(My body My choice) You may have seen females carrying placards with these words on them?? The question is, is it?
my body my choice
- Thread starter zaferali
- Start date
- Status
W
Of course it is geeze LOL what is wrong with men bloody hell!
it is your body and it is your choice, "only" if no one else is involved. because they have an opinion also.
It is our choice; however, along with exercising that choice go responsibilities and consequences. Unfortunately, many women--and men--choose to ignore this part of their sexual decisionmaking, and only want the illusory freedom to act. Women cannot behave as recklessly and thoughtlessly as men often do without paying a steep price (including abortion, even assault). That is a simple biological fact. There is nothing "fair" or "equal" about it: Socio-political ideology cannot transform us into sameness, although science is trying to counteract our innate differences.
"No" and "wait" and "commitment" indicate we women recognize our enormous value to ourselves and to men. The words represent conditions we must impose for everyone's ultimate benefit, especially for our children, who need and want both mommy and daddy. Feelings are delicious but fickle, so reason should negotiate the contract of intimate conduct.
Men have a stake in their women's pregnancies, which is why they need to be in a fully committed partnership, i.e., marriage, so together they can work through tough situations where abortion might be contemplated. Unmarried women should not be legally obligated to consider their partners' views about continuing or terminating their pregnancy. (I do believe they are morally obligated to do so, but that is not enforceable.) Fathers of children born outside wedlock should continue to be legally responsible for providing financial support toward their care until they are 18 or leave school for employment. The old "you play, you pay" rule.
Just the perspective of a woman whose actual experience validates traditions worth maintaining.
S
No, it is not, if it were, there would not be two or more humans directly involved. Practicing safe sex and being responsible is the first step and educating your children.
Most of these people that say, "My body, my choice" are the ones telling you to mask up and take this vaccine, it's all hypocrisy like what most of what the left does and tells you.
If you believe abortion is a good idea (Besides in extenuating circumstances) then maybe your parents should have believed in it as well.
You will regret that decision later on in life no matter how you feel at the present time about it, there are many out there that would welcome a baby even if you don't.
Most of these people that say, "My body, my choice" are the ones telling you to mask up and take this vaccine, it's all hypocrisy like what most of what the left does and tells you.
If you believe abortion is a good idea (Besides in extenuating circumstances) then maybe your parents should have believed in it as well.
You will regret that decision later on in life no matter how you feel at the present time about it, there are many out there that would welcome a baby even if you don't.
people think more about protecting their cars than they do about protecting their bodies, a car can be replaced, but a body cannot. I think that females tend to advertise their bodies by the less clothes that they wear so attracting more attention to it, why?
W
Anyone who says I Weaserlorian has any right to impose anything on the women standing next to me needs to have their head examined.
I know this is a hot button topic and I will leave it alone
Some of us will agree to disagree
I know this is a hot button topic and I will leave it alone
Some of us will agree to disagree
I'm with you Weasie. I have my opinion and it differs from those who would impose their will on other people. I will say no more on the subject but will monitor it to ensure continued cordiality.
B
shouldnt be a topic in a media forum...also people who dont vote in the united states shouldnt even be wasting time nor energy entering into it
I appreciate the willingness to 'agree to disagree'. Unfortunately it allows those who do not want to engage in a topic to engage that topic... I respect that. It is a very small hypocrisy in a topic fraught with hypocrisy (on all sides). How human!
Words matter. Lets look at some of them before we go further. When one says "Right or Rights" do they mean 'natural rights' or 'enumerated rights'? Natural meaning bestowed by God or one creator. Enumerated meaning bestowed by an entity like a governing body or even an employer for example. Let's look at the words "Murder" and "Kill" because they will probably come up. I define 'murder' as the unlawful (unsanctioned) ending of a life while 'kill' is the lawful (war/execution) ending of a life. What is 'lawful' is determined by the society the act occurs in, which determines what is 'lawful' in their jurisdiction. Let's toss in "Manslaughter" as the 'unintentional' (medicine/drunk driving/bar fight) killing of another.
