Give women choices, and the world goes to Hell in a handbasket. It would be far better if we didn’t let them think for themselves.

“If you call “meddling in a decision they will never be called upon to make” humanity and decency, I suppose it does. I have other terms for it, myself.”

Like you, I sympathize with the difficulty such women face in deciding whether to dismember their offspring. It would be so much easier for them if they only had one option — to choose life.

“I always find it of interest that the most vocal opposition to abortion comes from men, or male-dominated groups.”

Yes, I find that interesting too. In my view, it does speak to the humanity and decency of such men.

“I always found it funny how anti-choice people automatically assume that pro-choice people don’t know what an abortion IS.”

I always found it sad how anti-life people can acknowledge the gruesome reality of what abortion IS, and actually justify it in their minds.

What? You’re going to snuff out a life by refusing to give your body to someone else against your will? John, your kidney would sustain someone! Surely, being forced to give it to someone else is only reasonable, right?

[The right to an abortion] is about the right of women to control their destinies, full stop.”

Think of what you’re saying when you use that logic. The effect of aborting a baby is that a woman controls her destiny, by choosing when to give birth. But in order to seize such control, she has to kill her own offspring. If killing offspring produces control — if the right to abortion is essentially about women retaining control — then the question is whether women should have such control or not.

Control superseding the right to life? Control superseding the right of others to control their own lives? That’s the control that is justified simply because the baby is growing inside the mother? It seems that what you’re saying is that if someone depends on you totally, you should therefore have the prerogative to revoke that which they depend on, even if it means causing them to die.

If someone depends totally on you after they have been born, should it be your prerogative to kill them? To starve them? To abandon them? To dissolve your legal responsibility to them? At what point do we draw the line of responsibility and obligation? Because if the priority is to give someone control over those who depend on them, then we can take that concept to extremes.

In my opinion, women should not have such control. They should not have so much control that they can snuff out another life. Full stop.