Voted "No," and in fact there is no such thing as an absolute right. Nor has there ever been such a thing. In that sense, this question is attempting to close the barn door after the horse is gone.
As the 18th century statesman and political philosopher Edmund Burke wrote, "Government is not made in virtue of natural rights, which may and do exist in total independence of it; and exist in much greater clearness, and in a much greater degree of abstract perfection: but their abstract perfection is their practical defect. By having a right to every thing they want every thing." In that connection, adding, "It is not, what a lawyer tells me I may do; but what humanity, reason, and justice, tell me I ought to do.”
Even in contemporary law, the fanaticism of American political discourse notwithstanding, the right does not exist. There is no right to commit suicide - and if there were the state would have no authority to stop a man from jumping off of a bridge. There is no right to use your body to drive a car - because if there were, such right could not be restricted by a licensing requirement. There is no right to segregate lunch counters. Your body may own the store, but it may not use that right to restrict the rights of others.
Indeed, even the recent debate on vaccinations is silliness on stilts. A child may not attend school if he or she has not been vaccinated against a whole host of illnesses, including rubella, small pox, mumps, measles, etc. The current debate over COVID being an absurd misnomer. The real issue being about what level of government has the authority to regulate vaccination requirements. This typically being left to state and local governments to decide and the recent Federal interventions being a somewhat new innovation.
Even the right to an abortion - itself of only very recent vintage (see Roe v. Wade circa 1973) - is not absolute. The third trimester restriction being in no uncertain terms a limitation of the "right" of a person to do with their bodies what they like. Such restriction would be inconceivable were "My body, my choice" the reigning philosophical, constitutional and legal principle.
In fact, the authority of the state to regulate what an individual may do with his or her body is longstanding and rooted in both moral principle, philosophic considerations and constitutional/legal arguments. The rights of the individual existing in balance with the needs and rights of the community.
To recur to Burke again: "The foundation of government is. . . laid, not in imaginary rights of men, (which at best is a confusion of judicial with civil principles,) but in political convenience, and in human nature; either as that nature is universal, or as it is modified by local habits and social aptitudes. The foundation of government. . . is laid in a provision for our wants, and in a conformity to our duties; it is to purvey for the one; it is to enforce the other... All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter. We balance inconveniences; we give and take; we remit some rights, that we may enjoy others; and we choose rather to be happy citizens than subtle disputants.”
To assert then "My body, my choice" is to assert a principle that cannot be adhered to in practice and is inherently corrupting in theory. It is to embrace an abstraction and look away from the injustices inherent in such an abstraction. It is, as Burke said, to confuse "abstract perfection" with "practical defect." Suffice to say, such confusion pervades American political discourse at the moment, but as a practical matter, American law has never embraced such "abstract perfection."
"There is no such thing as an absolute right"
Is that right though?
@this_is_me_123 Not sure I understand your question. Even the rights articulated in the Bill of Rights are limited in various ways. Free speech, for example, does NOT include libel, slander and various forms of deception. For that matter, you are not free to dispense classified information.
Bottom line, as Burke said of such rights, "their abstract perfection is their practical defect."
I do agree. Good luck finding others who do. SO MUCH double think here, on both the left and right. Vaccine mandates good, abortion bans bad! Or abortion bans good, vaccine mandates bad!
As if anyone, on the left or right, really gives a sh*t about human life. None of you do. People on the left wouldn't even talk to their grandparents or save a homeless guy by donating a dollar to him, but want to act like getting the Fauci Ouchie and virtue signaling for Big Pharma is "saving lives." That eroding away human rights and bodily autonomy is okay because they're paranoid assholes who'll go on Spring Break or riot for George Floyd in 2020, but then act like not wearing a mask in a restaurant or getting a vaccine that wasn't approved for over six months, is "the morally righteous thing to do." Selfish pricks.
Meanwhile people on the right don't even want to pay taxes for starving single mothers or give a single sh*t about all those kids in Afghanistan getting drone striked, and will proceed to sleep with everything that moves. But then act like they give a sh*t about some undeveloped lump of cells and skin of a 6 week old fetus because "life is sacred" and they should tell irresponsible mothers to raise a child for 18 years all while doing f*ck all to actually help contribute to that child. Selfish pricks.
You're all full of sh*t, is what I'm saying. No wonder the elitists use issues like this to control all of you. I can't even blame them with how idiotic both sides act on some bullsh*t any intelligent person like @Xtcy2083 should automatically agree on.
