Which means that you still have put yourself at risk so you still are giving someone else some input into what happens to your body. You have not maintained total control over your body.

...just like walking down the street.

Merely walking down the street isn't going to make anyone pregnant.

A woman cannot rightfully complain about a baby being inside her body if she willfully allowed someone else to help put it there.

If you did so intentionally or if I willfully went out of my way to let you do it while you did nothing to keep from doing it, then yes.

I am asking for your definition of conservative since most people you encounter on the net who claim to be conservative are really libertarians who don’t understand what conservatism is.

And just because most people who claim to be liberal or claim to be conservative have common beliefs on abortion does not mean that they have the liberal or conservative belief on abortion; abortion is not a liberal or conservative issue. It is a moral issue. You cannot be liberal or conservative on abortion, you can only be right and wrong.

How dense can you be? If you go to the county hospital here for treatment you have to give up your right to sue in order to get treatment.

Which means that a woman who has sex gives up (by your calculation) 50% control over her body. Do you pay any attention at all to what you write?

Contracts signed under duress are not enforceable.

Now, see, that's the thing about morality: it highly subjective. I consider myself to be a very moral person; however, my moral compass is set somewhat differently to yours.

Both sides of the debate think that they are right and that the other side is wrong.

I defy anyone to try to bring a lawsuit against this hospital using your reasoning. A judge would laugh you out of court in a heartbeat.

No it is not. You are either right or wrong by the only standards that matter: God’s.

Given that I do not believe in the existence of God, that kind of 'logic' doesn't really carry any weight with me.

Except for malpractice cases flaja. Those are taken seriously by courts. Under duress or not.

If it is a malpractice suit, then that agreement is actually disregarded until the truth of the incidences come to light. You can make all the claims you want with that trivial piece of paper in place. Your hospital can fight it all they want, but no judge will laugh when the wrong leg has been dismembered. Because it isn't funny unless you are me, and it isn't my leg.

No matter what you sign, you still have rights under the protections of the law. It's funny that you claim you work in a hospital, and think that judges laugh at patient claims. I don't think you know what you are saying really.

I do not even approve of your contractual metaphor, in regards to your so-called moral issues.

Flaja has been identified.

:lol2: