XPost: talk.politics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: talk.philosophy.humanism   
   From: rrufiange@cfl.rr.com   
      
   "Daniel T."  wrote in message   
   news:postmaster-C99904.20044903122003@news02.west.earthlink.net...   
   > The *man* had unprotected sex? What about the woman? Didn't she have   
   > unprotected sex as well? Why are you blaming the man for something the   
   > two did as a couple?   
      
   As we all should know by now, unless some of us are still virgins, is that   
   sometimes one or both parties make stupid decisions, or sometimes one or   
   both parties are just plain dishonest.   
      
   > Yes, a truly wacko view, but it isn't mine. I believe that neither   
   > parent should be allowed to abort a fetus without the consent of the   
   > other parent; but if both parents want the abortion then no outside   
   > agency should be allowed to stop them, or punish them for the decision.   
      
   Perhaps when both parents are entered into some sort of joing agreement, but   
   were I a woman, you can be damn sure I wouldn't let some guy I had sex with   
   tell me what I could or couldn't do with my yet-to-be-born child.   
      
   You'd probably feel the same way, under the proper circumstances.   
      
   > This is a simple difference of opinion. A fetus is not a tumor, 50% of   
   > the fetus' DNA is identical to the fathers and thus he should have as   
   > much right to it as the mother, IMO.   
      
   Well, your opinion differs from the current legal opinion of the matter.   
   Plus, until the brain forms, it can be argued (successfully, too!) that a   
   fetus and a tumor are not all that different.  Both are living tissue.   
   Until the organs and systems form, who can honestly and educatedly claim   
   that there is a real difference between one mass of tissue and another?   
      
   > The hypocrisy I detect is those who loudly proclaim equal rights for the   
   > sexes but refuse to give a father equal rights to the decision of   
   > bringing a fetus to term.   
      
   The only way you're going to get your wish, is if both parties who would   
   have to agree to the decision were likewise forced to remain in that child's   
   life, atleast until that child became 18 years of age.   
      
   > If only you would say, "no *person* has any right to determine what   
   > another person may do with his/her body" I might agree with you; but   
   > then you would have to accept that forced child support as well as a   
   > whole host of other laws, are immoral.   
      
   Actually, I'll say it.  No PERSON has a right to determine what any other   
   person may do with their body, for any reason.  You don't have any right to   
   stop a woman from having an abortion, even if it is your sperm inside.   
   Likewise, that woman has no right to stop you from having a sex change   
   operation, or having a vasectomy, or any other surgery on your own body.   
   That's already the way the law is.  What's wrong?   
      
   > > Better an abortion clinic on every streetcorner   
   > > than the birth of one more unwanted child.   
   >   
   > You insist that I am anti-abortion, yet I agree with your tag-line. How   
   > could that be?   
      
   What exactly is your stance?  Are you anti-abortion, pro-abortion,   
   pro-choice, or just anti-woman-aborting-a-fetus-made-with-my-sperm?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)