Yes, absolufuckinglootly... If you want to have one, go for it. That is between you and your God. No governmental agency should be able to tell you what to do with your body. Not my problem.

Oh yea, and stay the hell out of my bedroom.

Originally Posted by Ibram

Who is this person? Can't read a word of it.

Define conservative.

Many, if not most, Republican politicians claim to be conservative, when most of them are actually libertarian on social/moral issues, and if the budget deficits with GWB's first 6 years in office are any indication, most Republicans are liberals when it comes to government spending. And as far as I can tell most Republicans who hold national office are in favor of abortion in cases of rape, incest or fetal stem cell research.

There are not many people who are conservative and who are willing to support the rights of the unborn. In this regard the "conservative" position on abortion is little better than the "liberal" position on abortion- both are in favor of killing the unborn for convenience's sake. But abortion is a moral, life and death issue. It transcends politics.

Doesn’t a woman yield control over her body when she sleeps with a man and thus ends up pregnant?

And does the unborn’s father have any rights? The unborn is just as much part of the father’s body as it is the woman’s. Furthermore, are you in favor of child support requirements? If a man has no right to keep a woman from killing his child in utero, what right can the woman have to make the man pay child support if she chooses to let the child live?

Most certainly, in some cases yes. That is quite different from an outside entity, such as a government telling her to yield control. It is about free choice.

I guess that would depend on the relationship with the mother. Hell we can't even get people to assume any rights so much as want them and take responsibility for their actions. In this country the answer is that the fathers have significantly less rights than the women when it comes to the pregnancy.

Yes, for men and women equally. Equal responsibility, esp if one remarries.

Apples and oranges. They two subjects are hardly related.

Is this a thread for discussing partisan politics or engaging in partisan politics?

:lol2:

Yeah, it's amazing how quickly this thread went meta on it's own theme. I dig it, kind of like a post-modern literary art installation, only on the interwebs.

Actually that is done for all invasive procedures and experimental treatments. None of that removes the patients right to sue or prevents them from suing sucessfully.

No. She changes her physical state, but that doesn't mean she relinquishes control over her body. If a woman is giving birth, she gets to choose how and she gets to choose what medical assistance she will or will not have. All these things are the woman's decision. They weren't always, of course.

Unless rape or incest is involved, the woman has already yielded control over her body to someone else when she got pregnant. Why should she be entitled to reclaim what she had willfully given up just because a baby is involved?

My mother has Medicare because she is disabled and gets SSI (lupus). She has no choice but to get treatment at the local government hospital. That hospital won’t treat anybody that won’t sign a waiver whereby they specifically give up their right to sue if malpractice of any sort takes place.

In what way has she given up control and to whom?

Letting a man put his penis in her does not give the man control over her body? Get real.

Holy shit. Well that's an interesting take on it, flaja, it really is.

Of course, in your post you said she gave up that control when she got pregnant, not when she had sex. Do you believe women lose the right to control their bodies when they have sex?