I am.
I believe I have a right to choose to beat your children.
I believe I have a right to choose to steal your car.
I believe I have a right to choose to burn your house down.
I believe I have a right to choose to skin your cat.
I believe I have a right to choose to set you on fire.
I believe I have a right to choose to mow down crowds of people on sidewalks with my car.
I believe I have a right to choose to burn piles of tires and pollute the air.
I believe I have a right to choose to fart on an elevator.
I believe I have a right to choose to kill you.
Pro-choice. The right to choose whatever it is I choose to do regardless of moral or ethical concerns.
2006-09-17 10:40:38 · 32 answers · asked by BrianthePigEatingInfidel 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Now tell how you can justify abortion by saying you believe you have a right to choose. If your choice in that matter is free from all moral and ethical constraints, then why isn't every other choice likewise free of those constraints?
2006-09-17 10:44:35 · update #1
Ok callstrat, so freedom of speech means freedom to murder? Obviously you are not aware of negative rights versus positive one.
Freedom of speech harms no one. Abortion, and all the others I listed here, require the harm of another individual.
2006-09-17 11:11:50 · update #2
Godisdead, that's pretty clever, but that has nothing to do with the question.
And besides, I odn't believe we ever bombed innocent Iraqis. We bombed mostly empty government buildings using GPS-guided, high-precision bombs, which resulted in almost zero collateral damage.
2006-09-17 11:28:25 · update #3
WEIRD
2006-09-17 10:42:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 6⤋
Nobody said that the choice was free from consequences. All of your examples carry consequences dictated by societal laws. If someone chooses - and make no mistake, every example you gave is a choice - to do those things then they have to live, or die, by that choice. It's the same with abortion. There are definite repercussions and consequences that a woman must deal with by making this choice - some spiritual, some physical, mostly emotional - just as there are repercussions and consequences of having the baby and putting it up for adoption or even keeping the child and raising it. All I'm saying is: who are you to dicate what choices someone should or shouldn't make? Only God can do that.
2006-09-17 11:11:58 · answer #2 · answered by johngjordan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The contradiction is the things you listed ARE illegal. While you may have the freedom to do such things, that does not mean there arent consequences and you have the law against you.
The Q of abortion is, should the govt fund and sanction the taking of innocent life? Should we have the blessing from the law to murder at will? That leads to a pretty anarchistic immoral unsafe unproductive society- kinda like the middle east!
2006-09-17 10:50:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
the right to choose is a law but what you have listed is either unlawful to do or ridiculous.
I'm pro-choice when it comes to the life of the mother, incest, or rape.
I'm opposed to late term abortions unless the mothers life is in danger!
I'm somewhat undecided about 1st trimester abortions on a regular bases but if i had to vote would probably vote for abortions on a very early basis if that is what the mother chooses! i would also place a limit on how many abortions a woman could get before having her tubes tied!
2006-09-17 10:47:59 · answer #4 · answered by lou 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ignorance... What a sad pathetic thing it is...
I'm pro-choice, but not pro-abortion. I don't like abortion, but if it's illegalized, it won't go away, it will just go underground. I wish people became smarter and realized probation never works for anything...
Also the fact is that a woman's body is her own. It's her body, it's her choice, whether I or you like it or not.
As for moral and ethics, I think it's immoral to pass judgement and speak in ignorance. Do you think the religious right has the monopoly in morality and ethics? What irony then that the most civilized, tolerant and orderly countries are secular liberal ones such as Canada, Sweden, Finland...
2006-09-17 10:49:59 · answer #5 · answered by Epicarus 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I believe I have the right to choose to bomb the hell out of Innocent Iraqis
I believe I have the right to choose to change the reason why I chose originally to bomb the hell out of innocent Iraqis
I have the right to choose to change the reason as many times as i need to bomb the hell out of innocent Iraqis
2006-09-17 11:25:39 · answer #6 · answered by jpknute1 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Interesting philosophical point you possess; however, it is sorely incorrect. Having a "right" and having a "choice" are two entirely different things. I have the "right to bear arms," however, I have a choice on whom I choose to impose this right upon. Also, I have the right to peacefully assemble; however, I have the choice as to what I will peacefully assemble for.
Please don't confuse having a right and having a choice because I am afraid that with the philosophy you currently have in mind you may find yourself in prison or surrounded by some very upset people. Thank you and God Bless America!
2006-09-17 10:46:09 · answer #7 · answered by babylove 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Oh my gosh that is so true! These little ... chicks (I'm refraining from using worse terms) think that they can just sleep with anyone they want and not deal with the consequences, by using abortion. Well imagine when they are speaking with God on judgment day and they see the baby that they had brutally murdered. Well it will be on any flousy's conscience for the rest of her life.
2006-09-17 10:47:47 · answer #8 · answered by Victoria W 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I am anti choice if the choice involves hurting someone else or taking the life of another, even if someone thinks a their child is a piece of property, that is a human life.
Just because you own a dog, doesn't mean you are allowed to abuse and kill it. IF someone catches you doing it, there are animal rights laws.
I wouldn't do to an animal or my worst enemy what people have done to thier flesh and blood because it's "theirs", It's not a tumor to be removed, it's a separate individual!
it's science!
2006-09-17 10:44:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Definitely pro-choice.
2006-09-17 11:32:36 · answer #10 · answered by cityexplorer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm pro-choice concerning what a woman does with her body. When she aborts a fetus, she is making a conscience choice that she believes is best for her and the fetus. Those are the only people involved (usually the father is relieved.)
That's great that you like to do all those things, I doubt you'll ever need to worry about getting an abortion yourself. You're too scary for anyone to want to have sex with.
2006-09-17 10:46:07 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