If you wish to engage, I hope you put forth some ideas and maybe some of us can learn from your perspective. For those who wish to have a conversation, lets!
I'll start. For those who say that they do not have the "right" to impose their "will" upon the "rights" of another - at what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
We do it all the time don't we - look at all the Forum rules for example! I hope we can agree that these rules, imposed by a private entity, are for the orderly maintenance and operation of this site for the benefit of it's voluntary members.
I'll repeat the question: at what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
Words matter. Lets look at some of them before we go further. When one says "Right or Rights" do they mean 'natural rights' or 'enumerated rights'? Natural meaning bestowed by God or one creator. Enumerated meaning bestowed by an entity like a governing body or even an employer for example. Let's look at the words "Murder" and "Kill" because they will probably come up. I define 'murder' as the unlawful (unsanctioned) ending of a life while 'kill' is the lawful (war/execution) ending of a life. What is 'lawful' is determined by the society the act occurs in, which determines what is 'lawful' in their jurisdiction. Let's toss in "Manslaughter" as the 'unintentional' (medicine/drunk driving/bar fight) killing of another.
If you wish to engage, I hope you put forth some ideas and maybe some of us can learn from your perspective. For those who wish to have a conversation, lets!
I'll start. For those who say that they do not have the "right" to impose their "will" upon the "rights" of another - at what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
We do it all the time don't we - look at all the Forum rules for example! I hope we can agree that these rules, imposed by a private entity, are for the orderly maintenance and operation of this site for the benefit of it's voluntary members.
I'll repeat the question: at what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
You are welcome, Dr. Pickles. I appreciate your addition of a philosophical framework. The issue is fraught with moral and legal dilemmas. Getting it "right" is difficult, especially in an era of sharply polarized politics and widely divergent social values.
I'm a guy, I don't carry the child for 9 months and go through plopping it out. Not really my place to decide.
Ethically I think it is wrong to kill something sentient. I am not a scientist so I have no clue when that is, after 6 months I think. Things like morning after exist so I don't see why aborting before the child is sentient is illegal. Some people aren't willing in the deed so I think that should atleast be an argument.
If you doing the deed without a contraceptive, willingly you more than like should be expecting to have a child, I do see why it is an issue that some younger folk mainly don't think about consequences to their actions.
Realistically It shouldn't be up to a bunch of neck-beards to decide female rights (IMO).
Ethically I think it is wrong to kill something sentient. I am not a scientist so I have no clue when that is, after 6 months I think. Things like morning after exist so I don't see why aborting before the child is sentient is illegal. Some people aren't willing in the deed so I think that should atleast be an argument.
If you doing the deed without a contraceptive, willingly you more than like should be expecting to have a child, I do see why it is an issue that some younger folk mainly don't think about consequences to their actions.
Realistically It shouldn't be up to a bunch of neck-beards to decide female rights (IMO).
I see my last post discussing the science of and on biology was deleted w/o notice as well as my quote of someone else's interesting perspective is also missing.
So let's skirt the conversation on the 'beginning of life' - an evolving position for many.
Instead we'll talk about "birth control"! There are basically several forms of birth control - including abstinence, barrier, surgical, irritants/chemical and medications.
Oh look at this - WebMD has all the info right here:
Of course they don't talk about Abstinence which is 100% successful when properly used. Nor do they talk about 'Abortions' as a birth control method.
So here is where the conversation can get sticky (ewww) bad pun. Opinions vary on what constitutes "when" one can abort and therefore often drives the discussion of which forms of birth control are abortive. Personally, I am going to have a fairly broad acceptance of people positions here.
So were talking preventing conception (abstinence, barrier, surgical, irritants/chemical and medications), preventing implantation (irritants/chemical and medications), and post implantation (abortion- morning after pills, induced birth, and surgery).
The distinctions
Preventing conception keeps the sperm and the egg from coming into contact.
Preventing implantation keeps the egg from implanting in the endometrial lining of the uterus.
Post implantation is the process of destroying/removing the fertilized egg within the 24hr to 9mth period of growth.
