http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060308/ap_ ... rhood_suit
The problem with this lawsuit is that it doesn't deal with married men's reproductive, procreative and adoptive rights within marriage, men's right to advocate abortions for the wives and daughters of married men, or men's right to medically abort women in the first place.
I could argue that unmarried persons don't have any right to reproduce at all. So, in cases like this lawsuit deals with, an unmarried woman could be forced to abort if she and her lover-boy can't, or don't want, to get married.
I would only argue as a legal theorist since there are no laws on the books requiring unmarried woman to abort at this time. However, the principle of terminating unwanted pregnancies by abortive medical procedures has become well established in law for over 30 years now, and it would be a case of gender and religious discrimination to deny Christian men the right to have their babies aborted when Jewish medical men and women already have the right to perform abortions on Christian women.
Roe v Wade for Men
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Roe v Wade for Men
Post #11Religious apartheid has been steadily incremented in the US ever since WW2 by separation of church and state, you know.McCulloch wrote:Let's establish Religious Apartheid. It did not work so well in Germany in the 30's and early 40's, but what the heck, why not try it again?
Post #12
Only my deep sense of propriety is keeping me from laughing uproariously at this outrageous statement.
Where in this country are Christians forbidden from going, where everyone else is allowe to go?
Apartheid was a system by which blacks were forbidden to live anywhere but in certain areas. They typically also could only hold certain jobs.
If you would like to implement actual Apartheid for Christians, then this would drastically change the lifestyle of freedom that all Christians in the U.S. currently enjoy.
I'm sure your suggestion would be found insulting by anyone who actually experienced apartheid. It is insulting enough for those of us who actually understand the deep injustice and oppression that apartheid represents. Perhaps you should have a discussion with Archbishop Tutu before making such ridiculous statements.
You mean secular socialists like the late William Renquist? You mean atheistic humanists like Clarence Thomas, Chief justice Roberts, Samuel Alito, Janice Rogers Brown, Sandra Day O'connor, Anthony Scalia etc. etc.?
Where in this country are Christians forbidden from going, where everyone else is allowe to go?
Apartheid was a system by which blacks were forbidden to live anywhere but in certain areas. They typically also could only hold certain jobs.
If you would like to implement actual Apartheid for Christians, then this would drastically change the lifestyle of freedom that all Christians in the U.S. currently enjoy.
I'm sure your suggestion would be found insulting by anyone who actually experienced apartheid. It is insulting enough for those of us who actually understand the deep injustice and oppression that apartheid represents. Perhaps you should have a discussion with Archbishop Tutu before making such ridiculous statements.
jcrawford wrote:we are all judged by secular socialists and atheistic humanists.
You mean secular socialists like the late William Renquist? You mean atheistic humanists like Clarence Thomas, Chief justice Roberts, Samuel Alito, Janice Rogers Brown, Sandra Day O'connor, Anthony Scalia etc. etc.?
