It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Now before we get off on the wrong foot here, I want to say that clearly the man who is the subject of the news article below was wrong in his actions. You can't go violently attacking people in a civilized society. But having said that, I can empathize with the man, and would like to examine the deeper socio-economic issues behind this news brief.
Story and editorial
S 125.40 Abortion in the second degree.
A person is guilty of abortion in the second degree when he commits an
abortional act upon a female, unless such abortional act is justifiable
pursuant to subdivision three of section 125.05.
Abortion in the second degree is a class E felony.
I think you are missing the point of what the author was saying. But to your point then. Why is it LESS illegal for a woman to abort outside of a clinic?
Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
Let's ignore his method and deal with the bigger question.
If infanticide/feticide/child murder is legal for one parent, why not the other? It is simple fairness.
omg, thats just sick, if you Didnt want to be a father? Maybe you should of put something on the end of it? Bit late once you concieve to have second thoughts (for a bloke).
Originally posted by CobraCommander
reply to post by Wolvo
He's not justifying the method the attacker used. But he is pointing out that there are much deeper issues behind the reported attack. Why should a man be forced by law to be a father, when women have no such obligation?
Of course, there is the tired old excuse that the man should wear a condom if he does not want to be a father. Sorry folks, that # don't fly with me. Women have far more choices when it comes to birth control, up to and including termination of a pregnancy (or simply insisting that the man wear a condom in the first place.) With rights comes responsibility. Why should the man be responsible for the WOMAN'S CHOICE? It is not a shared responsibility, it is not a mutual decision, it is the woman's choice, plain and simple, as this news article makes abundantly clear. The woman is responsible for her own body, and the man has NO RIGHTS over whether or not "his" child is brought into the world.
Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
Let's ignore his method and deal with the bigger question.
If infanticide/feticide/child murder is legal for one parent, why not the other? It is simple fairness.