There are several degrees of separation with these methods as well as overlap. I will be happy to have a respectful conversation with anyone on this topic.
What is your position on birth control?
At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
So let's skirt the conversation on the 'beginning of life' - an evolving position for many.
Instead we'll talk about "birth control"! There are basically several forms of birth control - including abstinence, barrier, surgical, irritants/chemical and medications.
Oh look at this - WebMD has all the info right here:
Code:
https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-optionsOf course they don't talk about Abstinence which is 100% successful when properly used. Nor do they talk about 'Abortions' as a birth control method.
So here is where the conversation can get sticky (ewww) bad pun. Opinions vary on what constitutes "when" one can abort and therefore often drives the discussion of which forms of birth control are abortive. Personally, I am going to have a fairly broad acceptance of people positions here.
So were talking preventing conception (abstinence, barrier, surgical, irritants/chemical and medications), preventing implantation (irritants/chemical and medications), and post implantation (abortion- morning after pills, induced birth, and surgery).
The distinctions
Preventing conception keeps the sperm and the egg from coming into contact.
Preventing implantation keeps the egg from implanting in the endometrial lining of the uterus.
Post implantation is the process of destroying/removing the fertilized egg within the 24hr to 9mth period of growth.
There are several degrees of separation with these methods as well as overlap. I will be happy to have a respectful conversation with anyone on this topic.
What is your position on birth control?
At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
Your post was not deleted. It's still there. I don't know why you would say something like that except to stir the pot, but you need to seriously look before you speak.
If a woman decides she wants to have an abortion that should be down to them. Men should not be making these decisions as it is not them that have to deal with 9 months of carrying a foetus, we don't have to suffer the sickness, discomfort and quite frankly the worry of a it all. What if the woman is raped? What happens if the woman will die or the foetus will die if the pregnancy is followed through with.
At the end of the day, it should be their choice, not someone elses choice, will, demand or anything else.
Its bad enough that heterosexual women and heterosexual men are having a bad time of it because of the problems with the trans situation......and if no one has seen the problems you've been walking around with your eyes and ears closed
At the end of the day, it should be their choice, not someone elses choice, will, demand or anything else.
Its bad enough that heterosexual women and heterosexual men are having a bad time of it because of the problems with the trans situation......and if no one has seen the problems you've been walking around with your eyes and ears closed
WADR NavyRet I have looked. What you have quoted was my first post made on Jul 19, 2022. My second post to Vertu was made about nine minutes later. What is missing is a post made on/about Jul 20, 2022 after RobustPatcher's post (which I referred to) earlier that day. My statement stands.
As for pot stirring - this whole topic is a boiling caldron because of so much misinformation, politicization, and deliberate ignorance. I'm only trying to stimulate an adult conversation and dispel some of the ignorance caused by misinformation/politicization.
Thank you for your perspective eatmyshorts - I'm so glad you brought up the topic Rape/Incest/Health of the Mother!
In the United States:
Did you know - that in every law banning abortion since the time when a seven man supreme court ruled on Roe v Wade - that there were exceptions for cases of rape/incest/health of the mother???
Let's restate that! Today, every law proposed or enacted regarding abortion has exemptions for cases of rape/incest/health of the mother!
Let talk about some hard facts.
1. The number of valid exemptions compared to the number of requests for abortions are statistically insignificant. That's cold. I know. But it is the truth. I will try to explain why.
(I recognize that my use of the term "valid" may be subjective on my part.) (I do not want to dismiss the very serious and real dangers that these exemptions provide for. - they are valid!)
2. Rape (of women). Violence against women is a plague upon society that has been going on since the beginning of time and worthy of another Thread/Conversation.
Studies show that unwanted intercourse (rape) and rough sex results in significantly less conception/implantation than normal unprotected intercourse. The number of miscarriages is also much higher. The human body is quite amazing and seems to know this is unwanted.
3. Incest. Just like in rape, except the amount of conception/implantation is not as low. The miscarriage rate is about the same.
4. Health of the Mother. Did you know that the #1 medical reason for wanting an abortion is 'a headache'. And that has been a valid exemption in the majority of abortion bans. Sigh.