@mcheetah People choose to reproduce.
Why should I pay for other people's kids.
Should my tax dollars go to support kids of wealthy families? Nope!!
I can afford a mansion or a Maserati. So I don't have either.
If I can't afford kids I shouldn't have them.
If ya don't want kids for whatever reason don't get pregnant.
If I cause a car accident, I am liable for the damages. So if ya fuck and don't want to be liable for "accidental kids" make sure ya don't cause an accident.
*I can't afford expensive toys so I don't have them.
In terms of abortion, legal abortion should be an option for the father within the same time frame the mother has to decide. If the woman doesn't inform him, he should have no legal obligation as he didn't have the proper conditions to make an informed decision, however he'd have the right to choose to be a part of the child's life with all the obligations that follow.
In cases where the woman didn't know she was pregnant until it's too late for an abortion, it's a woman's responsibility to keep track of her own body when she's sexually active, same as for her health in general.
I'm still on the fence because of conflicting perspectives. If one has a right to do with their body as they please (abortions) than why not the other (vaccines)? Some say not getting a vaccine causes loss of life, yet some say abortions cause loss of life. So why are not both treated the same? After all, abortions cause more loss of life than Covid.
she took my comment off , so I guess that is like blocking.
Opinion
89Opinion
In theory, but if you are attacked by a bunch of tigers and choose not to have your body eaten I suspect you will find they will provide an exception to the rule. The thing is time eventually heals all wounded lives by eventually shedding the scab. Every death is the memories of a whole lot of misery taken out of this world forever.
And a whole lot of good memories, too, though those tend to be shared enough that some manifestation of them lingers. So, if instead of "should we sacrifice this virgin to the volcano so it doesn't explode?" we ask "should we sacrifice this virgin to the volcano so it doesn't explode 100 years from now when we're all already dead?" we would be still removing the choice but we would be removing it in such a way that shows we're legitimately trying to help the future and not just discarding a girl we don't like because of spite, fear, or superstition. Because if we are honest with ourselves about the 100 year question, the answer is no, we shouldn't sacrifice her if its something that just makes us feel better in the moment, and in being honest with ourselves, we are doomed to acknowledge we aren't actually thinking about anyone 100 years from now.
Of course, this is all a ridiculous example as it equates being eaten by tigers to being thrown into a volcano. Sort of like people who equate pregnancy to a vaccine. Even when there is no obvious metaphor, the important point is they are not the same and so blanket statements with vague connections don't really function as a "gotcha."
Maybe not after the unborn baby looks like a baby, and not liked a tadpole anymore. I think it's better to get an abortion then to have an unwanted baby up to a certain reasonable point. My mom had a baby when she was 18, said the guy date raped her. Abortions were illegal at that time (1965). She put the baby up for adoption right after birth and regretted it every day for the rest of her life. After my mom reunited with my older sister who was in her early 20's, my older sister wouldn't forgive my mom for giving her away and cut off all contact with my mom. It ripped my mom's heart out all over again. Maybe it would have been better if she got an abortion, I don't know. My friend and his wife decided to get an abortion, and my friend couldn't stop thinking about who that baby could have been. What would their life have been like, would the baby have been the best kid ever, etc. He told her he would never suggest she get an abortion again. They had 3 kids after that. There's a lot of factors that go into the decision.
As long as it's YOUR body only, yes.
Someone who wants to get wasted on new year eve and say "my body my choice" is bullshit, because he might later kill someone while driving.
As for abortions, since it's obviously what we're talking about here, yes, of course, it's your body, your choice, but also YOUR consequences.
Whatever you choose, the consequences of it will be yours, and yours only. You want to have the kid and your man doesn't? Well, ok, but you can't ask him to support you, it's your choice. You don't want the kid and your man wants it? Well you can't ask him to stay and support you, it's your choice, not his.
That movement, "my body my choice" is also pushed by people who consider that a man, whether he agrees with that choice or not, has to pay for it, or support it even against his own good. Therefore, it's "my body my choice, but you're the one who pays for it". Unacceptable. You make a choice, you endure the consequences. And if someone wants to support you, it's another choice he'll make on his own.
