Alito

[Not Afraid]

I guess the matter of choice goes like this.....when man chooses to have sex, little cash registers should go off in his head at that time, if he doesn't mind the sound and the implication, then he can continue. If he does mind, then he should probably switch to masturbation.

[Name]

Make something illegal, and it is only going to drive it underground..... while morally, it would probably be better to include all partners in the decision making process of such things as abortion, however reality is that it just isn't going to happen except in a perfect world. Make something illegal, and those that think that the money is more important then following the law will continue to perform the procedures, probably with a lot more risk to all...

To think that we ever have control of another person, and what they will or will not do is, in my opinion, an absurd idea.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Not irrelevant but easy to dismiss when someone argues that Clinton is to blame for everything this administration does wrong.

Is that something I have done here?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Scaeagles, there are lots of instances where birth control is used, and it fails. Why should the woman be the only one who pays? I guess because that's how it's alway been, eh?

Why should the woman be the only one with a say about if the child is born?

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Name

To think that we ever have control of another person, and what they will or will not do is, in my opinion, an absurd idea.

I certainly agree with you - but isn't that what laws are all about? Creating consequences intended to control our behavior? Of course, we always can decide to take those consequences.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Why should the woman be the only one with a say about if the child is born?

Because she'll be the one raising them.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I'm curious if you'd make the same argument for a married couple - Should a husband be allowed to withold finacial support of a child he didn't want with his wife - what would that situation look like? Or would the presumption be, divorce would be result of this situation?

Hmmm....I haven't much thought about it. An interesting conundrum that I will have to consider.

My first thought is that a marriage is a contract, of sorts, in the law. Upon divorce, the assets are split up by a court because there has been a legal agreement entered into. This, I suppose, then changes the situaiton a bit. In marriage, there is a legal agreement, and therefore a larger degree of responsibility on the part of the male.

I do need to think about that a bit more.

[Name]

I certainly agree with you - but isn't that what laws are all about? Creating consequences intended to control our behavior? Of course, we always can decide to take those consequences.

exactly, we can, and do, choose to take the consequences of whether we want to follow the law. Its a social contract, you either agree with the law, and follow it, or you don't and either get away with it, or pay the consequences. Making things illegal, have never stopped those activities, they have only created criminals.

[Not Afraid]

You know, I just have to say that I love the way we tend to discuss things here. There is a lot of thoughtful, open discussion with different options being presented for consideration. I llove you guys!

[Name]

In marriage, there is a legal agreement, and therefore a larger degree of responsibility on the part of the male.

huh??? how is there a difference in the level of responsibility in a legal agreement between the sexes?? Or did I read it wrong??