Parental rights are fundamental rights, look it up skippy. Is he not a parent at the moment of birth?
3.) because i factually am, real rights not the ones you make up
Real rights means to you rights that you agree are worth supporting. Gotcha.
4.) thats not a right so the answer is NO
He has a protected legal right to be a parent free of interference from the government provided there is no MATERIAL harm to the child being done. I can't believe you're arguing this point, there are thousands of legal precedence for fundamental parental rights. This is a new one, granted, so that's why we're debating the rightness or wrongness of this legal decision. You agree this is a debate forum, right?
5.) meaningless to rights, how many girls have you seen naked, does that give you the right to see them now too? lol thats retarded
Well, I'm arguing that if I was in the4 same position as this father that I would and should have the right. See what I'm doing is taking a side and arguing with merit why I think I'm right. Now, you're supposed to do the same, but from the other point of view.
Yes, that's what the judge said, and I articulated why I think that her decision was wrong. Why do you think it was correct, and specifically how does that apply to your stated goal of equal rights for everyone?6.) easy its her privacy and her medical situation
Yes, now you're getting it. See, at least you're recognizing the basic principles of debate. What you now need to do is actually provide a logically coherent argument as to why you think I'm wrong. It really not that complicated a concept.7.) nope thats what YOU are saying
8.) you are welcome to this OPINION but its meaningless, your feelings dont impact rights
This judge's feelings impacted the rights of this man. Did you read the decision? It's an opinion of an interpretation of how SHE felt who's rights should prevail in this matter.
9.) nothing to do with the topic
Well, it might not, but it could add context to why this women for no other rational reason decided to exclude the father from the birthing process. Now if she did have a legitimate reason, perhaps you can enlighten me? Materiality matters in law, superficiality has no weight usually, and that was the basis of my providing a possible contextually significant argument for what ole Mom was really preventing Dad from being there.
No, an actual history of abuse or a clear and present danger are actually very good reasons to leave Dad out of the birthing process. Since I saw none, then what other possible reason would she not want him there?10.) meaningless to her rights
11.) its her right to her privacy and medical situation, sorry you dont like her having rights but she does
Ok, so there we go, so you think her privacy rights trump his equal protection rights to be a parent? Again, I thought you were for equal rights? How is that being for equal rights?
The issue is i stick to facts, reality and actual rights not opinions
No, I think I am convinced now that you really don't have a very good grasp on how this all works on a debate forum? I've told you countless times this and it doesn't seem to register with you, so not sure why, but we don't have the facts sparky, and if we do, it is very, and I mean very rare that we do have them. But I argue that if we have the facts, why debate the subject at all. What we usually have is an interpretation of events that reflect the experiences we've gained over our lives, and our brains arrange this into a logical format for us to process the truth of any series of events. We tend to avoid going against the grain when our truth experiences over time, and have evolved our opinions to represent how we believe something should be or currently is.