Your body your choice that's one hundred percent right if you're talking about the vaccine it should be your choice if you're talkin about abortion it's your choice if you're talkin about Cocoa Pebbles or Fruit Loops it's your choice it's your body you decide what you want in it but you don't that's your right is a human being that you're right as a woman got to be 100% honest with you I am pro-choice but if I see a woman getting picked on or getting beat down because she's she is pro-choice I will step in front of her and I will have her back because that's just wrong I think a woman has the right to choose herself it's nobody else's business
If you are talking about taking the jab, then keep in mind that your choice will possibly impact the lives of many people who are around you. On the other hand, if it’s about abortion, then it’s ONLY the mother’s and the baby’s life which is going to get affected.
It’s funny how many conservatives believe that the slogan “my body, my choice” applies only to the vaccines and not to the case of abortion. If merely taking a jab is your choice, then a life altering decision such as raising another life should be that of a mother’s. It’s HER choice. HER body, HER choice. Not YOURS.
I deliberately refrained from mentioning either abortion or the vaccines, because I just knew that people would mention both in the comments. This time I am not going to take a side, nor will I even hint at one. I'm going to just let everyone else present and argue whatever case they want to make, and stay out of it :)
This is not a simple yes/no choice.
It is a situational choice
When it comes to things like abortions then yes there should be a choice because there is a destinct impact on the individual. This also does not have an impact on other around.
If you are talking a covid vaccination jab then the decision has an impact on those around you and the health of the nation. Therefore in this situation if you where to give people a choice not having a jab is going to result in tight restrictions because the welfair of the masses need to be the preference.
I know not all people can have the vaccination for genuine reasons and this also has to be considered. Note being misinformed, ignorant or an idiot does not constitute a genuine reason!
Pretty much... especially if... and when you roll in juvenile physical sovereignty.
As long as "No! Don't..." is to be respected then apriori one must ALSO allow for circumstances
in so far as NO physical harm occurs, when the younger uncoerced exploration occurs
is deemed and respected as freely participated.
You only need peruse the Reddit accounts as to just HOW OFTEN
juvenile and/or familial intimacies are hypocritically 'main stream'~
NOT a matter of 'right or wrong'... it has, .. is, and will continue to be happening.
Simply 'factual' and laying societal aprobation hasn't and won't change human disposition.
No more 'effective' than hubristically 'outlawing' the affect of inertia or gravity~
It is an illusion and a lie. 2020 - 2022 showed us that. ""My body, my choice"" none sense only works when it NEEDS to work so they can push their agenda, while shutting people off. In other circumstances like forced vaccinations and endless boosters, (if you don't take them, you will lose your job, you cannot enter places and you be imprisoned basically for life), where is ""My body, my choice"" law here? It doesn't exist, because as I said before it is a lie and illusion. You cannot keep saying that green is green, until you don't want green to be green anymore, because you are trying to achieve a certain goal, by saying that green is no longer a green, unless we get an outcome that we have planned. Then green can go back to being green again.
"all circumstances" No. There are circumstances where "my body, my choice" can indirectly harm or affect anyone. For example, you do drugs and it's your choice but you can lose your mind and attack anyone and you're not excused for that. That's why drugs ia banned. For antivaxer's case, unvaccinated people have higher risk of getting affected by the virus so companies dont choose unvaccinated people for the same reason why they don't choose people with cancer because a death of an employee can affect the company. There are always exceptions in life.
No I don't.
That argument could be made for anything.
My body, my choice even if the decision impacts hundreds of people.
I could even go as far as my body my choice to spread aids to people if I had it because i wanna have sex.
(Gave a death sentence to everyone I slept with)
My body my choice to knowingly have covid and spread it to others. (Possibly got hundreds of people sick and who knows how many die)
My body my choice to decide to purposely walk in front of a speeding car. (Traumatized a family or injured them)
Then it’s not your body your effecting than is it?
@Subarugirl there is never 1 example of my body my choice not affecting someone else ever.
The whole my body my choice always affects someone.
So it's not an accurate use of terms. Ever.
There are always outcomes that affects others from all decisions we make.
So you don’t believe in bodily autonomy?
@Subarugirl i didn't say that.
I'm for making our own choices, but we cannot ever say our choices do not effecting others.
I just not a fan of that saying, because it is very very inaccurate.
And if this is you trying to argue about abortion, you waisting your time. I would never get one, but don't care if others do.
Because all choices have a reprecussions and effects others.
My point exactly! People should be able to make their own choices, but when they do they should not complain about the repercussions.
@Subarugirl well we have a lot of selfish people in this world.
All these arguments isn't about what's right what's wrong.
It's more about my views are more important then anything.
