[FireFly]

Interesting points in the argument brought out....

Indeed? What child would that be, Ms. Gandy? According to the National Organization of Women, the decision to have sex is not a decision to have a child. There is no child at the moment of conception. There is no child, really, until birth. How can Matt Dubay be responsible for a child he didn≠t create?

According to the most modern, cutting-edge definitions of sexual responsibility, pregnancy and personhood, Mr. Dubay most emphatically did not create a child nor had he anything to do with the creation of a child.

Abortion supporters insist the act of sex does not create responsibility towards a future child. If it did, no one could support abortion. Legal abortion is grounded in the idea that something which does not yet have its own existence does not yet have any rights. Thus, abortion supporters take great pains to explain why the tissue mass in the womb is not really a child....

So, we ask again, Ms. Gandy, how can Matt Dubay have any responsibility towards a child he didn≠t create? A child is created through the act of gestation, but what has that got to do with a man? Men don≠t have wombs! Men don≠t gestate. Remember?

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/13134.html