Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
and in typing that i feel disappointed that i can only type 100s of countries and not 1000s of countries, which i figure would be way more interesting.
-
i think there are 100s of countries around the world that punish lawbreakers in an inhumane manner.
-
i'll just check,
-
Grant, I'm not a condemner, sorry.
-
thanks heather, that's pretty much me, and i should stress i'm not a supporter of waterboarding, but i'm not completely against forcing people to watch oprah for extended periods, as a more acute form of torture. I have no idea what goes on inside guantanamo to be hoonest. who really does? it was poorly chosen as jake said, but i feel i have gone to some lengths to clarify the issue, regardless of people's feelings about the means employed by the US to maintain national and international security.
-
sorry,
jake,
"to refuse consent to"doesn't mean prevent or stop, just means refuse to consent to, fortunately if the father doesn't consent to the abortion he can't physically prevent it, but i think it's necessary for further child support cases, that this goes on record
a rhetorical question-
a father can't prevent an abortion of his child?
not a statement of intention or fact or anything else
as I understand it, for all the bad press about guantanamo, it's primary purpose is to protect US and allied interests and prevent foreign interference, the action taken inside is divisive and non passive. and it's highly likely it has saved lives
if you have issues with the torture in guantanamo you can take that up with your local representative
but similarly, I argue that what goes on inside a women's body is her choice, for the betterment of herself, again the procedure, couldn't fully be described as passive to the body or nature, it's again a divisive issue, but again i feel this choice should be without outside interference. because it saves lives,
-
take it as you want Jack,
I'm satisfied i've clarified myself and satisfied with the answers i received -
thanks for your replies.
-
and to clarify that, further, the girls father insists she terminates the pregnancy on threat of injury, but the father of the child is employed and promises to take care of the child,
firstly if this case were heard by an independent body, with the fetus's father apparent, this could help to distinguish the role of the father the mother and the patriarchal grandfather, and in some cases be more empowering to the female than if she'd just been driven in an uncompromising position to the abortion clinic by her father.
or would you just prefer it as it is george, where what gramps says goes?
-
really george, what is poor quality about suggesting counseling for or at least a little education for males involved in the abortion process? what is poor quality about suggesting that the father should also be offered the option to be a party to the discussion or that his opinion is heard with regards to the termination,
what checks are in place if a man wishes for an abortion but the the baby is carried through? and he is forced to pay for that pregnancy for the rest of his life? we're not just talking about a autonomy of body here, where talking about future oak trees
If a woman were to convince the male that she will endure the pregnancy and seek no child support, then what public record is there of this statement?
if a woman has had her arm twisted into the abortion by a husband or father, then what role could a partner have in preventing the patriarchy controlling the daughters body assuming things could go on public record and mediated by a nonpartisan female?
why invalidate these concerns george?