I just said it comes with natural consequences that include the presence of a human life inside one's body, and we're not obliged to provide a way out of those natural consequences once the exercising of this right begins to infringe on the very right to life of another. It's not making a moral statement to say that if a person has sex, they should be prepared to accept biological consequences, it's a scientific one.
21 comments
You do realize that cute widdle babies become adults, right? Just because I have sex doesn't mean I'm signing up for parenthood. Ideally, only those who were capable and ready to parent would be able to get pregnant/get someone pregnant, but biology doesn't work that way.
If it's inside my body, *I* have every right to decide if it stays or goes. If it's a zygote, embryo, or fetus, I WANT IT GONE. Same as I'd want a tumor, tapeworm, or foreign body (no pun intended) removed.
Hmm. Y'know, the fact that this was said by someone born with "outdoor plumbing" somehow fails to surprise me.
A perennial fundie hot-button issue, but not really batshit-crazy. I rate it a 3.
It's not making a moral statement to say that if a person has sex, they should be prepared to accept biological consequences
Sure. We have birth control. Then there's Plan B. Then there's abortion. What's Alex's point?
I actually agree with the last sentence of this quote. If you have sex you should be prepared to accept the consequences. That being said the consequences could be pregnancy. Which could lead to a child or an abortion. One way or another a person should be fully aware that these are possible and be prepared to commit to one or the other. Or, in the case of most guys, be aware that you have almost no control over the choice of one of the other.
Sorry, for the little rant but I feel strongly that the possibilities should be fully disclosed between sexual partners well before sex takes place.
Ok, Alex, now take this to the next step. If a person who has sex should be prepared to accept the biological consequences, wouldn't make sense to do something to prevent those consequences?
I realize that I'm making an assumption that you oppose birth control, but in my experience, most people who oppose abortions as a moral issue (which you do, despite your arguments to the contrary) also oppose birth control. What they don't seem to get is that if birth control use was encouraged , it would cut down on abortions.
It's a wonderful little critter with a right to life ...or it's a "consequence"?
Which is the thing that makes you all warm and fuzzy, that dear little baby, or the glee you get from punishing some poor woman who doesn't want a baby?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
