08-31-2020, 06:18 PM
(08-31-2020, 12:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a classic "false equivalency" argument. Once the child is born neither party can chose not to support it.
Right now men think it is not fair that a woman has the choice to have an abortion, but it would not be fair to give the man the choice over the woman's body either. The fact that the fertilized egg can not develop outside a woman's body makes the current law the only fair way to do it. But in a few years technology will advance to the point that if the father wants the child he can have it removed form the woman's body and force her to support it as a living child. Until then the current law is the only fair way to do it.
What other choice does someone get to make with their body, but force someone else to pay half (or more) for?
I guess you and I have a different definition of "equivalent" . It's about choice, per the positions taken. Fairness = Her body her choice. My money, my choice.
No one should get to make a choice, and that is what abortion is being billed as... as a choice that one person gets to make... and then make someone else have to help pay for their choice. That's La La Land thinking.
^ That's the very definition of unfair.
BTW, the idea that so many abortions are done due to health reasons is such BS and everyone sane knows it. Abortion via planned Parenthood is post pregnancy birth control for a huge majority of women.
If the Gov. funds these programs, I would rather pay for forced sterilization that requires people to pass a parenting class/test and show financial means before being allowed off of it, than pay for post pregnancy birth control.
