It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could abortion be considered a double standard?

page: 15
14
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: Annee
From my Ex, great man.

"If you stick WooHoo in HooHoo without a Raincoat, BooHoo"

In otherwords deal with it. If she keeps it, you pay, it's your kid. If she doesn't, her choice, deal with it.


So to be clear the argument for the woman having all the say is that she grows the baby in her belly for 9 months? Are there other points that could be made for the woman's side that couldn't also be made for the man?


You should probably read my first post in thread.



My response is always: for eons women have taken the brunt of responsibility for getting pregnant. That really hasn't changed, even today. When the sperm donor did not hold up to his responsibility ---- the woman was told it's her fault for picking the wrong man.

So, men --- for eons women have been expected to take full responsibility for pregnancy --- and so, most do. If you think otherwise, expecting her to consult with you or care about your feelings, and she doesn't --- guess what --- you picked the wrong woman.

edit on 16-8-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Hey everyone i seen this post and had to create an account solely to comment. now while this is a touchy subject it will always come back down to women wanting equal rights, im firm believer that men should have a say in whether or not that baby/fetus is aborted or kept not spread 50/50 because the women does have the hardship but 60/40. because if the baby is born and kept the father must pay regardless of martial situation if they stay together the father usually is forced/coerced into becoming the main worker of the family if their position allows for this, now because she opted to keep the baby the father is screwed financially, but he should get a say but because its her body he doesn't. now if women around the first world want it to stay this they cannot have equality and women will not be able to make foreign or military policies because women are excluded from combat roles so its a mans body that will go through the hardship.(semi-example)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: lordofthesheep



im firm believer that men should have a say in whether or not that baby/fetus is aborted or kept not spread 50/50 because the women does have the hardship but 60/40.

So you agree that the woman should have the final decision. That's what many have been saying.



now if women around the first world want it to stay this they cannot have equality and women will not be able to make foreign or military policies because women are excluded from combat roles
Yes. And women have been asking to be allowed to be allowed in combat. Being excluded is not equitable.
www.elpasotimes.com...


edit on 8/16/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

while i agree they should have the final say, but if the male iterates from the start that he wants nothing to do with said child, then he should have no part in his/hers life or have to pay any support, also yes they have been asking to be allowed into combat but they cant be allowed into combat because regardless of what people say women and men are fundamentally different, they are more of a liability than asset but thats an argument for another day. also i didnt voice my agreement with the OP so i'll do that now
edit on 16-8-2015 by lordofthesheep because: spelling



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: lordofthesheep

while i agree they should have the final say if the male iterates from the start that he wants nothing to do with said child, then he should have no part in his/hers life or have to pay any support
If the woman has an abortion why would there be child support?



they are more of a liability than asset but thats an argument for another day.
So, you just threw that part in there for no reason.


also i didnt voice my agreement with the OP so i'll do that now
And, like the OP, your opinion is based on chauvinistic reasoning. Got it.


edit on 8/16/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/16/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

no i agreed that the man is screwed currently, regardless of the womens choice and the first part i apologise its been a long day if she doesnt have the abortion he has to pay support. and no i threw it in there as a counter point to you point "Yes. And women have been asking to be allowed to be allowed in combat." and why have you become hostile i was only stating my opinions
edit on 16-8-2015 by lordofthesheep because: spelling



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: lordofthesheep

no i agreed that the man is screwed currently
And, of course, everything is fine and dandy for the woman.


and no i threw it in there as a counter point to you point "Yes. And women have been asking to be allowed to be allowed in combat."
After saying that women have it easy because they are excluded from combat.


and why have you become hostile i was only stating my opinions
No hostility. Just pointing out flaws in you logic.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

What about the placenta? Is that part of the woman's body? Surely she should be able to have the placenta removed... It will kill the fetus, but it IS an organ that belongs to her.

Doesn't appear to be.


The cells in the placenta, like all nucleated cells, contain DNA. The placenta is derived from fetal cells, with a contribution from the lining of the mother’s uterus.

www.nsta.org...



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

##SNIPPED##
no the women goes through the hardship of childbirth, so no its not easy but she has OPTIONS the man does not, example
women;im pregnant and having an abortion
man:i want to keep it.
women: no
man is now emotionally #ed up because believe it or not men have emotions too.
scenario2
women;im pregnant and im keeping the baby
man:i dont want the baby
women: tough you are paying child support or you'll go to prison


so either way the guy is screwed, "they have it easy because they are excluded"? no but they shouldn't dictate to other what they are prohibited from doing themselves due to them not being able to complete the function that job requires
edit on Mon Aug 17 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: removed off topic remark....Go After the Ball, Not the Player!



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

You didn't really answer the question... though I can infer an answer from your response.

You are essentially saying that the woman has the final say.

