I don’t care, but I’m advocating that they be treated the same, not one group being singled out as a designated class of heroes (or in this case, heroines) that deserves particular sympathy.
I suppose if it were up to me I’d prefer to ban both than ban neither.
You have shifted the goalposts.
Your initial claim was that men’s bodies were treated as “sovereign” by the law.
Moreover, this logic is baffling: “In order to be subjugated to that law, you first have to commit a crime.” Well, no – the law DEFINES that action as a crime, and a crime only a man can commit. Isn’t that what you specifically asked me to provide?
The first is already banned, I’m pretty sure, so I don’t know why you keep on bringing it up.
Just curious - would removing all bans lead to an increased incidence?
Oh, do tell about a way that the law can treat women differently based on behavioral, cognitive, or emotional differences. I’m all ears. (Well, and uterus, since that’s generally what matters for women.)
Of course, that’s total abortions and not broken down per capita and even with no laws governing abortion we still have a lower per capita rate than the US.
I agree. So, since disruptive protests inside a church are not legal, then we are agreed that similar protests at abortion clinics should also not be legal.
If you want to make all protests that disrupt daily life (funerals, religious organizations, grocery stores etc) illegal, I suppose I’d be fine with that.
I’m not going to get behind any law that requires me to feel special sympathy for people who choose up have abortions, though.
And back on topic: how would you ban disruptive and excessive protest tactics from situations like the one Bricker described?
That’s not what you originally said:
Plus, it is illegal to have a disruptive protest at a funeral, religious organization or grocery store.
You’re a guy, aren’t you?
That’s the only way woman are supposed to have one, the baby murderers, if at all.
Because it’s legal. Just like abortion.
The morally indignant are always sure. No room for silly, wimpy doubts or anything.
None. Crackpottery is completely legal also.
And of course they couldn’t give a shit’s less difference about all the ones who have done that because… reasons. 
You jezebel. 
Then his point still stands. It’s not up to you to “allow” someone to choose an abortion. That’s already been decided and, as previously stated, is legal. Perhaps you should repeat that last part as necessary until you grasp what it means?
Good to see you answer, Bricker. Thank goodness you understand that abortion is legal, yes?
Russia.
I’m not moving the goal posts. You’re making bull shit comparisons between signing a meaningless piece of paper to abortion rights.
Are you trying to tell me that if a woman forcibly inserted a man’s penis into her vagina she wouldn’t be charged with a crime?
Yayy, an abortion thread. Another opportunity for people with irreconcilable differences to make veiled insults at each other.
In the end, the law is all you have when you have those sort of irreconcilable differences, its what makes rule of law so important.
That’s not how those laws work but maybe open carry escorts who are merely trying to normalize guns in society while they escort patients into the clinic. There you go, two birds with one stone.
I wonder why aren’t there protesters screaming at people outside of gun stores?
P*ssy Riot’s antics weren’t legal in Russia (for the record, I think they got punished way too harshly), and they’re in the process of tightening up abortion laws as well. Thank God.
The whole point at issue here is whether abortion should be legal or not.
The point at issue is protests at clinics.
Which might suggest why it’s a bad idea to give everyone a voice and a vote.
I entirely disagree with you about what fairness and justice are, and continue to be amused that you think this is about ‘men’ and ‘women’. You’re aware, right, that women are pro-life in about equal numbers as men?
The real division here is between people who think about themselves first and foremost, and people who think about their duties to the common good.
What an intriguing and enlightened point of view.
you may well think this is a strange thing to say, but when you argue for the right of a fertilized egg to become a human, you are theoretically denying 8 or 9 other eggs the chance to become fertilized and to become, eventually, human.
A woman should be allowed to decide when and if she reproduces, which eggs allowed to go to term and which, not.
Yes, I do. I wish it were otherwise, but if I hold out as legitimate the laws I like I can hardly cavil at the laws I don’t like.
If anything, we shouldn’t let people who think a just God is running things vote.
I’m kidding of course, everyone should vote. Especially people you disagree with, since your beliefs are so goofy.
Women fall victim to religious brainwashing as much as men. Women cut the clitorises off their daughters and granddaughters. Cultural indoctrination is a strong, strong thing.
The common good is to support abortion. It makes the world a better place. Outlawing abortion makes the world a worse place.