law; men cannot choose.<br />• A woman can expect the state to force the father to subsidize her choice; men cannot choose.<br /><br />In some cases, a woman can even get the state to force child support, even if her partner proven not to be the biological parent, because it is in the best interest of the child. If choosing parenthood can be considered a right, it is western men who are lacking equal rights.<br /><br />The symbiote is simply not a part of the mother’s body: it has its own genetic identity, blood type, sex, and although it is dependent on the mother, that dependence is constantly shifting. At some point soon, when we are capable of growing a baby from a zygote outside the womb, the dependence argument fails entirely. At that point, will you consider abortion ethical?<br /><br />Edit: Deleted and Reposted for formatting.Relythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08643069143800104758noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-689721533782867620.post-69444675398778014632017-02-20T12:44:28.729-08:002017-02-20T12:44:28.729-08:00Thank you for the intelligent well informed intere...Thank you for the intelligent well informed interesting reply. <br /><br />Societal norms aside... <br /><br />Each human being is genetically unique : this is why the biochemistry of one size fits all drugs makes no sense at all. Our genome dictates our biochemistry. <br /><br />All people start out as the fusion of an egg and sperm, the resulting single unique new cell the property legally of its parents, subject to certain property rights restrictions unique to parental property rights of their children, mostly to protect the children of abuse and neglect. <br /><br />Sexual immorality causes STD's to exist. The proliferated because people have reckless unprotected sex without careful risk assessment or inntellectual reflecting, giving rise to the spread of STDs as well as unplanned and often unwanted pregnancies. <br /><br />When a child is born to parents who are unfit to be parents, this is often to the childs' detriment. I was once upon a time closely associated with a social worker who worked with drug addict single mothers to help them not neglect or abuse their children. <br /><br />We all learn things from each other, and must teach each other virtues and values, ethics and morality. A human is a beast, an animal, an air breathing mammal of remarkable potential. Look at human civilization for the evidence of what mankind is able to do at its brightest, while we punish each other with inhumanity for reasons that exist beyond logical defense: mankind is insane for exhibiting inhumanity towards itself. <br /><br />Abortion & STD's are symptoms of perverse immorality within culture. Abortion is also emblematic of the lack of intelligent thought most people engage in when they decide to engage in fluid exchange. The potential for acquiring a cancer causing variant of herpes now significant in random flue exchanges. STD's exist because the family unit has been torn apart by worldly sexual pleasure focused narrow minded hedonism, self worship, self aggrandizement and other forms of arrogant divisiveness. The debate about abortion is moot, the woman's rights are supreme! <br /><br />I am neither pro choice or pro life, I only defend women's rights because of humanity absurd history of gender inequity that is beyond logical explanation. Women deserve equal rights, and that includes what they choose to do with their bodies. When the fetus is biologically attached to the mother, it is part of her body, and she should have the say over the net system. The woman should be the parent, in control, not the unborn and a male chauvinistic society of strange pressures. Women deserve the right to choose what they do with their symbiot when it is still attached internally. That is all I am saying, we have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.... like you said with smoking age, drinking age, illegal drugs, selling body parts, prostitution, etc<br />Aaron Kenneth Schwarzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17269701875376295116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-689721533782867620.post-7361758225972192342017-02-20T11:05:47.836-08:002017-02-20T11:05:47.836-08:00Your Pro Life position is weird to me.
People d...Your Pro Life position is weird to me. <br /><br />People do not need to contribute to society, have social security numbers, or produce useful work for it to be unethical to kill them or let them die. The same can be said of children, born or unborn.<br /><br />A living child cannot survive without food, shelter or protection. All children rely on a parasitic relationship for survival. If it is ethical to abort an unborn child because of its parasitic reliance on the mother, reason dictates it would also be ethical to allow an infant to starve for the same reason. <br /><br />Scientifically, a new living organism is created at conception. That organism, which is human, with its own unique DNA, has a high likelihood of becoming a self-reliant person if allowed to grow undeterred.<br /><br />There are a lot of ways to form a pro-choice argument. Many consider the unborn non-human, which I consider scientifically unsound. Others revolve around the idea that access to legal abortion produces better results, and is therefore the most ethical (but you don’t seem like a consequentialist to me). I’m not certain how a woman’s rights are infringed upon by a pregnancy, or infringed upon by denying access to an abortion. There are countless ways we, as a society, tell men and women what they cannot do with their bodies and most people agree that there should be limits:<br /><br />• You cannot smoke or get a tattoo until you turn 18.<br />• You cannot consume alcohol until you turn 21.<br />• You cannot take illegal drugs at any age under any circumstances.<br />• You cannot sell your body parts.<br />• You cannot rent your body for sexual favors (in most states).<br />Relythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08643069143800104758noreply@blogger.com