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 
What is a law in your country that you think should be abolished because you feel it infringes on people’s rights and liberties? (Page 3)
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
49Opinion
One law i would like overturned is the fact if your turning left in a traffic accident it is automatically your fault
Restrictions on abortion and birth control.
Restrictions on abortion are very neccessary but I'm not aware of any restrictions on birth control, most people can get birth control from their high schools or Planned Parenthood.
Most, not all. Some areas require a parents permission, some simply make it more expensive or less available.
And no, they really aren’t. It’s a method for the government and its people to control a woman’s body. Ones right to control what happens with their body is a fundamental human right. How would you feel if the government had full say in what you did with your own body, because of a medical condition that you’re trying to be cured of, using what would a few weeks prior be considered perfectly acceptable?
An abortion tips apart a body and it's not "her" body.
The time for a woman to be in full control of her body is before she conceives, afterwards there is more than just her body.
That argument holds no water. Terminating a life because it is "not wanted or not planned " is wrong, if we are permitted to terminate life on convenience then what happens to those in comas or those infirm in nursing homes?
It would be a public outcry if we started killing anyone who might be a "burden " to us or society.
No one would be safe, not the homeless, the old, the disabled.
It’s inside her body, without her permission. So yes it has to do with removing something from HER body SHE doesn’t want.
It’s not wrong just because you don’t like it. Your morality isn’t the morality of anyone but yourself. I think it’s immoral to birth those that are unwanted and unloved, but you don’t see me trying to push that onto you.
So no, our right to control our bodies doesn’t stop at conception. Also I love how you dodged my question. Answer it.
There are approximately 2 million families in America waiting to adopt, that baby would be wanted and loved.
I find it humorous that you say my morality shouldn't determine what is acceptable but then go on to say that because you feel it is okay then it should be that way?
The argument that ones beliefs shouldn't say determine what is right or wrong holds no water either because you argue that its acceptable because you think it is right.
So to recap
1,, my body my choice (when it isn't her body being torn apart)
2, child won't be loved and wanted ( 2 million families wanting to show the child more love)
3, my beliefs and values shouldn't dictate what is acceptable but yours should.
Hmm, you see the irony of all the talking points for abortion?
Sorry for the late reply.
You say that but dozens of thousands each and every year go unadopted, with a fair amount aging out of orphanages each year. So why aren’t those millions getting them?
Correct. Everyone has their own morality, at least mine doesn’t remove someone’s rights to control their own bodies. And before you say that I’m removing a fetuses rights, don’t bother. They have no rights to life until the third trimester.
1. If you’re inside someone without permission, regardless of circumstances, you have no right to live. You can be legally removed with lethal force.
2. Yet many thousands are never adopted each year.
3. It’s better than yours. I’m not after turning half the population into broodmares
Abortion removes the rights of the unborn over their body. If you say no one should have a control over someone else's body how do you justify a procedure that results in a torn apart body that isn't hers?
Except they have no rights, especially no right to occupy someone’s body without permission. Just like with literally anything and anyone else, occupying someone’s body without their permission is grounds for them to be removed by lethal force.
Then if they have no rights please explain how many people have been convicted of double homicide when they have killed a pregnant woman?
They obviously do have rights or it wouldn't be a double homicide.
Simple. That occurs when the woman is in the third trimester, when the fetus is externally viable. That’s also when abortion is not performed.
Even still, they still have no right to occupy someone else’s body. They can be removed for medical emergencies anyways at that stage.
Inconvenience is not a medical emergency
I never said it was. Inconvenience is covered during the first two trimesters.
So you are saying that it is acceptable to take a life because it is inconvenient?
Another fact, babies born in the second trimester have survived and grown to be productive human beings, so the argument that the baby is only viable in the third trimester is miss guided at best and a big lie at worse.
Yes that’s exactly what I’m saying. There’s other motivations to do it, but I’m just using it as a placeholder.
Also just because it can doesn’t mean a thing. It’s called premature for a reason. Also it is irrelevant as it is still not legally externally viable in the second trimester. So it still has no rights and no rights to occupy someone’s body without their permission. Literally nobody has that right.
Look I get it, you don’t like abortion. That’s your right. But just because it upsets your sensibilities doesn’t mean a damn thing to anyone else.
So where do you draw the line of taking an inconvenient life?
A person in a coma, people on ventilators and life support?
Homeless people?
People who are a drain ok n society by taking long term assistance from the government with no intention to contribute to the community?
Old people needing to be in a nursing home?
People with disabilities?
All of the above could be considered an inconvenience by some people. What determines the value of a life? Who determines the value of a life?
When the life is no longer inside someone without that persons permission. That’s where I draw my line.