The most common 'valid' medical exemption is for ectopic pregnancy (where the embryo implants in the Fallopian tube instead of the Uterus). These are dangerous for the mother and lethal for the fetus. Ectopic's also result in a high possibility of sterility. Medical science has come a long way and continues to progress. It is pretty rare for a pregnancy to result in death of the mother. It does happen. Preemies can now survive after weeks!
5. Viability of the fetus. Most people know about China's 'one child' policy and that female babies were almost always aborted due to cultural traditions. Did you know that the country of Finland is virtually 100% Downs Syndrome free due to abortions? The long-term effects of 'one child' policy has been recognized and steps have been taken to try and mitigate that. Advances in medical science not only allows us to save mothers lives, we can now very effectively screen, medically treat, and even perform surgery on fetuses in the womb
I am of a mixed mind on the viability question. Do I want to live in a society that embraces genocide? Where a so-called defect will exterminate you? Females, Downs, race, party affiliations - when or would it ever stop?
Of course there are stories of 'defective' embryos that are carried to term, thrive and lead productive lives. And stories of those that do not... And these all fall into that category of statistically insignificant. <shrug>
Another point - conceptions occurring from rape/incest and surviving to term have every ability to survive and thrive as you and I were.
Ok, I hope I didn't mess up here. I wish I still had all the statistics at my fingertips. Alas if there are any errors, they are my own.
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
6. Did you know there were always exemptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
7. What is your position on viability of the fetus?
In the United States:
Did you know - that in every law banning abortion since the time when a seven man supreme court ruled on Roe v Wade - that there were exceptions for cases of rape/incest/health of the mother???
Let's restate that! Today, every law proposed or enacted regarding abortion has exemptions for cases of rape/incest/health of the mother!
Let talk about some hard facts.
1. The number of valid exemptions compared to the number of requests for abortions are statistically insignificant. That's cold. I know. But it is the truth. I will try to explain why.
(I recognize that my use of the term "valid" may be subjective on my part.) (I do not want to dismiss the very serious and real dangers that these exemptions provide for. - they are valid!)
2. Rape (of women). Violence against women is a plague upon society that has been going on since the beginning of time and worthy of another Thread/Conversation.
Studies show that unwanted intercourse (rape) and rough sex results in significantly less conception/implantation than normal unprotected intercourse. The number of miscarriages is also much higher. The human body is quite amazing and seems to know this is unwanted.
3. Incest. Just like in rape, except the amount of conception/implantation is not as low. The miscarriage rate is about the same.
4. Health of the Mother. Did you know that the #1 medical reason for wanting an abortion is 'a headache'. And that has been a valid exemption in the majority of abortion bans. Sigh.
The most common 'valid' medical exemption is for ectopic pregnancy (where the embryo implants in the Fallopian tube instead of the Uterus). These are dangerous for the mother and lethal for the fetus. Ectopic's also result in a high possibility of sterility. Medical science has come a long way and continues to progress. It is pretty rare for a pregnancy to result in death of the mother. It does happen. Preemies can now survive after weeks!
5. Viability of the fetus. Most people know about China's 'one child' policy and that female babies were almost always aborted due to cultural traditions. Did you know that the country of Finland is virtually 100% Downs Syndrome free due to abortions? The long-term effects of 'one child' policy has been recognized and steps have been taken to try and mitigate that. Advances in medical science not only allows us to save mothers lives, we can now very effectively screen, medically treat, and even perform surgery on fetuses in the womb
I am of a mixed mind on the viability question. Do I want to live in a society that embraces genocide? Where a so-called defect will exterminate you? Females, Downs, race, party affiliations - when or would it ever stop?
Of course there are stories of 'defective' embryos that are carried to term, thrive and lead productive lives. And stories of those that do not... And these all fall into that category of statistically insignificant. <shrug>
Another point - conceptions occurring from rape/incest and surviving to term have every ability to survive and thrive as you and I were.
Ok, I hope I didn't mess up here. I wish I still had all the statistics at my fingertips. Alas if there are any errors, they are my own.
