Fresh discussion

I've noticed that a lot of new people have an unpleasant habit of dragging up long-dead topics like grave robbers digging up a corpse for conversation. The people who originally discussed these topics are not going to answer new demands for debate, except in rare cases where they actually still post to this board. They aren't going to answer you. Some of them possibly aren't even alive anymore...you never know. Dredging up a debate that hasn't been replied to for over a year and isn't even on the first page of topics is annoying, at best. Many things in the abortion debate have changed in the past ten years, along with some attitudes.

If you want to have dialog that bears some resemblance to a productive discussion, please stick with the more recent topics-especially if you're quoting a poster expecting an answer from them. Maybe it instills some people with the false sense of "winning" a debate if they challenge someone who can't or won't give them a rebuttal, or maybe they just don't want to be bothered starting a fresh topic about something they saw in an older one.

Regardless of the reasoning behind it, "thread mining" is not the way to initiate a worthwhile debate with anyone.

I will state here my reason for being prochoice. Just like a man, a woman owns her body. It is not the property of the state, her husband, her offspring, the medical community or her fetus. If it were otherwise, it would be called a nasty little word known as "slavery", and we in the civilized world don't do that to people any more. A woman has the right to refuse the use of her body to anyone--just like a man. Hardened criminals have the right to refuse to donate even a single drop of blood to save a life. Why should a woman be denied that same dignity, simply because she never received the Y chromosome that would have made her male instead of female?

Fetuses have the same right to a woman's body as anyone else...NONE. It's not "prejudiced against the unborn" to refuse access that no born person has. I don't care what name you call it, the unborn should never have greater rights to another person's body than the born. You can't force someone to give their blood, marrow or tissue to save your life. Why should a fetus be any different? Why should only ONE gender be compelled to share their body against their will?

If any prolifer can give me a rational, reasonable explanation of why the unborn should have a greater right to life than the born or why women should have fewer bodily rights than men, I'll be happy to listen. I'm not holding my breath. I expect bible verses to be flung around like so much confetti, accusations of being a selfish, cruel, mean poopy-head and possibly some bizarre attempt to rationalize that women don't actually own their own bodies.

Let's see who proves me right, shall we?

If you don't wish to participate in a fresh new thread, at least try to avoid bumping topics that were active in the time when Methuselah walked the planet.