Hon, humans have no inherent value. We have lived on this earth for 250,000 years. In that time we have had approximately 100,000,000,000 humans born and died. We aren’t special. We aren’t valuable. We are animals that use tools. Hell chimps use tools and recently orangutans officially entered the Stone Age.
It's sad that you think that you have no value, very sad.
I'm glad I have a higher opinion on the value of your life than you do of yourself. I think every life is valuable, so does every rational caring individual.
I said no inherent value. The value we have is what we give to others and ourselves. That’s it.
That’s good, I’m glad you embrace your beliefs on the matter :) one does not need to agree in order to be respectful
" The value we have is what we give to others and ourselves. That’s it."
The statement you made contradicts yourself, babies give unconditional love to their caregivers, give incomparable joy and pride if given a chance.
Ask yourself this, what if the person who would develop the cure for cancer has been aborted?
No one can predict what the aborted child could have accomplished to change the world and make it a better place.
No it doesn’t :/ I said we have no INHERENT value, I never said we had no value at all.
Oh lord the cancer crap again. Oh well. Statistically more likely to be a murderer. So how would you feel if I aborted the next Ed gein or Edmund kemper?
But you’re right, we have no way to know. Oh well.
Just as a heads up, sentimentalism doesn’t work on me. I don’t have the best track record with empathy.
Murderers are created by society while geniuses are born. So that argument is redundant.
I'm not trying to be sentimental, I'm being rational.
That’s why I said we have no way to know.
No you’re not. Sometimes, with that cancer cure bit and that part about babies giving unconditional love is sent. That is called casuistry, which relies on emotional stimulation to make an argument. So I was letting you know it doesn’t work on me so you don’t waste your time.
I never waste my time. I don't rely on emotions for anything I debate, I use rationality and common sense, rationality and common sense is constant while emotions are inconsistent at best.
Then why are you trying to appeal to emotions with the cancer cure argument and bringing up babies giving love? That isn’t based in rationalism.
But if you want to continue as you have, do as thou wilt.
The cancer cure has nothing to do with emotions, if emotions could help cure cancer we wouldn't still be trying to cure it, rational people question actions and common sense dictates that with around 600,000 abortions each year, that is millions of people over a decade, the chances of a person out of millions being the one that could be the one that could discover the cure for cancer and other issues facing our world, is a definite possibility.
It does because it is supposed to elicit reactions of “oh shit what if I killed the one who could save millions?”. It plays on guilt and fear.
True. And imagine how many potential serial killers, drug addicts, rapists and joe schmos are aborted each year.
Genius means nothing. Edmund kemper had a wickedly high IQ, and he was a serial killer. So did Ted Bundy. Or Josef mengele. Or Herman goerring. Or lavrentiy Beria. The chances, whilst real, that he could be a curer of cancer, it’s slim at most.
All above were not "born" rapists, murderers etc. The society they grew up in created it. So a murder can't be aborted because babies aren't born murderers. On the other hand society could reduce murderers by not being broken or not caring. Murder and rape are results of dysfunction. Society can stop dysfunction.
How often does that actually happen though?
It’s very rare but unfortunately still possible for the US government to do that.
I agree.
Abortion should be made illegal!
What makes you say that?
@Cat_Frank because abortion is murder.
Every victimless crime should be abolished.
UK - ban on handguns,,,
I don’t like same sex marriage
Neither do I.
Good
What about girl on girl porn some blue anon guy like 8 weeks ago told me he likes that but never in real life in a question
@IronMan another disgusting and degenerate practice, this time involving female homos.
Those are fake people putting on a fake front it's not real life. The do it to please men porn watchers. But of course they are disgusting filthy
Islam
Roe V Wade.
How about we enforce separation of church and state instead? Almost ALL the anti-abortion crowd are religious fanatics.
Well separation of Church and State is enforced, but that doesn't change the fact that abortion denies the Constitutional right to life liberty and the persuit of happiness to millions of people each year.
said the religous fanatic-we athiest don't see ANY attempt at separation of church and state, especially among Republicans where the evangelicals have become Christo-Fascists
You don't even know if I have any religion. You're just acting like a Nazi straight up. Go zeig heil your way to the loser's corner. Because both the Ruskis and Jerries lost the war.
I guarantee you don't understand what separation means. You probably think that Chinese forced secularism is the only way to separate Church and State.
You’re a moron. Even if the right wing hacks appointed to the Supreme Court overturns it Abortion will be protected by legislation-70% want Abortion Rights protected; only the Christo-Fascist minority want it overturned.
can't say
Prostitution.
Gender quotas.
The Patriot Act.
wtf...