Though if she goes against your choice, that you will withdraw your support of her decision... which really highlights the core of the discussion... in the end it is the woman's choice, they take the burden of that choice, and men can only ever have an opinion, not actually make the choice for her... they can choose to either support the woman in her decision, or use their support as a leverage to try to get their own way.

In your situation, it's either agree with my decision, or the relationship is over.

I'm not saying that you are doing this, as I'm sure you have a loving discourse with your partner, and share similar ideologies... but in a sense, it is kind of emotional blackmail, if she doesn't agree with your decision and wants to retain the relationship.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: puzzlesphere

I guess I am not a big fan of a female that wants to kill my offspring for her own personal convenience.
I tried to put myself outside the basic morality of it, without personal conviction, but I could never continue to be with someone that had such 180 degree difference in philosophical morality, even taking any religious beliefs totally off the table.
An argument could be made by both to the effect "I guess you don't really love me then". The end result could kill the relationship anyway, the resentment for the man could carry too the point of no return, months later.
For the woman once that baby is in her arms and interacting with both parents in a family environment, any resentment that lingered would be wiped out by joy of this new being that is enriching both their lives. Especially if it is their first child.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

What about the placenta? Is that part of the woman's body? Surely she should be able to have the placenta removed... It will kill the fetus, but it IS an organ that belongs to her.

Doesn't appear to be.


The cells in the placenta, like all nucleated cells, contain DNA. The placenta is derived from fetal cells, with a contribution from the lining of the mother’s uterus.

www.nsta.org...



Nature is an amazing Goddess!

Scientists Discover Children’s Cells Living in Mothers’ Brains


The physical connection between mother and fetus is provided by the placenta, an organ, built of cells from both the mother and fetus, which serves as a conduit for the exchange of nutrients, gasses, and wastes. Cells may migrate through the placenta between the mother and the fetus, taking up residence in many organs of the body including the lung, thyroid, muscle, liver, heart, kidney and skin.


And, as an added caveat.....


These may have a broad range of impacts, from tissue repair and cancer prevention to sparking immune disorders.



edit on 16-8-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Morals and circumstance aside, you agree then that it is ultimately the woman's decision?

I agree that two people should share similar convictions, and that in a loving relationship, indeed there would be common ideologies, open discussion and a compromise can be reached that both parties are comfortable with.

This is often not the case though, and there are many reasons that a woman could have, outside of convenience, for wanting or needing an abortion.

For instance, I have gone through an abortion with a previous partner, and had two other pregnancy scares with my current partner/fiancee.

The abortion was the result of the pill not working, despite good practices with her pill regime (the pill only has a 99% success rate, so 1 out of every hundred women who take the pill can get pregnant every year). In that case, I was deeply involved in my thesis, and she was still at university in her final year, and even though we liked each other a lot, neither of us had any intention of starting a family together at that point, and our opportunities in life would have been severely effected by a child. Luckily as well, as in the next couple of years, many irreconcilable differences led us to part company, and each go our separate ways. If we had carried the child to term, it would have likely led to an unhappy relationship, and a child that didn't get the family that it deserved.

For the two pregnancy scares, one was the result of not thinking the pill had worked (based on previous experiences) and the other the result of a broken condom at a critical point. Both accidents, and we took precautions to avoid pregnancy. Luckily they were just scares, but we had discussed our options... for the first it was decided that we were not ready to raise children, and if there was a pregnancy that we would have an abortion (she was in her final year of a Masters of Architecture, and needed 3 years industry experience following graduation to get her architectural registration... which would have been impossible with a child, and is an extraordinarily difficult industry to come back to after years away)... the second, we still didn't feel ready, though we would have kept the child if it had eventuated, even though it would have been very difficult for both of us with her still gaining industry experience and me having just started a business.

In all of those circumstances, I had my preferences, but I would have supported my partner in her decision, as it would be effecting her life and body much more than it would mine, and all I had to do was offer a supporting role... even if that role was financial support for the next 18 years. I would have loved any child that we did have, but I understand that sometimes difficult choices have to be made in order to have the best outcomes for all involved... and yes that can mean abortion in certain situations... it should be a choice... albeit a choice not made lightly, and there should be support for the repercussions of either choice (that our society is dismal at providing).

These are all mild situations as well... we were mature enough and financially stable enough (barely) to support a child at any of these points, though for uneducated teenagers in low economic areas, forcing a girl to have a child because of illegal abortions just leads to greater poverty, and stifles the chances of some of these teens ever gaining enough of an education to make good decisions later in their lives.

edit on 17-8-2015 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: puzzlesphere

Fellow Antipodean, thank you for your measured account.
We live in a totally different society from the North Americans who oppose this, and so I thank your voice of reason in a world of 'Bible Belt' Conservatism...

...there's no arguing/debating/discussing with them though...




edit on 17-8-2015 by aorAki because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-8-2015 by aorAki because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-8-2015 by aorAki because: " ": round bible belt, for we know that narrowmindedness is not limited to that geographic spcificity...



