The husband of our vice president is telling men to "step up" to defend the right to kill a child. Real men will see through this evil charade.

[2PhiloVoid]

Condolences on not escaping the thread quick enough I'll leave you to your "fun".

Nah, it's no longer fun since I'm being cited as a "draft dodger."

 

[Hans Blaster]

Nah, it's no longer fun since I'm being cited as a "draft dodger."

[Checks OP.] This thread was never going to be fun.

 

[tall73]

tall73 said:
Why does care needs to be given at all? Why not expose the child Roman style, for instance?

Once it is born it is a member of society and govt is there to serve members of society.

Why does the government serve members of society? And what does that have to do with the parents?

You said they should take care of the child.

You have this "should" even though you objected earlier to "shoulds"

And you want to divorce it from morality. But the whole point of "should" is that it is some thing someone OUGHT to do.

Why ought the parents take care of their own child?
Why should the government care or get involved?

If you have no interest in ethics/morality, then you need to explain why they "should".

 

[2PhiloVoid]

[Checks OP.] This thread was never going to be fun.

Oh come on now, Hans, we all know it's a thrill-a-minute to come onto a public forum and waste time and verbally hash it out with other people on unsolvable human feelings and social problems over which none of us will ever agree .........................................

For some reason, my wife just said I need to get back to looking for a job. I wonder what brought that comment about?

 

[stevil]

tall73 said:
Why does the government serve members of society?

Maybe you could take a moment to think about that one yourself. What is the purpose of government? How did the concept of government come about? What problem were the people trying to solve?

 

[comana]

That’s pretty awful the father has no say whether his son or daughter can live or not.

Sick sick sick

It’s unfair for him just like it’s unfair that she has to take the toll to her body and risk death to carry to full term and the excruciating pain of delivery.

 

[RileyG]

It’s unfair for him just like it’s unfair that she has to take the toll to her body and risk death to carry to full term and the excruciating pain of delivery.

How is it unfair? They chose to do the act and a child was conceived. That’s how life works.

 

[RileyG]

It's great that he has no say in what a woman does with her body. He doesn't get to claim it just because he has had sex with it.

Again, it’s not her body.

The unborn child is not her body.

Just another cop out.

 

[Sketcher]

Abortion is the opposite of stepping up for a lot of men; when they offer to pay for the abortion, that's an escape hatch from being fathers to the children they begat.

 

[comana]

How is it unfair? They chose to do the act and a child was conceived. That’s how life works.

Biology is inherently unfair in reproduction. It’s just a fact.

 

[tall73]

Maybe you could take a moment to think about that one yourself. What is the purpose of government? How did the concept of government come about? What problem were the people trying to solve?

I of course think it is related to ethics/morals. You are not interested in my moral/ethical arguments, per your own statement. I am asking why YOU think the government exists, and why this "should" exists when you don't think there are any "should's" or ethical/moral considerations.

You have said parents should support their children. Why?

 

[stevil]

I of course think it is related to ethics/morals.

Ethics and morals is the realm of the church.

Now unless you want to make the church redundant, think of a more important reason for having a government.

 

[A2SG]

And that has nothing to do with my post.

Maybe not, but it has everything to do with who should make the decision.

How many moral issues would you cede responsibility for to some other person?

-- A2SG, guessing not many...if any....

 

[RileyG]

Biology is inherently unfair in reproduction. It’s just a fact.

And?

So humans shouldn’t reproduce?

 

[RileyG]

Ethics and morals is the realm of the church.

Now unless you want to make the church redundant, think of a more important reason for having a government.

I’m so confused.

Plenty of secular people have morals and are ethical people.

It doesn’t belong to the church or religion alone.

 

[RileyG]

Maybe not, but it has everything to do with who should make the decision.

How many moral issues would you cede responsibility for to some other person?

-- A2SG, guessing not many...if any....

Easy to say when you aren’t the one being killed

…~RileyG, thankful for life~…..

 

[comana]

And?

So humans shouldn’t reproduce?

Not at all my argument. The risk to the woman is substantially higher and her ability to decide to continue or abort carries more weight than the man who contributed a few minutes and his DNA.

 

[A2SG]

When you engage in an act that can lead to life, you do have responsibility. This applies even if you did not desire pregnancy, or used conraception, because there are known failure rates of all methods.

Yup. But, one of the ways a woman can deal with that responsibility is to have an abortion. At least, within legal parameters. Other people may not agree with her decision, but the fact remains: it's her decision to make. No one else's.

And we see this reflected in current law. A man who has sex with a woman who becomes pregnant is required to pay child support, and often expenses for pregnancy, whether they wanted a child or not, because the man made the choice to engage in an activity that could lead to life and responsibility.

He has ongoing responsibilities, often requiring the use of his body in labor, etc. to provide.

And the availability of abortion also means some men try to avoid this by pressuring for an abortion the woman doesn't want.

Yes, the man does bear responsibility for the child once it's born, but his rights only extend to the child. Not the child's mother. So, he has no rights over her body during pregnancy, nor does he have the right to override her medical decisions.

-- A2SG, if she wants to listen to his advice during the pregnancy, that's her decision...but if she doesn't, he can't demand it....

 

[stevil]

I’m so confused.

Plenty of secular people have morals and are ethical people.

It doesn’t belong to the church or religion alone.

Non religious scolarly people may have arrived at their own set of morals and ethics but they don't proclaim to be the authority on morality, they expect their moral beliefs to be everyone else's moral beliefs. They don't claim to be infallible and claim to teach everyone the right way to behave, they don't then claim if you are bad you are going to be punished for all of eternity.

No one looks to a secular leader for moral answers.

Govt provides roads, they don't then claim those roads to be morally good. They provide schools, and hospitals, they build a military (hopefully for defense). None of these are morally good or bad, they are simply necessary for a safe, stable and thriving society.

 

[A2SG]

Easy to say when you aren’t the one being killed

…~RileyG, thankful for life~…..

I'm certainly glad that my mother, when she was pregnant at 17, made her own decision about what to do.

-- A2SG, no one else made that decision for her.....