2007-01-10 15:33:44 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
What would be the point?
2007-01-10 15:47:37 · answer #1 · answered by Paul K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Female gays....being pregnant is much as the same as the straight lady. It's not because they're gays that they can already be allowed to have abortion. Hey , they did it..so?...there shouldn't be any exemptions. The law holds through to everyone. My answer is gay or not...joining civil unions or not...they should be responsible of whatever the end result of what they've done... so, answer is BAN.
2007-01-10 15:43:29 · answer #2 · answered by jad 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We should ban abortion when she has sex and does not want a child. We should ban civil unions because it is a back door way to get gay marriage. Start with unions and in a few decades they will want marriage
2007-01-10 16:20:44 · answer #3 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, those darn gays and their aborting babies like every other week has got to stop. I can't stand those lesbians and all of their getting knocked up and just thinking shucks how did that happen? Oh well lets go to Dr. Cranegame he will fix this malady.
2007-01-10 15:39:40 · answer #4 · answered by Stozzz 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So assuming here you mean a) gay females and b) become pregnant through IVF. Given the costs associated with IVF you'd have to assume the scenario you describe has probably never happened and likely never will. Could you please clarify what you mean?
2007-01-10 15:41:00 · answer #5 · answered by Fluffy 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry......that just doens't make sense.
2007-01-10 15:37:51 · answer #6 · answered by chole_24 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They can't become pregnant, duh, unless it's by some bizarre method, which itself should be banned.
2007-01-10 15:38:22 · answer #7 · answered by Joseph C 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