Thank you for answering.Speaker of Animals wrote:Uh.. yeah..
She believes women are not meant to bear children. She espouses feminism which expresses the idea that women are our equals (or they can do anything we can do, which is demonstrably false).
Would you concede that her failure to accept that natural order, then, is about as meaningful or futile as a falling man without a parachute arguing against the theory of gravity?
And if you could concede that, then would you accept that one cannot - in reality - "defy" nature, be it human nature or "natural" nature? That the falling man isn't defying nature, and the feminist cannot truly defy her being uniquely biologically suited to childbearing? She can, as an individual chose not to have a child, but she cannot defy what she is as a physical, biological being - that is, a female capable of childbirth?
Agree?