So if they are against abortion everyone must bend down to them and do as they say.
This doesn't end with abortion it goes for all the controversial topics
They ego feels they need to force people to think like them.
I mean I know girls are supposed to feel a certain way about this but I kind of feel like the baby's body is a separate body inside of yours. I don't think abortion is okay. I do think we should be able to choose what we put in our bodies though. For us women This would include which penises going to our body, which can have a slight effect on pregnancy.
I do not totally agree you should be able to. I have carefully thought this through and do believe @mcheetah brings up a good point with doublethink. Although @mcheetah if you would like to elaborate more on your thought behind if you literally mean double think or hypocrisy.. I'm curious.
So this is the dilemma I'm feeling. I don't care what anyone does with their body unless it's physically affecting others.
What does my body my choice mean? Are we saying anything? For ex If it's my body my choice and I want to blow myself up in a building of people, then I don't agree. That hurts others. If it doesn't hurt others I'm ok. If that's hypocritical well whatever because not everything is so black and white hence why there are laws. This was a truly good question
I meant people saying others shouldn't control their bodies, but then wanting to control others' bodies, whether it's on abortion or vaccine mandates.
I had a series of questions, plus two MyTakes on the hypocrisy behind this, with not a single person giving a rational explanation for why they are against vaccine mandates (which I agree are bad) but then want to force abortion bans on people. Literally, not a single person gave a rational answer to it, and it was a giant mess of stupidity.
Although Nomoturtle did try to explain their rationale a little bit ('if you do nothing, a baby will be born, but it takes effort to enact COVID mandates; arguing inaction vs action') and was the only one who gave a semi-competent answer. But not even he could rationalize the hypocrisy there, although he wasn't strongly pro-life; just debating for their side.
Why do both the political left and the political right love having the government control people's bodies so much? ↗
The rule I abide by is not to force people to do sh*t they don't want, especially if it can kill them or cause serious health problems (which both the vaccines and abortion can most certainly do). But like I said, assholes are gonna do mental gymnastics to rationalize their hypocrisy, on both sides.
@MCheetah thanks for the clarification.
If the choice truly only affects your body and nobody outside of your body yes. If your choice could have devastating effects on someone else's body then no. For an extreme example, you want to go out in a blaze of glory, you have every right to do so. Light some fireworks in a building with you in it and enjoy the feeling of your flesh melting. Your body your choice. That is if it's an empty abandoned building and the effects of your actions aren't going to harm (physically) someone else.
I am speaking as a Male, and NOT about Abortion Rights, rather about the BS that the Anii-vaxxers are spewing after appropriating the phrase from the Pro-choice female community. As far as vaccination goes, there is no such think as just "My body". An unvaccinated body is a virus spreader, infecting others, so it cannot be just your body. The entire concept is an oxymoron in this case.
In the abortion rights discussion, I agree 100%. No side cases, no caveats no religious stuff. A Woman has complete rights to and over her body. End of discussion.
What are we talking about?
Do what to your body?
For the most part... yes.
This phrase is usually used regarding abortion. At some point... that baby is pretty big and developed and usually "my body" usually means going in and killing the baby's body... so it really isn't "your body" anymore we are talking about.
So, "my body, my choice" can be more complicated at times.
In an abortion there are TWO bodies.
Don't listen to these religious zealots. You as a woman do not serve simply as a vestige to bring babies into the world for men. You deserve full control over your body.
That being said if you can kill it we can abandon them. Fairness is a two way street.
Yes, if it's regarding your body. If it's regarding someone else's body (for example, a baby), then you don't get to make that choice.
And I would also add that even harming one's self shouldn't be allowed. Because it's due to a mental disorder.
@Cherry234 I agree with that, though. Of course there should be those types of exceptions.
@Jamie05rhs Right. The ultra right wingers on here unfortunately don't think so. They really don't care about people.
@Cherry234 I'm undecided.
@Jamie05rhs Okay. I think women should have the right in those cases too.
I am pro choice, as long as that choice applies to both women and men. Men should have the legal right to financially "abort" and give up all their responsibilities and rights as a father, but they should be required to make that decision early enough in the pregnancy that the mother can make an informed choice about whether she wants to abort or keep the child and raise it as a single mother. That would mean the mother would be legally compelled to tell the father she is pregnant by a certain point in the pregnancy, too. That is the ONLY fair scenario, and anyone who supports abortion rights but doesn't support the rights of fathers as described above is a fucking hypocrite.
