Article: Rejection Question | The maternity husband imposed by the body of women in question …

How much power does a woman have over her body? Should she continue to accept forced labor or the fulfillment of her husband’s wishes? Countries are different; But the question is about women.

Considering the body as a bridge between two minds, it is very important not to cross it by force or so-called marital agreement.

The United States is not as developed as it used to be in Hollywood movies and has some pictures of our family. She’s not even that great to look at from the outside, Mars, etcetera. But sang the sweetness of these two, they are sublime and all seem perfect.

But even if cracks appear in it, the deceptive appearance inside can be easily noticed. Compare them to ‘You to Brutus?’ The courts of both countries have recently given an excuse to make such a sad surprise. Discussions, debates, and disagreements are characteristic of a healthy social psychology. But 21st century society is putting all issues aside and discussing Hanuman Chalisa, a country like America that is always ahead of the world. About fifty years ago the country declared that abortion was the sole decision of the woman concerned, that it was her personal freedom and that it was granted to her by the Constitution. At a time when the feminist movement was in its infancy, US courts were hotly debating women’s individual rights, their right to privacy and the right to conceive. 1973 suit, where ro v. Known as Wade, it expanded the scope of personal freedom, improved women’s literacy in the courts and governments, and added a more humanitarian dimension to issues such as abortion. Previously in the United States, abortion was permitted only if the woman’s life was in danger. But Jane Roe, who is pregnant for the third time, did not want a baby. But she was unable to have an abortion because the law did not allow it. Her lawyer, Sarah Weddington, is suing Henry Wade, a local judge in U.S. federal court. The case went to the US Supreme Court and at least in the first trimester of pregnancy, American women were given this right. But now, 50 years later, the right to abortion is unconstitutional, nowhere in the United States Constitution, and US courts are preparing to revoke that right, sparking outrage.

In fact, the mentality that children give flowers and noses to the house of God has always been, and still is, very different around the world. This is the first time a person with the unwritten responsibility of giving birth and nourishing a nine-month-old fetus in his body has been allowed to decide if he really wants to get pregnant. Today, abortion is legal in Argentina and Thailand. Mexico and South Korea have also legalized abortion with some restrictions. Kenya, Ireland, New Zealand and Colombia have also relaxed a number of restrictions on abortion. While abortion is legal in a country like China where there is a child policy, abortion is legal in a country like Zambia in Africa for economic and social reasons. In Europe, abortion laws are very strict in countries like Poland and Honduras in Central America. We also have a recent amendment to the 1971 Abortion Act, which was extended to 24 weeks.

The issue in the context of the original Row vs. Wade is not only about the right to abortion, but also to what extent the state should be allowed to interfere with the perimeter of individual liberty. The state system does not ‘give’ the individual the right to liberty. The function of the state system is to ensure that it is not violated. If he goes away the state system must lie in it. But why should the state say ‘no right to abortion’? This is the first time in the history of the world that such a feat has been achieved. If we want to move from the 21st century to the 18th century, if women are denied the right to personal liberty, many other rights related to it will not be axed tomorrow. Because there is no need for anyone to discuss that matter with anyone. In fact, modern education, on the one hand, liberates women from their traditional responsibilities. It is also predicted that in the near future maximum technology will be able to free them from the responsibility of nine months of pregnancy. At the same time it is unfair to present technical issues and deceive the present. The craze to rewrite history must be the same everywhere. We have to do with the history of thousands of years ago, because the United States does not have that much history, they have to do with recent history in some cases.

The debate over whether a woman has a right to her body is based on the issue of abortion in a developed country like the United States, but the question is whether a woman has the right to refuse sex in a developing country like ours. Sex after marriage. It is unfortunate that two judges of the Delhi High Court have differed on the issue of forced marriage under the guise of rape. Does the person sitting in a high position in the judiciary think outside the law, as a woman ‘male’, has anything to do with her aspirations and her morale? If the body is the bridge between the two minds, how can it be forcibly crossed? Is the body more important than the so-called marriage contract? Family important person? If a person is a part of the society and all the rules and regulations of the society apply to him, to what extent should he accept them even if they occupy his personal space? Many theoretical questions arise as to whether rejection is gender sensitive. However, this is not the first time they have appeared and will not happen again. It remains to be seen how America and India view the negativity of women in this conflict, at a time when modernity is coming from technology, modernity coming from technology, and at the same time rising tide of reaction mentality.

2022-05-13 18:32:00

Exit mobile version