Bluesqueak wrote:Daryl wrote:Right? So they did it first, still very strange to me.
What school would send their teenaged male students out to protest in public, over an issue that only should involve adult women, and is nothing to do with them?
As I said a different universe.
That would be because you've bought into the idea that free speech can somehow be restricted by gender. Going along the slippery slope, we get free speech being restricted by an upper age limit, a lower age limit, education ... colour.
I'm not a Roman Catholic, but I do know why they think the way they do on abortion. Essentially, it's based on the idea that life begins with the zygote.
That would be an objectively false belief. Life began once over 3 billion years ago (on Earth at least). Since then it has just kept going.
(Also, arguing that any point is where "life began" as the foundation for arguing the rights of a person should be conferred is purely stupid. My lawn has life, I don't face assault charges for mowing it because "life" is not what confers the rights in question.)
A zygote doesn't have the same genetics as its mother, so those different genetics make it a separate being and so it should have legal protection as a separate being.
Cancer cells have different genetics that the body of the person they are inhabiting too, we don't call them people with rights because of it.