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
6. Did you know there were always exemptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
7. What is your position on viability of the fetus?
Human nature has many disguises and one of them is to attract attention and there does not seem to be any limits for it, humans, animals, male and female are all in it together with the same actions, for animals it maybe a natural reaction? but humans have a brain and if the control of it is lost some one has to pay for it. There is no end to this subject has it has continued ever since Adam and Eve.
So in doing my due diligence on this topic, there were a few things that made me go huh! There is a chemical form of birth control. The old term was RU-485. They call it Mifeprex now. It is a dose of pills that can be taken by a woman up to forty-nine days after the beginning of her last menstrual cycle in order to abort her baby. I am told that almost all abortions in Finland and over half of the abortions in the United States is done with Mifeprex. One of its issues revolves around the mother making up her mind in time... ba-dum-dum... after 49 days (seven weeks) post menstrual cycle it requires a more surgical procedure.
The makers of the drug say that “the existence of debris in the uterus following the treatment procedure will not necessarily require surgery for its removal.” The “debris” they mention includes the remains of the child. However, between 5 and 8 percent of women who take the drugs will require surgery to end the pregnancy or stop excessive bleeding.
The FDC has issued warning of this drug twice (2000 & 2004). From the FDC: RU-486 is over 90 percent effective when used during the first seven weeks of pregnancy. If it fails, the woman is encouraged to have a surgical abortion. Should the baby survive the drug and the woman opt against a surgical abortion, the child often suffers mental or physical defects because of the chemicals in the drugs. These may include facial malformations, skull defects, delayed growth, and limb defects. Animal studies also showed that offspring exposed to the drug while in the womb experienced malformation of the ovaries, delayed puberty, deficient male sexual behavior, and other side effects. The effect of the drug on breast-fed babies is unknown.
Deaths have been reported in United States, Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
I sure that the mega-corporation for profit abortion centers are not happy that this drug in such prevalent use. What do you think?
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
6. Did you know there were always exemptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
7. What is your position on viability of the fetus?
8. Should corporations take advantage of women in dire circumstances and profit off of their abortion?
The makers of the drug say that “the existence of debris in the uterus following the treatment procedure will not necessarily require surgery for its removal.” The “debris” they mention includes the remains of the child. However, between 5 and 8 percent of women who take the drugs will require surgery to end the pregnancy or stop excessive bleeding.
The FDC has issued warning of this drug twice (2000 & 2004). From the FDC: RU-486 is over 90 percent effective when used during the first seven weeks of pregnancy. If it fails, the woman is encouraged to have a surgical abortion. Should the baby survive the drug and the woman opt against a surgical abortion, the child often suffers mental or physical defects because of the chemicals in the drugs. These may include facial malformations, skull defects, delayed growth, and limb defects. Animal studies also showed that offspring exposed to the drug while in the womb experienced malformation of the ovaries, delayed puberty, deficient male sexual behavior, and other side effects. The effect of the drug on breast-fed babies is unknown.
Deaths have been reported in United States, Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
Code:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MifepristoneI sure that the mega-corporation for profit abortion centers are not happy that this drug in such prevalent use. What do you think?
Ongoing list of discussion questions:
1. At what point do you have the right 'impose' your will upon someone?
2. Censored.
3. Censored
4. What is your position on birth control?
5. At what point is it ok to terminate a normal pregnancy?
6. Did you know there were always exemptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
7. What is your position on viability of the fetus?
8. Should corporations take advantage of women in dire circumstances and profit off of their abortion?
Right to integrity of the person, is pretty fundamental human right stuff. So the answer to the question is, what it is, that it says it is, if you know what I mean.
Also I saw a chicken wearing a "my cloaca my choice" t-shirt the other day.
Also I saw a chicken wearing a "my cloaca my choice" t-shirt the other day.