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake

So to be clear the argument for the woman having all the say is that she grows the baby in her belly for 9 months? Are there other points that could be made for the woman's side that couldn't also be made for the man?



Check and mate.


^ That's me BTW, a week before my son was born. See those boots I'm wearing? They weren't a fashion statement, I literally couldn't get my swollen feet into anything else. It was winter and I slipped on the ice and I practically dislocated my pelvic joints and I was having to go to a chiropractor every few days to get extremely painful adjustments. I went from 130 lbs to 200 lbs and it was pretty much all baby and amniotic fluid. I suffered from morning sickness the ENTIRE 10 months, sciatica for 3 of them....all the while having to do all my regular chores, including loading and unloading hay bales and feed sacks, digging post holes, etc. Most women have no choice but to continue working through all of this. My baby and I almost died in childbirth and I ended up with an emergency C-section. And I currently have a hernia that requires surgery to fix. I had to take horse pill vitamins every day. I had to stop taking necessary medications because they caused birth defects. Obviously I couldn't smoke or drink, not that I wanted to- I was so nauseous. ....and that was a normal, healthy pregnancy!

And now I'm raising my boy all by myself- minimal babysitting help from my mom, nothing at all from the biological father. I'm not complaining, this was my choice and I'm happy with it. But imagine having all this forced upon you?
edit on 17-8-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: lordofthesheep
Hey everyone i seen this post and had to create an account solely to comment. now while this is a touchy subject it will always come back down to women wanting equal rights, im firm believer that men should have a say in whether or not that baby/fetus is aborted or kept not spread 50/50 because the women does have the hardship but 60/40. because if the baby is born and kept the father must pay regardless of martial situation if they stay together the father usually is forced/coerced into becoming the main worker of the family if their position allows for this, now because she opted to keep the baby the father is screwed financially, but he should get a say but because its her body he doesn't. now if women around the first world want it to stay this they cannot have equality and women will not be able to make foreign or military policies because women are excluded from combat roles so its a mans body that will go through the hardship.(semi-example)


OMG! What world are you living in?! 60/40? With the 60% being the man's opinion, I presume, because he will be the one having to pay child support????

CNN Money- Over $100 BILLION in unpaid child support
^ and that's just the COURT ORDERED CHILD SUPPORT. A lot of women are too exhausted from raising the kid on their own to even try to take it to court. They just suck it up and do the job.

OP's complaining because women can have abortions without the man's consent. Now you're complaining that when they DO keep the baby the man has to support it. Which one is it guys??? You can't have your cake and eat it too.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

What about the placenta? Is that part of the woman's body? Surely she should be able to have the placenta removed... It will kill the fetus, but it IS an organ that belongs to her.



Doesn't appear to be.

The cells in the placenta, like all nucleated cells, contain DNA. The placenta is derived from fetal cells, with a contribution from the lining of the mother’s uterus.

www.nsta.org...


So, the woman has HER body. The 'baby' and accompanying placenta have their own DNA. So why can't a woman remove a foreign object from HER body??? Because you said so?
edit on 17-8-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: format

edit on 17-8-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: format...again



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: puzzlesphere
For the woman once that baby is in her arms and interacting with both parents in a family environment, any resentment that lingered would be wiped out by joy of this new being that is enriching both their lives. Especially if it is their first child.


I have no problem with you (hypothetically) ending a relationship with a woman who aborts your offspring against your will. I would consider that 'irreconcilable differences'. I even starred your post.

The above quote is where I have issue. What a rose colored fairy tale idea you have in your head! Going through a pregnancy is hard. Having a baby is hard. There's not always automatic love for the baby (postpartum depression). And once you get that kid home the REAL work begins. If a couple isn't on rock solid ground to begin with, a baby is just the thing to push them over the edge. Especially if one half of the couple didn't 110% want the baby to begin with. The stress and fatigue can make things get real ugly, real fast. Most couples face their greatest hardships once a baby shows up on the scene....especially if it's their first.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

What about the placenta? Is that part of the woman's body? Surely she should be able to have the placenta removed... It will kill the fetus, but it IS an organ that belongs to her.



Doesn't appear to be.

The cells in the placenta, like all nucleated cells, contain DNA. The placenta is derived from fetal cells, with a contribution from the lining of the mother’s uterus.

www.nsta.org...


So, the woman has HER body. The 'baby' and accompanying placenta have their own DNA. So why can't a woman remove a foreign object from HER body??? Because you said so?

Uhh, because this particular "foreign object" is a human. Not an indistinct blob 'belonging' to the mother.

The "object" should be killed for violating your extreme My House, My Rules policy? I don't think so.
edit on 17-8-2015 by DenyObfuscation because: consistency of random capitalization



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

But she's not killing it. She's merely removing it from her body. If it can't survive on its own...




top topics



 
14
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join