Human Rights

In the thread A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore
Michael Moore makes a pledge from liberals to conservatives (of which I am neither): My reply to that was

quote:

---

Does this mean they won't stick up for my unborn child should someone intend to do harm to him/her/it. Or is it just trash?

---

Then everyone started getting concerned that I was not concerned about the rights of a woman. My reply to that was:

quote:

---

I never said the woman doesn't have any rights, she has every right in the world not to have intercourse. Unless she is raped against her will, then she should have the right to remove the baby, IMO.

---

Chiroptera responds So I asked her why that is a right.Being that birth control is not 100% full proof, or natural, I can't see how this is a right for two consenting adults. The same goes for the man, as he is part of it, and can be an influence on the woman’s decision to get an abortion. (of which I am guilty of).When I think of human rights, this is what I think of:
Human RightsAs I read that, I really don't see anything that could be applied to what is claimed by chiroptera and others.The obvious answer is because you can get an abortion, that makes it a right. But there was a time when you couldn't, and they are fighting to remove that option. So I will not accept that answer. It doesn't fully describe why it is a right. A starving child has a right to food. The child has done nothing to put himself in harms way.If a woman gets raped, then I feel she has a right to an abortion.But the combination of the two events, consensual intercourse, and abortion together, I feel is just not a right, and I would like to hear arguments as to why it is.In this thread we are not going to talk about abortion. Abortion is legal. I also don't want to talk about when life begins in the womb. Those two subjects have been beaten to death already.So this is the question, and the topic,
Why is it a right for both a man and a woman to have consensual sex, AND get an abortion?

What about the man?

Of course it does. Yea, but I have a choice whether I want to come over or not, and if I leave, I won't be dead. That is a very very bad comparison. So basically the man has nothing to do with it? What's that reason?
People cannot do whatever they please in this life.

How is it forced, if the person willingly has sex? We all know that contraception is not full proof.

I can have a right to have a gun, but if I kill someone with it, then I have a right to go to jail.Just because we have a right to have intercourse, does not give us the right to be irresponsible with it. I am not creating anything when I drive a car. And driving a car is not strictly for pleasure. e have been through the whole car/sex comparison, and it really doesn't apply. Oh I do understand perfectly, and many people agree with my thoughts. So it is not correct to say I do not understand. Plus I have been through it first hand, and have a excellent perspective on it. Ok, that is 100% correct, but that doesn't make it a right. Some could use that same line of protection for an unborn baby. No one is being attacked here, just because I do not see it as a right. When you create something, then legally disgard it, you are the one in control of your reputation.
Article 12 does not apply.

You are going down the same path as crashfrog. I don't see what that has to do with rights.The woman owns the womb, and she and a man can create something in it, and then destroy it. How is that a right?

I am not arguing that here. She can if she wants legally. I may not agree with that, but thats not for here. I just wouldn't call it a right.Thanks for your openess BTW.As for your comparison of driving a car and all that, first off, it only takes one person to do that. Driving a car can be for both pleasure and necessity. Regardless, let's say you hit my kid (OMG) and you offer to hook yourself up. I don't think I would let you, unless you agreed to carry it out until the end. Either way, it may be your right to offer to help, but I don't see it as a right to withdraw your help, unless something was really wrong.

That was a missed point if ever I read one. There is no error in knowing that there is a huge difference between driving a car, and having sex between two consenting adults. There is also a huge difference in the need to rely on a seat belt, as opposed to relying on birth control. My logic is fine.Next time I get pregnant from driving a car though, then my logic will be flawed. Oh no. I just want to put my thought on the subject to the test. We are just discussing here, and emotions should fall by the wayside.
How dare you say majority rule, I am sure in a heartbeat you will be the first to point out that just because 1/3 of the world believes in Jesus, that doesn't make him real. Hand waving? What was that sentence? We are not going to discuss when life begins. But in some states people have gone to jail for harming a fetus. So the possibility remains. Please explain how I am attacking anyone, by considering that it is not a right? There is a difference between a right, and a privelage. Where it says what?
Isn't it beyond obvious that if you consentually have sex, then get an abortion, that you have added that experience to your own reputation, and it has nothing to do with me? Yes, I was, and I supported the idea of getting one fully. A thing that I regret a bit. But life can be full of regrets, if you let it get to you. I have discussed this fully in other threads, I don't want to start talking about here again.Try leaving emotion out of this discussion, and just discuss.