What a world we live in, you may see on TV news of countries where children are suffering from hunger and need aid and you pay for it willingly, do the mother's of these children have a choice over their bodies or is it a lack of knowledge? I remember that at one time in the UK it was natural to have large families, some having 15 children as they were needed to work on the land or in factories to earn money. it is a pity that people do not know the value of what they have and how to appreciate it
Having children is a big deal for many people, it requires financial security and a stable home life if they want to give the children a healthy childhood. Not everyone meets these and/or other relevant circumstances that are necessary in bringing children into this world in good conditions. Not all people or relationships require children in order to feel fulfilled in life, if a couple feels compelled to have a larger family they should have the legal freedom to do so, and childless couples should enjoy the same freedom to choose. The advice to give to men who are against abortion in their own relationships is to discuss it with their partner, but the choices of other women and how individuals choose to shape their own household should remain up to them.
It is not a lack of knowledge, it is action without responsibility. Let's take Africa as you have brought up the hunger issue....Of course the women know what they are doing, if they have sexual intercourse and its the right time, they will become pregnant. Women aren't stupid lol At this time I would also like to bring up AIDS briefly, African men were being educated on AIDS and the transference, they were also tested and some did have it and were given condoms and advice on not spreading it, openly in TV interviews some of the men said they didn't care and won't be wearing protection. That right there is an unbelievable amount of hate for women. Right back to the other bits....need aid, Sir Bob Geldoff, himself said openly that there is no point continuing with aid to africa because they just become reliant on it and don't do anything for themselves because they know they will keep getting aid.
Everyone and their dog has got their hand out at the minute, I've noticed a huge rise in charity advertising on TV stations and some of them have no right to put their hands out and no one has any money anyway, well not here they don't, fuel hitting £2 a litre, food prices going up, domestic energy supplies going crazy high. My electric bill doubled from the last quarter and everyone puts it down to the evasion of the Ukraine, which again is bollocks. There is a charity advert at the moment and its asking to support girls in other countries where there is child marriage etc and some of them saying oh I didn't know this sort of thing was happening....jesus h christ do they not read the media, watch the media or listen to the media. In the UK, there are grooming gangs all islamics and recently there was one gang made up of 30 men and 1 white woman, something like that. Two muslims walked up to a mother and asked her how much for her daughter, its happening here and no one is doing bugger all. Did you know that labour run councils tell the police to ignore the grooming gangs? So, if Catholics win the votes on anti abortion, what about our children that could very well end up pregnant and can't have abortions? This is why it should be done on an individual case not just no abortions
Yes, SOME families in the UK have a large amount of children but that happens everywhere in the world apart from China and North Korea, to which, China is suffering for their decision of only 1 child per family, huge generation gap and those that were born do not want to stay in the villages they want to go to the cities, leaving the elders to try and fend for themselves.
yes I agree, but not the legal freedom to make others pay for it ( child allowances )
but they did learn from their mistakes and have now adjusted it to 3 children.
You know the saying, "Better late than never"
I have just thought of how many females who have had one abortion, have had a second one?
Also in China when having only one child was in force, what controls were used to enforce this?
Also being a mother means being a person who cares for her family and home, ( A very important position) where the father is or should be the provider and that means knowing what you have and how to use it and look after it.
Don't think you get it or have seen what is happening but the old are on their own in china.....the children do not want to be in the villages in the middle of no where they want to be in the cities, so when the child leaves, they have no one else to look after them. It doesn't matter if the communist peoples republic of china has changed the ruling or not, there will be several generations of old people that have no one left to help them.
what controls were being used to enforce it? lmfao you don't know communism very well do you......they are in fear of spending the rest of their lives in prison or worse still dead. The chinese communist governments have people everywhere across China, reporting people on a daily basis. Hospitals had to report people if they had more than one and the records will show that they have. If the hospitoal staff don't report them, they face life in jail or dead too.
"also being a mother means being a person who cares for her family and home whilst the father is the provider" ? Not a sexist comment at all. I, for one am happy to stay at home and look after any mini me's I have with the droid woman that I am in a relationship with at the moment.
this maybe true? but you could say that it applies to many other countries as well and they are not communist, that includes the UK. People have a tendency to see what they want to see, but you come back to the main point again, "my body my choice" so you have to look after it, or others are involved then it is not your choice is it?
- Status