is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?

[Deckard]

pro-life AND pro-gay rights

No contradiction there, but obviously a lot of pro-lifers' opposition to gay rights tends to result from the common factor of the Bible and more specifically how they choose to interpret it. But that got me thinking: I wonder which is more uncommon amongst self-described conservatives: being anti-gay rights or anti-abortion?

[Strangelet]

Anyway I'm very much anti-life. In fact when I go out for a hike, and I'm in the mountains surrounded by nature I get really mean and say "god i hate all this fucking life everywhere."

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

Exactly. Define pro-life, Bryant and i'll see if I fit the bill

i see myself as pro-life in that i do not believe abortion should be allowed unless the mother's life is in danger. i believe that adoption should be the policy, because once conception occurs, the child is a seperate entity and 'aborting' them is no different than killing a newborn. on the same token, i believe that killing others is wrong and do not believe abortion clinics should be bombed, and i believe the death penalty should be abolished.

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

I'm gonna stir it up here by saying that it is very easy for a guy to be pro-life.

if i ever got a girl pregnant outside of marriage, i would have to commit to her and the kid as if i were having the child myself or i would be just as guilty as a woman having an abortion. although i could never hold the amount of responsibility of a pregnant woman, i would have to remember that the child is 100% my responsibility as well as 100% hers and treat it as such. people who get women pregnant and run off are as guilty or more because they leave the woman alone to raise the child and push them towards the decision.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

I'm gonna stir it up here by saying that it is very easy for a guy to be pro-life.

true. at the same time you could also say it can be very easy for a guy to be pro-choice. depending on what he did last night.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Rog

Instead of 'pro-life' Bryant, wouldn't you be better off describing yourself as Anti-abortion?

anti-abortion, yes. and i can think of a number of more accurate ways to describe the position:

anti-choice, anti-individual rights, anti-women's health rights, pro-government intrusion, pro-government legislation over individual bodies, pro-revokation of individual civil rights, pro-punishment for reproductive females

etc etc

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

although i could never hold the amount of responsibility of a pregnant woman

not even a whisper of a dream of a fantasy of the amount of responsibility of the pregnant woman.

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

if i ever got a girl pregnant outside of marriage, i would have to commit to her and the kid as if i were having the child myself or i would be just as guilty as a woman having an abortion. although i could never hold the amount of responsibility of a pregnant woman, i would have to remember that the child is 100% my responsibility as well as 100% hers and treat it as such. people who get women pregnant and run off are as guilty or more because they leave the woman alone to raise the child and push them towards the decision.

I agree 100% with everything you've said here. Buuuuuuut, as history has always shown and I don't see it changing anytime soon, it's more common than not many males do not hold up to this side of the bargin.



And kudos to you in your way of responsible thinking, you should make every effort to preach this to as many of your fellow male friends as possible. Not that I can tell the future or anything, but I kinda see you as being one of those guys who, after getting married, has a grand litter(+) of kids. Kinda in-the-closest horny kinda guy. Not gay in the closest either.


See:

Originally Posted by dubman

kinda want to make fun of this but then i'd sound like John Rodriguez.
oh no.

I prove another point, yet again. Comparing a match to a torch goofy boy.

[bryantm3]

Originally Posted by cacophony

anti-abortion, yes. and i can think of a number of more accurate ways to describe the position:

anti-choice, anti-individual rights, anti-women's health rights, pro-government intrusion, pro-government legislation over individual bodies, pro-revokation of individual civil rights, pro-punishment for reproductive females

etc etc

all of these things are not what my position (i don't know about others) stands for. i believe a woman has as much right as a man to do anything with her body that she wishes. however, once a child is conceived, i believe, and it is hard to disprove, that a child is alive and no longer part of the individual such as oocytes or semen. indeed, the child still depends on the mother for a nurturing environment in the womb and nutrition, but a newborn child does as well, and cannot survive on its own. arguing that a week old child is not a person vs. a newborn child is almost the same comparison as arguing that a newborn child is not a person vs. an adult.

so, to me, it's not about removing 'women's rights', it's about protecting the right of an individual to live who cannot stand up for her/his self. if it were in any way possible to safely 'adopt' a child still in the womb to another woman, i would support that procedure.

i do believe that a woman has a right to prevent herself from becoming pregnant if she wishes, via condoms, foam, diaphragms, etc.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by cacophony

not even a whisper of a dream of a fantasy of the amount of responsibility of the pregnant woman.

kinda want to make fun of this but then i'd sound like John Rodriguez.
oh no.