I hesitate saying "any and all circumstances" because someone might come up with a situation otherwise. Having said that. it is your choice what you do with your body, who you do it with, and what they do to you.
The choice takes place when you decide to spread your legs and have sex.
If you don't want to get pregnant and have a kid then don't get pregnant.
It is your reproductive system. Exercise control over it. Don't get pregnant. No need for abortion. Problem solved. Everybody is happy.
Abortion on demand as a form of birth control is is infanticide.
So should a 13 girl have the choice to fuck a 50 year old guy?
It's her body.. Shouldn't it be her choice?
Just pointing out how stupid your question is.
What if they're raped? They have no choice in that
If the rapist has a 5 year old kid. Should his 5 year old kid be executed for the crimes of his father?
I don't understand what you're saying. It doesn't even make sense
These dickless males are misogynists. You all rapists bait females into having sex and now y'all are against abortion? May you burn alive.
Hell, try getting pregnant and bear the life threatening risks, permanent diseases and labor pain or permanent cessarian cuts. Selfish assholes, I bet if you were to tolerate the same pain, majority of you would have been pro choice. You all are monsters and deserve to die painfully. Its NONE of your business to say what anyone does with their body.
No. I think it's your body, your choice, unless it also affects someone else's body. Just as I believe, in general, you should be able to do whatever you want, so long as you're not affecting other people. It's when other people are involved that there is a need to have limitations on what you can and can not do. That's kind of the entire point of laws and society.
It's already established law that you can't ingest certain substances, drinks, hallucinogens, etc... In some places attempted suicide is illegal. You have to wear a helmet or seatbelt in certain circumstances so you can't assume personal risk.
These are all established in law.
As for any medical procedures or vaccines? Yes
But when another life is at stake, we need to discuss what the line is regarding when that life will be protected as well. When a child is made. We count that as a protected person before it is born. We just need to discuss and decide when in that childs existence that is. So after that date no.
It is a LIFE! A LIVING HUMN BEING!! Abortion is murder!! Cut and dry! I am a man and I wil never be in that position but if a woman csn abort, murder, an unborn child without remorse or feeling, just becsuse she git oregnant snd did not want to have a baby, then she is despicable in my book. Not sorry!
If men who are government officials think they can restrict what women can do to their bodies, then women government officials should restrict what men can and cannot reproduce... in other words make those who are deadbeat dads get snipped
so this also means no government mandates for vaccinations ever then?
no the sluts ( only sluts want abortion to remain legal) will say you are taking lives not getting a shot , but killing their baby is ok.
Yes. As far as abortions go, let the women who want them do it. The whole idea that having a mask on is saving someone’s life is BS propaganda. The vaccine is also 100 percent a personal choice and doesn’t affect anyone but yourself. My body my choice. Your body your choice.
I do think so, but I think with things like the vaccine, the government can pay for it (since it's in the public interest for people to get innoculated) but in instances like body modification, it's your choice but you need to come up with the money--don't expect other people to pay for your stupid shit.
That's my take.
I would rather a woman have an abortion and not bring an innocent child into this world rather than give birth to a child and abuse, neglect, and traumatize them.
Our body is our absolut property and any person can do what ever they want to theyr own body no mather how bad it is.
But if it afect other people, only thous people can have the right to influence the decision not to take the decision.
are we talking about a woman’s rights over her body, or are we talking about a woman’s right to kill an unborn baby?
Unless the terms and verbiage are defined, your question is not really answerable or addressable. Some people are answering one question, others answering another, while simultaneously thinking that everyone is answering the same question.
Maybe that’s one reason why people have been debating this for years now. 🤦🏽♂️
No. the only reason I would justify an abortion would be if the fetus is severely damaged, such as brain damage due to a drug-addicted mother or father or whatever.
As there is more than one person in the world, it's not so simple. If my choice is to slam part of my body into your face, then it's not only my body that is involved.
Question is to general we're not sure what you're talking about. With the vaccine yes my body my choice. With abortions no because it's not your body it's literally an entirely separate body inside of you.
So should women who have spontaneous abortions be held legally responsible for manslaughter?
@Subarugirl "Spontaneous abortions" - oh, you mean MISCARRIAGES. That's not the same thing, and you know it.
@this_is_me_123 well it’s called involuntary man slaughter when you accidentally kill someone. If you believed that life starts at conception why wouldn’t you treat it like any other life lost at the hands of another.
