So as I said, you pray for an America similar to Saudi Arabia in the treatment of it's women.
What is sad is this is the way many of you on that side view this. It ignores the fact there are laws in the US (pretty good ones, I might add) that are specifically in place to protect human beings from the offenses of others such as:
Further, there are even laws to protect the property of human beings from the offenses of others such as:
However, no one questions society's right to regulate this behavior, although it inhibits the "choice" of an individual and limits his own sovereignty when it comes in conflict with others.
I respect the pro-choice movement's attitude regarding protecting an individual woman's right to sovereignty - the right to "choose". When the active pro-life movement (of which I am NOT a part) counters, "Okay, she had the right to choose to have intercourse without birth control - this baby is a consequence of that 'choice'", ya'll respond, "What about to protect the life of the mother?"
Most active pro-lifers respond, "Well, that may be an exception."
Then ya'll respond with, "What about rape and incest?" There is a split, because of the fundamental disagreement - some active pro-lifers want to defer to the mother's discretion at this point, but recognize the danger - a woman wants an abortion, has not been raped, but is willing to lie about it to secure the procedure. The exception would consume the rule if harsh measures aren't taken - measures that, frankly, are offensive if you don't believe the unborn child is a separate individual. So there is somewhat of an impasse. Other active pro-lifers do not believe the sins of the father should be visited upon the child, particularly when the sanction is death.
Some pro-choice people respect the opinion of the pro-lifers and realize it is not an "oppression", but rather, in their view a "misguided" attempt to protect an unborn child (a status opinion that most, if not all, pro-choicers do not subscribe). However, it is my experience that most pro-choice people, particularly the vocal ones, do not respect this opinion and suggest all sorts of spurious motivations on the part of the vocal pro-life movement - oppression of women, imposition of religious beliefs, etc.
Can you not accept that the active pro-lifers are trying to protect what they consider to be human beings from murder? I'm not saying that you have to agree with them, but must you suggest that, particularly the pro-life women are trying to oppress women? Is this topic just one that is not subject to a rational, civil debate without devolving into namecalling and wild generalizations?
Does a restriction on abortion rights really equal a restriction of women to the hijab, not driving, not being able to testify in court (at least against a man), not being allowed out with males to whom she is neither married nor related by blood, subject to the death penalty for adultery, restrictions on property ownership, political office, voting, business operation, etc.
Are those really the same or even similar to you?
Good that you can finally admit that.
Will you admit either:
1.) If life really begins at conception, then abortion is murder (and you just don't agree life begins at conception), OR
2.) Even if life begins at conception, the woman's right is paramount and she can terminate up to the moment of birth, if it were left up to you?
Can you admit to either one of those things (and I believe you can hold either view and I can respect the position, but disagree with you)?
This post was edited on 11/19 at 9:51 am