(December 3, 2009 at 3:24 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: I know the issue isn't easy, I used to think pretty much like Binny did, and I can show you posts on other forums to prove it. However after a discussion much harder fought than this one I really had to rethink my position in this and came to the conclusion that the issue is also a serious equal rights infringement. I understand the reasoning behind the infringment, but that is exactly why I don't just flatout say it is right or wrong. It is not as cut and dry as some think it is.
'Right' and 'wrong' are entirely subjective. I feel it is wrong for a man to demand for rights to part of a woman's body simply because he had sex with her (and got her pregnant)... wether that man be a rapist, a polygamist, or a 'worthy?' individual. It isn't so 'cut and dry' in the last of those... but the only thing that the 'worthy?' man has a 'right' to is to get a surrogate for the child.
In the case of this individual, it is more of a wood supplier who gave his wood to the carpenter on the condition that something would be carved from it (and the carpenter accepted)... and if that condition will not be met because the carpenter chooses to not make something from the wood: he has a right to get his wood back.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
