Difference between revisions of "Talk:Forced-pregnancy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(reply) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:You may believe it's against God's law, which then you can say it's a religious crime, I guess. But it's not a crime in terms of the laws of this land. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 10:48, 5 September 2008 (EDT) | :You may believe it's against God's law, which then you can say it's a religious crime, I guess. But it's not a crime in terms of the laws of this land. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 10:48, 5 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: Quit being technical, we are not in court. -- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:Jpatt|jp]] 10:52, 5 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 14:52, September 5, 2008
Two minor grammatical points: 1) If it's the law of the land, then technically, it's not a crime. 2) If a woman wants an abortion, and can't have one because abortion is illegal, then technically she IS being forced to carry it to term. I mean, obviously it's an argument for the pro-choice crowd, but on the fact of it alone, it's true. --Jareddr 10:33, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
It is a crime, it is evil elevated to the high status of law. It is a crime against mankind, a crime against God, a crime against a child, not a choice. Is not pro-choice a true term as well? The mother gets to decide, a choice, two paths, freedom... "It's my choice, keep the baby or kill the baby." -- 
jp 10:44, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
- You may believe it's against God's law, which then you can say it's a religious crime, I guess. But it's not a crime in terms of the laws of this land. --Jareddr 10:48, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
- Quit being technical, we are not in court. --
jp 10:52, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
- Quit being technical, we are not in court. --