soc.women

On Aug 12, 11:15 am, "R. Steve Walz" wrote:
> yarr...@ wrote:
>
> > On Aug 11, 4:24 pm, elcoy...@ (Paul Anderson) wrote:
> > > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:00:55 -0700, "yarr...@ "
>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > .....
>
> > > >Actually, that depends on what you include/exclude from defintion of
> > > >abortion. If the pregnant woman is murdered and the unborn dies, how
> > > >is that death any different from an abortion in a clinic? As I recall,
> > > >there are laws on the book that make that a double murder. So, while
> > > >such a death is not called an abortion, I see no difference as in both
> > > >cases the same kind of organism dies and see no logical reason not to
> > > >call it one. It seems that you do, but will you tell me what it is?
>
> > > An induced abortion is the act of a woman terminating her pregnancy.
>
> > > The crimes you are talking about take place against the wishes of the
> > > woman, and generally include the death of the woman.
>
> > So, anything that is against the wishes of a woman is a crime?
>
> --------------------
> Against her body, which is property she owns, YES!! Including the
> fetus!
>
> > Everything that is the wish of a woman is legal?
>
> -------------------
> About her body, YES! Just like we permit you that as well!!!

I am not permitted that. I am not allowed to fill my body with
illegal drugs and then use my body to drive a car without the law
stepping in and stopping me...even if I wish to do this kind of thing.
Therefore, your basic premis that I am allowed to do what I wish with
my body is false and therefore all your subsequent conclusions based
on that premis are also false,
That is mistake number one.
Mistake numbre two is that you assume that only one body is
involved....the woman's.
Does a woman have a penis?
Well, guess what, the unborn male child does. So, it is pretty obvious
from biological evidence that there is a second body involved in the
abortion issue that needs to be considered. So, you have no biological
basis for your claim of a legal basis for woman's right to do as she
wishes with her body.

>
> You're being DISTORTIVE now. We were referring to a woman's decisions
> about her body. Whatever YOU'RE railing about now, NOBODY KNOWS!

Well, in order for your argumen to prevail, you must admit that male
sexual organ is the biological norm for a woman. Is that a reasonable
position to tak?


>
> > Since when does
> > wishing determine what is a crime and what isn't?
>
> ----------------
> Always has!
> If someone burns your house down and you agree they were doing your
> bidding, it can be the difference to the tune of 20 years in prison!!
>
> If someone assaults you, you have the choice whether to prosecute!
> The People may as well, but you hold a key to it.
>
> > If I wish to rob a
> > bank, does that stop it from being a crime?
>
> ---------------------
> Irrelevant! You're being a lying little ass. That is NOT the issue!
>
> > > The reason you cannot see a difference is that you cannot see a
> > > pregnant woman as being a human being with the basic human right of
> > > bodily autonomy.
>
> > As shown above, you are wrong. Wishing is not a basis on which to
> > create legality.
>
> ------------------------
> Of course it is, see above, you stupid dumbshit!!
> Steve