I oppose the murder of unborn children, or as liberals euphemisticaly call it, abortion. I’ve said many times it’s just a means that allows people to have sex with whoever, whenever they want without regard to consequence. The justification for this murder is that it’s the woman’s body and no one but her should have control over her body. I’ve long asserted that except in cases of rape, a woman has total control over her body, what she lacks is SELF control, the unwillingness to excercise that self control to abstain from sex to begin with. The liberal response to my suggestion is usually that it is totally unrealistic to expect men and women to not engage in sex and even oppose teaching abstinence to our kids in high school. Abstinence is the only 100 percent way to prevent pregnancy and thus eliminate the need for and number of abortions.
I’m absolutely amazed then by the call by liberal spokesperson Alyssa Milano for women to ABSTAIN FROM SEX, until the full rights to unfettered murder of unborn children are returned to all women in the US. But WAIT A MINUTE… I thought abstinence was unrealistic and impossible??? When there is no consequence it is, but when there may be consequences there isn’t?? Which is it?
It’s always comical to me that men don’t want to take any responsibility in a pregnancy, then, once some other woman is pregnant they want to have control of her body and make decisions for her even if it’s a 9 year old girl who is raped by her dad (as some current laws suggest).
But if a woman calls for other women to stop having sex with their boyfriends and husbands to make a point, that’s over the line.
They’re Democrats. Things don’t make logical sense most of the time,
and their logic can change at the drop of a hat.
As long as it ultimately supports what they want, their so called morality
and so called logic changes as random and as many times as they need for it too.
That’s one great thing about the morality of a Conservative! They have a tendency
to be more consistent.
Abstinence isn’t impossible. However, it is unrealistic as a means of effective birth control given real world data as it relates to policy.
People have sex. Lots of people. The most effective way to minimize unwanted pregnancies is to maximize long-acting reversible contraception such as IUDs. Because science.
Did you get cheated on or something? Is that what this is all about?
Because woman who get pregnant are not simply women who are cheating (many times with men who cheat). Sometimes there are 9 year old girls who were raped. Sometimes it’s a happily married woman who is on birth control and it doesn’t work. Sometimes it’s a boyfriend and a girlfriend in college who aren’t responsible.
And sometimes men like our president cheat on their wives with porn stars.
I’ve said this before but I think a lot of people that we argue with either are past their sexual prime and don’t have a sex drive anymore or had a low sex drive during their lifetime. People who have a normal or above average sex drive realize that sex is going to happen. It’s what nature has always intended for us to do.
I believe a reasonable middle ground is 3 months. You get 3 months to decide if you want an abortion. After that, it’s illegal unless medical emergency
Of course. Government shouldn’t be paying for it. Personally, I’d rather government did pay for it. I’d rather they pay for that then the plethora of other things they already pay for that have absolutely no benefit to the majority of us. I think we can all agree less kids that end up being taken care of by the State is a common good. Even if you take abortion out of the equation.