Yes except, as I and many others said before, it makes no sense when it comes to abortion. Pro-lifers argue that abortion is the killing of a human being that hasn't been born yet in which case is NOT your body and would make no sense to assert that it is.
No because for some reason in our society, that phrase only applies to adult bodies.
Not if you are a minor or lack the mental capacity to make decisions. Nor if your decision will impact the lives of others in a material way. But, when it comes to abortion, I agree.
Yes. Why should other people make decisions over the medical decisions of people with a uterus? Pro lifers are Authoritarian
Yep. Which is why I’m against the vaccine mandates and also support the concept of the government butting out of women’s health when it comes to abortions
If a male knocks up a woman who poops out a baby that HE doesn't want, should the government force him to pay child support?
His wallet. His choice!!!
Be consistent now!!!
Wtf? I am consistent,
I don’t want the government to take away female’s ability to get an abortion. Read and comprehend
Should a sperm donor be forced to pay for a kid he never wanted?
Answer my question.
Umm… sperm donors don’t have to pay child support.
Also, if he never wanted it. Why would he even put his sperm out like that? Makes no sense.
In what state do fathers not by law have to pay child support?
you do realize would cum and run if they could.
You only have to pay child support when you have sex with a girl and get her pregnant.
Not when you donate sperm and a girl picks your vial. The purpose of sperm banks is that some girls want kids and never find a mate. Or they have fertility issues and need artificial insemination
Your not understanding my analogy.
Not under any or all circumstance or exceptions... I am all about free choice on all things. But fathers have some right here as well.
Well you need to add "my consequences" too. Other than that I can't think of a situation where it wouldn't be the case.
As long as it doesn't get into the way of another humans well-being. Like a baby.
I can see people heavily abusing this, but yes. No one should be forced to do something against their will.
I adore how idiotic and counter intuitive this statement is when it comes to abortion, I legit agree with the statement, lefties though...
It is a basic
fundamental right of human being for mature and sound mind folks either male or female.
We can read UN Human rights commission charter.
If you are making a decision that's going to possibly impact the lives of many others, I don't agree at all.
Baby impacts only the life of the mother and virus impacts the lives of everyone around.
Preach!
well, are you talking legally or morally? either way when you say all circumstances it's kinda easy to disprove, you can't let men jerk off in front of schools, you can't let people smoke in a hospital in a room full of people with lung cancer.
Why can’t we just do everything possible to prefer white meeting red in the first place? I am not talking just abstinence but universal birth control.
As long as your body doesn’t directly harm the health of the public, I agree with this saying.
No. Only for adults and only if it doesn't affect others. By "others" I mean sentient beings by the way. A fetus for example is not sentient and therefor it's not a problem if what you do to your body affects it.
No one should tell anyone what to do with their body
No. for example underage girls dating people over 18 and saying "my body my choice" or wanting to do s3x work or doing p0rn etc and saying "my body my choice" (it is tho in the last one but still girls my age thinking about these things isn't ok)
Minors do not have the ability to give consent. So that doesn’t really count.
No sane person would agree that a 12 year old has the ability to give informed consent
And they are not sane… that’s why there are laws in place to protect children
I don't think you should be able to commit suicide in front of your children.
@imjustadude These days people don't, they kill their kids first and then themselves. Must be the loonies they get from the vaccine.
I also don't think you should be able to eat yourself at a restaurant. Restaurants make money from people buying food not from people cutting their fingers off and snacking on them. I mean if someone wants to open a restaurant where you can do that, fine. But I think it goes without saying that eating yourself is bringing food in from outside which is forbidden at most restaurants.
yes, this includes being forced to take the covid vaccine.
I believe my body my choice is fine but like with covid when it can effect someone else then it's no then it not just your body its others too
Yes, but an unborn child is not your body if that's where you're going with it.
good answer Joe, these chicks here will bbq your balls for it.
@888theGreat They’re insignificant to me for the most part. I’ll be ok.
And I typed “if”. Methinks she doest protest too much.
Do not agree at all. We live together with people and communities. Must consider each other and certainly not harm. If we were living on a lonely island alone it might have been true.
A baby is not your body, it's someone elses. So in the case of abortion they're operating under a false premise. I do agree with the sentiment of my body, my choice when it actually is the case.
Nope but it doesn't matter what men think huh. Even though it takes 2. I will say I agree if its rape or incest but if it's just an accident because they didn't use birth control or make the guy wear a condom then that's just pure selfishness
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions