I understand that, my point is that if he doesnt want the baby and she does then he should be free of the future responsibilities. Call it Non-Birthing Parent Abdication or something. If she gets the choice to eliminate the problem regardless of his input then he should have the same option.

If we give unmarried men that kind of option, almost all of them will take it. People underestimate how big a role child support payments play in overall child welfare. Point being, if you do this, you're going to have a lot more destitute children, or we're going to have to increase spending on government payments to mothers.

Mike, you have to have sex to be at risk of paying child support. You are safe.

---

We institutionalize people all the time for self-harm, so the mantra of my body, my choice isn't even used when people are literally only harming their own bodies. If that thing in her womb is a person, it's not her body. I get tired of political arguments being reduced to one liners. It's for simpletons, and people eat that [BLEEP] up.

The government should have no say in how you live your life. My personal stance, I am not for abortion unless the baby will suffer after being born due to a both defect or the pregnancy will kill the mother. But my political stance will always be pro choice. No matter the subject.

The highly controversial legal and moral question is when does the life (and the right to life) of the unborn child begin?  Is it at conception, birth, or some point in between?

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

The government should have no say in how you live your life. My personal stance, I am not for abortion unless the baby will suffer after being born due to a both defect or the pregnancy will kill the mother. But my political stance will always be pro choice. No matter the subject.

The highly controversial legal and moral question is when does the life (and the right to life) of the unborn child begin?  Is it at conception, birth, or some point in between?

That is something you will never get everyone to agree on.

---

The issue is men don't have to carry the baby for 9 months and they don't have to take the risks of having the baby. Don't get me wrong, I would be devastated if a woman got an abortion when I wanted to keep the baby but in the end, I don't have to carry it in my body for 9 months.

I understand that, my point is that if he doesnt want the baby and she does then he should be free of the future responsibilities. Call it Non-Birthing Parent Abdication or something. If she gets the choice to eliminate the problem regardless of his input then he should have the same option.

Your option is going to create a lot of kids who are raised without dads.

---

So we should do away with divorce?

---

I understand that, my point is that if he doesnt want the baby and she does then he should be free of the future responsibilities. Call it Non-Birthing Parent Abdication or something. If she gets the choice to eliminate the problem regardless of his input then he should have the same option.

Your option is going to create a lot of kids who are raised without dads.

Yes, right up until women figure out that the Gravy Train isnt running anymore. Suddenly marriage will become fashionable again when the benefits of Bastardy are eliminated.

---

I understand that, my point is that if he doesnt want the baby and she does then he should be free of the future responsibilities. Call it Non-Birthing Parent Abdication or something. If she gets the choice to eliminate the problem regardless of his input then he should have the same option.

If we give unmarried men that kind of option, almost all of them will take it. People underestimate how big a role child support payments play in overall child welfare. Point being, if you do this, you're going to have a lot more destitute children, or we're going to have to increase spending on government payments to mothers.

We should eliminate that as well and return welfare to the private sector where it belongs. Public Policy should encourage self reliance not encourage irresponsible behavior.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Killing babies... I am against most abortion. Women use today as a form as birth control because they refuse to practice safe sex. Its disgusting and is what is ugliest about the human race. If we cannot protect the most innocent of us, than what good are we?

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

For those of you so fervently against abortion, let me ask you this. What would you do in cases of rape, molestation and cases where birth control was used and it failed? None of these scenarios are the woman's fault in any way. Would you still force her to have it?

---

For those of you so fervently against abortion, let me ask you this. What would you do in cases of rape, molestation and cases where birth control was used and it failed? None of these scenarios are the woman's fault in any way. Would you still force her to have it?

I think most people would be for allowing abortion in those cases, except people that oppose abortion for religious reasons. I am not religious, at all. I just find the practice vile and disgusting and beneath being human. It absolves people of their decisions at the expense of human babies.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

For those of you so fervently against abortion, let me ask you this. What would you do in cases of rape, molestation and cases where birth control was used and it failed? None of these scenarios are the woman's fault in any way. Would you still force her to have it?

Sure, exceptions for rape and molestation. Those cases are exceedingly rare. I want to say it's less than 1%. As for failed birth control, risk is inherent in everything you do. With proper education and contraceptive availability, people who engage in recreational sex should be willing to assume the risk that comes with it. This includes the man AND the woman. People that engage in any risky behavior need to assume the consequences. Dudes who get herpes live for that the rest of their life. Why should a baby be different? Because we can kill it?

---

For those of you so fervently against abortion, let me ask you this. What would you do in cases of rape, molestation and cases where birth control was used and it failed? None of these scenarios are the woman's fault in any way. Would you still force her to have it?

Sure, exceptions for rape and molestation. Those cases are exceedingly rare. I want to say it's less than 1%. As for failed birth control, risk is inherent in everything you do. With proper education and contraceptive availability, people who engage in recreational sex should be willing to assume the risk that comes with it. This includes the man AND the woman. People that engage in any risky behavior need to assume the consequences. Dudes who get herpes live for that the rest of their life. Why should a baby be different? Because we can kill it?

Why pick and chose which risky behavior consequences you address or don't?

Driving is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Drinking is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Eating sugary food is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 

So why do we suddenly draw the line at the risk associated with sex?

---

For those of you so fervently against abortion, let me ask you this. What would you do in cases of rape, molestation and cases where birth control was used and it failed? None of these scenarios are the woman's fault in any way. Would you still force her to have it?

Sure, exceptions for rape and molestation. Those cases are exceedingly rare. I want to say it's less than 1%. As for failed birth control, risk is inherent in everything you do. With proper education and contraceptive availability, people who engage in recreational sex should be willing to assume the risk that comes with it. This includes the man AND the woman. People that engage in any risky behavior need to assume the consequences. Dudes who get herpes live for that the rest of their life. Why should a baby be different? Because we can kill it?

Exactly. A baby should never be treated as something to "cure" unless the pregnancy is actually risking the mother's life.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Sure, exceptions for rape and molestation. Those cases are exceedingly rare. I want to say it's less than 1%. As for failed birth control, risk is inherent in everything you do. With proper education and contraceptive availability, people who engage in recreational sex should be willing to assume the risk that comes with it. This includes the man AND the woman. People that engage in any risky behavior need to assume the consequences. Dudes who get herpes live for that the rest of their life. Why should a baby be different? Because we can kill it?

Why pick and chose which risky behavior consequences you address or don't?

Driving is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Drinking is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Eating sugary food is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 

So why do we suddenly draw the line at the risk associated with sex?

Sure you do. We drive with a risk. If we get in a car accident, we suffer. If we don't have insurance, we suffer. Drinking is a risk. If you get black out drunk and fall down stairs, that's a risk. People eat sugar and get diabetes. That's a risk. They get fat. That's a risk. There's no takebacks for any of that. You're the one that wants to draw the line. 

Tell you what. New idea while I was typing that. Sex Insurance. You pay an extra premium on your insurance. You get accidentally pregnant, the insurance covers the cost of the pregnancy, any missed time of work, and any adoption fees or maternity leave. It's a government mandated programs that health insurances must carry. You can opt out if you don't want it.

---

Why pick and chose which risky behavior consequences you address or don't?

Driving is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Drinking is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 
Eating sugary food is a risk, but we don't ignore those consequences 

So why do we suddenly draw the line at the risk associated with sex?

Sure you do. We drive with a risk. If we get in a car accident, we suffer. If we don't have insurance, we suffer. Drinking is a risk. If you get black out drunk and fall down stairs, that's a risk. People eat sugar and get diabetes. That's a risk. They get fat. That's a risk. There's no takebacks for any of that. You're the one that wants to draw the line. 

But you don't deny people treatment who suffer the consequences of those risks. But with unwanted pregnancy, we suddenly think it OK to refuse treatment.

---

What are you talking about? In each of those examples, the person has to pay for their poor choices. They can get treatment, but it costs them. It costs one increase in insurance premiums and medical bills. We don't cover this. In the second, it costs them their dignity and medical bills. We don't cover that. In the third, it costs them their beauty and medical bills. They have to pay in each instance. Not to mention the potential lifelong damages. Stop coddling people. We make choices. You don't get to kill another human being because a condom broke. That's the risk of having sex.

---

What are you talking about? In each of those examples, the person has to pay for their poor choices. They can get treatment, but it costs them. It costs one increase in insurance premiums and medical bills. We don't cover this. In the second, it costs them their dignity and medical bills. We don't cover that. In the third, it costs them their beauty and medical bills. They have to pay in each instance. Not to mention the potential lifelong damages. Stop coddling people. We make choices. You don't get to kill another human being because a condom broke. That's the risk of having sex.

But these people can pay for treatment. We don't make it illegal to get treatment for a car accident.  Why is it illegal to get treatment for a sex accident?

---

What are you talking about? In each of those examples, the person has to pay for their poor choices. They can get treatment, but it costs them. It costs one increase in insurance premiums and medical bills. We don't cover this. In the second, it costs them their dignity and medical bills. We don't cover that. In the third, it costs them their beauty and medical bills. They have to pay in each instance. Not to mention the potential lifelong damages. Stop coddling people. We make choices. You don't get to kill another human being because a condom broke. That's the risk of having sex.

But these people can pay for treatment. We don't make it illegal to get treatment for a car accident.  Why is it illegal to get treatment for a sex accident?

BECAUSE IT’S MURDER!!

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

But these people can pay for treatment. We don't make it illegal to get treatment for a car accident.  Why is it illegal to get treatment for a sex accident?

BECAUSE IT’S MURDER!!

So you're against pro choice for one thing, but pro choice for another.  I think that meets the definition of hypocrite.

tsk tsk

---

BECAUSE IT’S MURDER!!

So you're against pro choice for one thing, but pro choice for another.  I think that meets the definition of hypocrite.

tsk tsk

No, not even close

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

So you're against pro choice for one thing, but pro choice for another.  I think that meets the definition of hypocrite.

tsk tsk

No, not even close

But you are, Blanche. You are in that chair.

---