Still I don't find that to be a comparison. I don't like dealing with comparisons, as they are not 100% accurate. If I want to learn about the properties of metal, I study metal, not jello. The only thing I learn about metal by studying jello, is what metal is not. Having intercourse is not driving a car. Woman do not get pregnant from driving a car, maybe from parking Well this is why I specifically mention consensual intercourse, and not sex.If I were to compare driving a car accurately to the kind of sex I am talking about, it would be like this.
Your driving a car through an empty parking lot. Without any barricades, you can get to the other side easily.
If there is a barricade, then you will not get to the other side, unless the barricade fails.Seat belts are for saving lives, not keeping you from driving the car. Well this is why I have trouble with comparisons. Why not just deal with the issue directly. I don't find any logic in comparing seat belts to birth control, when looking at the overall picture. NOOO, this is where we agree. I believe it is the right of a woman to retain full control over her organs, and the such. She has a right to decline sex. Once another life/thing is started in the womb, it really isn't part of you is it? Please remember we are talking about rights here. I believe your right ends once you decide to have intercourse. I am guilty of it too, just so you know, and I am not a hypocrite, just speaking from experience.I have heard all the comparisons, and to me making comparisons like calling a fetus a tumor, and having sex as opposed to wearing a seatbelt, are all weak, and make no logical sense whatsoever. It's as if people are now programmed with these types of responses. I would never compare intercourse to wearing a seat belt, unless it's a crotch belt with a vibrator and sperm ejaculator, and a consenting mind.Edited by riVeRraT, : spelling

ABSOLUTELY !!!!
That is why you can decline intercourse.A zygote is not part of the woman’s body. There is a large difference between chopping off your leg, and having an abortion. Right, once she decides to have intercourse, she has made that decision, and relinquishes the "right" and it becomes a privilege to rip it out. Zygotes do not "take up residence" like some kind of unwanted tumor. zygotes only get there by a woman having perfect control over her body and making a decision that can lead to the zygote getting there in the first place. Zygotes do not ask to be put there, or wander off the street, or do they happen from driving a car. Stay on topic, I strictly asked that we not discuss when life begins.
We are talking about rights, not life. The woman, the woman. She has the right to consent to intercourse.You are not making a case for yourself, only reinforcing my position. You have not shown how it is a right for both things to happen.

Try using that analogy in a court of law to show intent.
You'll have to explain why it doesn't matter.
The reason why it matters is obvious. It is a persons right to have intercourse/not have intercourse. But the fetus didn't ask to get there, or was it even invited. Comparisons suck, they don't work. I can show you several reasons why your comparison do not compare at all. Try dealing directly with the topic, not comparing getting pregnant to coming over someones house. It doesn't compare. Where are you chiroptera?????? Hell no. I am not looking to tell people when they should have intercourse or not. Intercourse is not necessary for our own survival, as much as I would want it to be.All the free will in the world won't get you a date with Katherine Zeta Jones. People cannot do whatever they please. You are comparing things to individuals, when we are talking about something that takes two willing adults, and involves a third "life/thing" that has no say in the matter whatsoever, and didn't ask to come into this world.

Yes it is. Thats my point, birth control is not 100% fullproof, we all know that. When you consent to intercourse, you consent to possibly creating life/thing and therfor give up your rights, then it becomes a privilage to correct your "mistake" (which I believe is not a mistake, if I play the lotto, I intend to win, if I lose, it is not a mistake). Before technology existed you could not do this. Technology does not determine our morals and rights. Living in a place where it is legal gives you a privilage also.

That is a foolish statement. It's not against your will, it's against you wishes, wishes you have no control over really, unless you retain from having intercourse. Once you consent to intercourse, you have given up your right to having a thing inside of you.If you force a guest into your house, and the guest is now dependant on being in your house for its survial, then you retain 100% of the responsibilty. You now have the privilage of killing the guest or not trying to let it live. lmao. I came in through your pie. Another bad comparison.

thank you. That is debatable, and not for this thread. Two separate rights. The two of them combined is not a right.If your in imminent danger, and it is not by your own doing, then you can't compare that to getting pregnant. Another bad comparison.

Just how unwanted is it?
Howd it get there?