For men who are pro life: what would you say to being told that you don't have a right over your own body? Because that's what you're telling women.

At the end of the day the issue is SO simple:

Whether or not you consider a fetus a person, it has o right to a woman's body.
If it's not a sentient being, much less a person then of course no argument will be made.
But even if you DO consider it a person then it has only the rights of any other person and NO person has a right to make use of another person's body against their will.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

graphite · 61-69, M

When men are ordered to fight wars, they don't have a right to their own body. How many guys were shipped off to die in Vietnam against their will?

Pikachu

@graphite

Forced conscription is definitely a problematic issue in my mind.
Make a thread about it because it has nothing to do with this one.

graphite · 61-69, M

@Pikachu We're always hearing about a woman being denied the right to their own body if abortion were outlawed but we never hear about how this happens to men and is forged into law. Someone asked Kavanaugh during his hearing about any example where men are denied jurisdiction over their own bodies and he didn't even mention this. The implication of the thread is that unlike women, men always have full jurisdiction over their own bodies but they don't.

Pikachu

@graphite

No such implication is being made. If you inferred it then evidently you have something to say about it and i suggest you make your own thread devoted to the subject...because it has nothing to do with this one.

graphite · 61-69, M

@Pikachu I think it does. What we have is a western culture where women's needs and rights are paramount but men's rights and needs are dismissed. Men dying in wars? Men accounting for 80% of suicides? 80% of homeless? Meh.

Pikachu

@graphite

I think we can sum this up as you are against men being told that they have no right over their bodies.

LeopoldBloom · M

@graphite In case you haven't noticed, we've had an all-volunteer military in the U.S. for decades. Forced conscription was way overdue to be ended.

However, around two-thirds of soldiers in Vietnam were actually volunteers. The reason forced conscription ended was because it wasn't necessary. Military leaders also didn't want to deal with angry, resentful recruits who didn't want to be there. You don't hear about fragging incidents anymore.

graphite · 61-69, M

@LeopoldBloom And men are still required to sign up for Selective Service at age 18, providing the government with a list of people disposable on the battlefield, if necessary. Only men make this list of disposable people. I had to sign up. (I wonder how many soldiers in Vietnam were drafted into the Army but, resigned to their fate, ended up "volunteering" for a stint in one of the other services, instead. Avoid the 2 years in the Army by getting perhaps a better deal with 4 years in the Navy or the USAF)