No rights are being taken away. Get over it.
Dude. You know what? Let's play a tiny thought experiment.
Say I go to Texas, in 2014. Or for that matter, ANY state. And I would be guaranteed (if I was born as a a women, or reproductive organs of one) to still have the choice to get an abortion. Now if we play that same game, but now. I don't get that guarantee. I now have to know what the states laws are on the matter ahead of time, before even being there, or else I might get a
felony for attempting to get an abortion.
You still lack reading skills
Alright let's play from the top
"Sex, not responsible, isn't necessarily consent to get pregnant."
This is a modified quote you made from Lacious, here's the original quote
Whether or not a woman uses contraception is also irrelevant to whether or not she should have a right to bodily autonomy. Sex, responsible or not, isn't necessarily consent to get or stay pregnant.
Now your response to him
If you stick you hand near an alligators mouth with all the warning signs you know what your going to get
Okay. Now let's look at what I said, the most relevant part, since I gave three arguments that are relating to each other.
The last bit
Lets also not forget there is such insane shit such as child trapping (go look it up on r/childfree. horrifying concept that wants to make me vomit) (tl;dr the concept is that a man or women intentionally sabotages the contraceptive in order to force the other person into a relationship through pregnancy.)
Sex being boiled down to "touch hotstove get burned"
Is an extremely gross simplification.
in this last statement I make two arguments.
1. it's possible for one to believe that they are having responsible sex, while the other party makes it irresponsible.
2. as a result of that argument, I point out that boiling it down to something as simple as that, is stupid.
Damn near, NO ONE, is arguing that having unprotected sex will not result in a child. What I am arguing however, is that it's possible for a party, to believe that their condom is working, or that their partner is using it. When said partner than can say, remove the condom right before finishing. Or, the birth control being tampered with, or not being taken at all.
Let me redefine your terms
Responsible Sex
Irresponsible Sex
Sabattoged Sex
of course your going to redefine midway as I'm making a response.
sigh
alright. I'll play be those terms, and make a new argument.
How can one have irresponsible sex, and not consent to a baby?
how about if contraceptives were banned
or how about a lack of proper sex education? Which for the sex ed issue, the states really REALLY likes to not teach that.
And for the contraceptives part... well let's look at the court.
“
n future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” he wrote, referring to the Supreme Court cases that found a privacy-enshrined right to contraception, sexual contact with someone of the same sex, and same-sex marriage. Thomas, who is Black, did not explicitly mention interracial marriage in his statement, though the Supreme Court ruling, Loving v. Virginia, is founded on the same legal principle"
Or what if one of the parties is drunk? Or [put mind altering thing here]
Would they once they're not completely wasted still consent to having a child? No. They may of consented to having sex that night, but a child? No. And that is DEFINITELY irresponsible sex. I'm pointing out that "irresponsible sex" can happen for a variety of reasons. and just thinking that two people just randomly decide to rog dog without thinking of the possibility of a child (even then lust in the heat of the moment during intimacy can definitely break logic too so there's that too, it requires one of the parties to be of reason, which can be rather difficult. ) is incredibly short sighted.
And it's also unrealistic to say to not have sex.