Posted on Jul 4, 2022
Will the Supreme Court Decision Force Young Women to Confront Sexual Reality? | FrontpageMag
1.49K
54
11
9
9
0
Sex
Feminism
Supreme Court
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
10
10
0
SGT Steve McFarland
CMSgt Marcus Falleaf It has nothing to do with morality, and everything to do with managing consequences. Nobody in their right mind would drive 90 mph through a cop-infested school zone because the consequences would be too great.
(5)
(0)
SPC Lyle Montgomery
When I was in the Army when we screwed up and dropped our weapon from the bleachers durring a freezing boring convocation, as I did, they made me run around the bleachers 3 times with my pants down holding a stick in one hand and my dick in the other saying THIS IS MY RIFLE( the stick) and THIS IS MY GUN ( my dick) THIS IS FOR FIGHTING ( the stick) and THIS IS FOR FUN (my dick) After this embarising episode they gave me my rifle back and I never dropped it again. The point that I am making is that a lot of these unwanted pregnancys is caused by the gun ( dick). So it's not always the woman at fault.
(1)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SPC Lyle Montgomery Choices are choices. A female who chooses to have sex has chosen to have sex. If she also makes the choice to have vaginal sex with a male, then she has chosen a sexual option which provides the possibility of pregnancy. She can make additional choices which raise or lower the probability, including (but not limited to) choice of partner, contraception, timing, and physical health decisions.
The same is true for the male. But, rightly or wrongly, the male has the option, biologically speaking (not talking about legal or moral options, just physical/biological ones), to "run away" or "escape" some of the results of that choice (namely parenthood). Females do not have this option.
As the person bearing greater burden for the outcome of the decision, she should ALSO be the one who takes more care in it. Which was the whole point of the article.
Again, this is looking at things from a PURELY biological standpoint.
The same is true for the male. But, rightly or wrongly, the male has the option, biologically speaking (not talking about legal or moral options, just physical/biological ones), to "run away" or "escape" some of the results of that choice (namely parenthood). Females do not have this option.
As the person bearing greater burden for the outcome of the decision, she should ALSO be the one who takes more care in it. Which was the whole point of the article.
Again, this is looking at things from a PURELY biological standpoint.
(2)
(0)
Sgt (Join to see)
SFC Casey O'Mally - I agree. Women are all loud and proud these days about their body rights, but not about accepting personal consequences for their sexual freedom.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
I can't see why all of these liberal baby killers are up in arms. I guess it's just because they can't have their way. All the supreme court did was send the issue to the states. The good states will ban abortion and the evil states will allow it. Now if some baby killing bitch wants to kill her child she will have to go to New york or California. those states are so screwed up that they will screw that up also.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D. Limiting the legal reach of Roe is a positive Two-fer: Both Women and Men will rethink their loose sexual behavior, and babies will get to live!
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google