AngelRho wrote:
What you give someone as part of a mutual agreement carries conditions, likely that you’d get it back in some form at a later time.
Again with the "agreeable transaction" argument trumping a woman's rights to her own body. Transferring DNA is not a binding contract on the woman to fulfil by giving birth - it's not fixed in stone as you would wish it to be and not least in all of this is how she feels about it. A man can just walk away at any point - a woman must be afforded the same right
even though she is pregnant.
Quote:
Whatever ends up in the dumpster is fair game. And where human life is involved, someone has to be held accountable when it’s destroyed.

You think a woman agonizing over the decision and undergoing an abortion doesn't feel accountable? That she is unaware of the enormity of her decision? There are no "what ifs" weighing heavily on her mind? No grief for what is lost? Sorry, but your statement is a little too vengeful for my tastes.
The least she needs at this point is being told that she has no
protected right to make that decision.
I've shamelessly copy/pasted this from a newsletter received through email. It's a good summary -
The Supreme Court is expected to overturn Roe v. Wade, ending the national right to an abortion. If that happens, the medical procedure will be severely restricted or just outright banned in about half the country. A lot of people are extremely upset about this because, among other things, they think the government should not get to treat 50% of the population like second-class citizens, and that pregnant people should be allowed to decide what to do with their own bodies, just like men can chose to, say, have a vasectomy without a bunch of elected officials weighing in.
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.