The slave breeders make your argument, not mine.
Quote by: Apeman81
The woman's birthright is hard. As the gestation vessel of future generations, there are responsibilities to choose the time and place adjusting as circumstances change. Is she to eschew asking for information to aid in her decisions? Not at all. That, too, is her birthright. Unfortunately, she must fight interference from such as a state, which, using overwhelming force, intrudes and gives no consideration for the choice of the pregnant mother to birth, or abort.
So "mother's" are solely imbued with the power to decide the value of their offspring? Must be hard to bear that god-like burden.
Enjoying the responsibility of being pregnant?
The remainder of your post is based upon the life of the mother enjoying a superiority to the life she created. The women is a "body" over which she has total control, and the other is an extension of that body for which no protections are offered, unless the mother wants to keep that part of her body, in which case the killing of that part of her body (oddly not requiring any physical harm to her body that remains), is a crime.
Can you cite the law making legal abortions a crime?
Certainly the unborn is dependent for its continued existence on the mother. Don't think a woman is smart enough to have that responsibility? Do you claim the hubris necessary to claim the superior abilities to decide while being independent of the responsibility that she would have of your decisions for her? Must be rewarding to enjoy that god-like burden for the stupid woman, uh, the unborn.
Not my doing that has the woman in the catbird seat. If it's your doing then by all means use that as a justification for beating her, doggone it, persuading her that she still loves you and wants to spend the rest of her life with you telling her how to act and raise YOUR child.
It also grants only one of the participants of the creation of the human life any control over that human life prior to birth.
But I don't. I do deny your entitlement to a pregnant woman's child, and indeed deny your being the giver of its life which sure does deny you ownership of the unborn.
You reject the separate nature of the life created. You deny it the title of offspring, child, and indeed deny its right to life.
What does a whim look like to you such that it gives you the right to make another's reproductive decisions?
To be killed at the whim of one's "owner"?
Your arguments to supplant a pregnant woman's decisions for your own are not based on your sense of ownership of the unborn? Call it something else, then. But when your arguments and the slave breeders are the same, might be time to rethink or at least introduce a new term or two that would NOT be defended by the slave breeders.
And you have the audacity to allude that my side of the argument resembles slavery!
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences." ~ C.S. Lewis