RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights

RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:07:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I think she was rude to not include the father in this decision. If it was an unintentional miscarriage there was nothing to include. If it was an abortion I agree. I'll go beyond rude. It should be illegal for a non-medically necessary abortion after consensual sex to NOT include the input of the father. But I will defend to the death TG's right to be wrong in her disagreement with that. lol Gee willbe, thanks for assuming you know what I would say in respect to that. IF the law required him to be notified, then I would support that. The law does not. Now, the question would be... how to force the woman to tell you who the father is.... its extremely easy to say "I dont know".... then what? No assumption needed. There was a thread where you made it very clear that you think the father should have no say. I do think a father should have no say. First, prove you are the father. Second, compel a woman to name the father. Its a ridiculous argument.

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:08:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy The guy made his point and should drop the bill board. At this point- it defeats the purpose. It is not like she can undo the abortion. you got proof she had one?

CookieSlave -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:34:02 PM)
I hate crap like this. I hate that someone is so quick to throw around their "right to free speech" just to try to support them doing or saying or acting how they feel like it, without any sense of appropriateness or actual human decency. IF what he says is true, SURE he should be pissed, but this is an overly dramatic and completely, childishly inappropriate way to deal w/ that. I don't care if he has the "right" or if he has a "case" or whatever, that's not even the point, in my book. He's an idiot who is USING and ABUSING the "right to free speech" in a completely asinine manner, just to allow himself to be a dick. All that does is diminish the value of the same right he is trying to claim, just so he can be an ass. Plus I'm also not a fan of the "you screwed me, so I'm going to screw you more" method of dealing w/ shit. No one is EVER going to win.

pahunkboy -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:46:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy The guy made his point and should drop the bill board. At this point- it defeats the purpose. It is not like she can undo the abortion. you got proof she had one? She is to obey the man. She stole his baby.

Lucylastic -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:50:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy The guy made his point and should drop the bill board. At this point- it defeats the purpose. It is not like she can undo the abortion. you got proof she had one? She is to obey the man. She stole his baby. YOu are fucking nuts

WyldHrt -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:53:54 PM)
quote: She is to obey the man. She stole his baby. [sm=yeahright.gif]

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:57:07 PM)
pahunk, he has provided no proof she had an abortion.

pahunkboy -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:57:34 PM)
She was not much of a girlfriend if she did not obey him. The man is in charge- not the woman.

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 6:58:48 PM)
Tell LadyPact, that, pahunk.

pahunkboy -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 7:01:43 PM)
Even still it was juvenile for the guy to buy a billboard. I can think of better things to spend cash on. He needs to get over it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 7:02:24 PM)
And if I were the girl, I would sue him to replace that billboard with one of an appology.

pahunkboy -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 7:04:51 PM)
Why give him the time of day? let him blow his money.

Lucylastic -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 7:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy She was not much of a girlfriend if she did not obey him. The man is in charge- not the woman. obviously not. Hugely dumb and ignorant post made on this board of all places dumbass. Women have rights over THEIR bodies, no matter what you think or want

slvemike4u -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 8:27:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy She was not much of a girlfriend if she did not obey him. The man is in charge- not the woman. obviously not. Hugely dumb and ignorant post made on this board of all places dumbass. Women have rights over THEIR bodies, no matter what you think or want It was my understanding that hunky wanted nothing from a woman's body.....have I been mistaken all this time [:D]

WyldHrt -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/7/2011 11:09:54 PM)
quote: She was not much of a girlfriend if she did not obey him. The man is in charge- not the woman. What the hell ever gave you that idea? [sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif] The man is in charge- if that is the dynamic agreed to for a particular relationship. BTW, what you are doing is blaming this woman for the actions of an asshole ex. Stop it.

thishereboi -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/8/2011 6:25:14 AM)
quote: If it was an unintentional miscarriage there was nothing to include. If it was an abortion I agree. This is the part I am having a problem with. If she did have a miscarriage, why isn't the lawyer jumping all over that. Oh wait according to the article, she hasn't asked the girl about that. Now if I were the lawyer, I would be looking for anything I could hang this guy on. But she doesn't seem to think this is important enough to ask about? Sorry but something doesn't add up in this.

calamitysandra -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/8/2011 6:55:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy She is to obey the man. She stole his baby. You are fucking nuts I don't know. I have the feeling he is having us on, and is not quite as deranged as he wants us to think. There have been a good number of posts in the last time that have me wonder if he is not simply playing a very elaborate game.

Lucylastic -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/8/2011 7:02:05 AM)
Ive been of the same opinion for the last couple of years Sandra I have to admit, but, im not letting him get away with that kind of bullshit. I have ZERO issue with Male led relationships, kinky or nilla, but saying shit like that is disrespecting me and many other femdom or malesub posters here.

calamitysandra -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/8/2011 8:38:42 AM)
It is disrespecting the submissive females and dominant males too. It invalidates their right to choose.

tazzygirl -> RE: Free Speech vs. Privacy Rights (6/8/2011 9:07:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: If it was an unintentional miscarriage there was nothing to include. If it was an abortion I agree. This is the part I am having a problem with. If she did have a miscarriage, why isn't the lawyer jumping all over that. Oh wait according to the article, she hasn't asked the girl about that. Now if I were the lawyer, I would be looking for anything I could hang this guy on. But she doesn't seem to think this is important enough to ask about? Sorry but something doesn't add up in this. Isnt the burden of proof on him since he made the statement? Do we, as females, now have to open up our lives because a man "demands" that we do so? The sign is on White Sands Boulevard, the main thoroughfare in Alamogordo, N.M., and has been up since mid-May. Fultz's ex-girlfriend Nani Lawrence took him to court with a petition for domestic violence and charges of harassment and invasion of privacy. Fultz, 35, claims that Lawrence was pregnant with his child during their six-month relationship last year. He admits that when the relationship ended, the baby was lost, but he does not know whether it was due to an abortion or a miscarriage. Fultz says that Lawrence would not tell him what happened. A pro-life organization called Right to Life New Mexico had also originally endorsed Fultz's billboard and given their permission for him to use their logo. However, they pulled their endorsement when they discovered that Fultz was unsure whether Lawrence had an abortion or miscarriage. http://abcnews.go.com/US/abortion-billboard-lands-mexico-man-court-girlfriend/story?id=13783668

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875