The father has no choice because he's not the one taking all the risk.
The unborn child still has no rights, just like the dog example I used.
The Nazi crap is exactly that....crap
Slavery was legal, but now it's not
Abortion was illegal and now it is
Both are improvements, whether you happen to agree or not
Margaret Sanger was part and parcel of the Nazi planning, and the creator of Planned Parenthood for the same reasons; eugenics. This is historical fact.
The dog analogy fails because the child is, as you admit, human.
Because something is legal, or illegal, does not make it morally or ethically right. This is entirely the case in point, and thus the references to blacks and women formerly having no rights is accurate. You cannot simply dismiss those points as they are pertinent to the issue at hand.
The father is, in fact, taking substantial risks in the case of the child. However, that is irrelevant to the discussion as it is illegal to discriminate between the sexes, illegal to give rights and privileges differently between the sexes, and if under your concept the child is mere property of the mother then it is equally so property of the father based upon biology and the anti-discrimination laws.
In light of this, please continue.
Why should I continue when all you do is parrot the same things endlessly?
The father isn't risking anything because a a pregnancy, and to even suggest that shows you're not serious, or not smart.
Sanger died before abortions were legal, and she didn't support them at all, showing you know the buzzwords but not the details
One shot, one kill........ It saves a lot of ammo!
