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.

 

Dave Chappell said "if women can kill their babies, then men can abandon them"

page: 13
62
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Good job cutting my comment in half.




posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Sookiechacha

When you consider there is another thread where people are complaining that we ain't having enough babies and its gonna result in the white majority being replace by immigrant minorities..
Ya, just one big right wing circle jerk, pat each other on the back, assure each other your way is the right way..
And of course, liberals are the demonic enemies of the American way..


Pretty much sums it up and it's fact.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: The2Billies




With abortion available up until birth
~~~

That's not true.

Guessing you missed it when they were pushing for just that a few months ago, still active in the background but they aren't as vocal about it lately. Wonder why?.


why should only women have a choice
~~~

Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her health and her choice.
Do you think a man should trump her choice, and force her to abort or give birth?

Trump her choice, no maybe not, but a man should be aloud a say. His voice should carry nearly as much weight... this is a lifetime commitment, both monetarily and emotionally, that guys have little to no say in. After all what happens if the couple used protection and she gets pregnant anyway. Obviously neither wanted kids, they used protection for a reason. So why should the guy be held accountable if she makes the unilateral decision to keep the kid? Shouldnt he get the chance to at least voice his thoughts before being forced into becoming a father/atm machine.


isn't that punitive to the man and discrimination?
~~~

A child is a punishment? Becoming a father is a discriminatory action?

It is when it is not something you ever wanted....



Why should the woman demand financial responsibility from the man if she can't afford the child, but chooses not to abort?
~~~
Because it takes two to tango. Take your assertion farther and ask, "why should the public have to take care of child, because the dad wont"?

Indeed it does, however you are advocating that one half of the couple performing the tango should be muzzled and given no choice after tab A gets inserted into slot B. How is that fair or just? You just stated that they acted in concert, so should they not both have the right to decide?
edit on 2-9-2019 by looneylupinsrevenge because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-9-2019 by looneylupinsrevenge because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

I think Dave highlighted so many failures of humanity

one of my more liberal friends said dave was "punching down"

but can a black man in the USA actually punch down .

ANyway , yeh I think he has a point 100% .


However I preferred his " you can say faggot on our network"

Hold on , then why can I say "nigga" ?

"you arent a faggot Dave" , "well Im not a nigga either"

If you take away all this identity stuff , dave isnt punching down on anything but Humanity!
what is the largest group on earth , its called Humanity , one which we all collectively belong too.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Is this thread a pro abortion thread?
Men seem to be demanding abortions.

Or is it just 'women are bad' thread?


edit on 2-9-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 06:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
Is this thread a pro abortion thread?
Men seem to be demanding abortions.

Or is it just 'women are bad' thread?



No I just think that what Dave Chappelle proposed maybe appeals to many men and that they agree with his position !



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82
Have you seen the film 'The Giver'?
The way it is done on there would stop all the issues.

Let the state decide the child bearers and let the state choose the people who nurture the child (never the child bearer).

Oh and be injected every day to prevent any sexual feelings.


edit on 2-9-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 06:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yeh that doesnt sound like any kind of world I'd want to live in !

The less the state has any involvement in your life the better your life will be



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82
Well it would solve all this hate and division.....and poor me, lifes not fair sh1t.


The film is a great watch btw.


edit on 2-9-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Cool I will check it out , i do enjoy a good movie.

The thing is , we need to realise , yes we may all "believe" we have this identity and we all like and dislike things
but underneath it all , we are human , just like every other human on earth .

Our external appearances and our own internal beliefs and likes and dislikes , are all different and some same
but we are all in one majority group called humanity.

if we were just able to see that , rather than hope that there are others who like the same things we do or dislike the same things we do and instead of forming into these tiny groups who are all "oppressed" or someone has it out for them .

its actually Mental ! how much we divide over nothing



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 07:11 AM
link   
He is a comedian. He said this to make people laugh(and likely to upset some, kind of like a troll). In the larger sense, he is probably trying to tackle what is a major problem in the black community.

It is sad that quite of few of you actually think this actually makes sense.
edit on 2-9-2019 by jrod because: Grammerrr



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82
Yes it's all about division.

Divide and be conquered.

Imagine being full of hate.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Sookiechacha

When you consider there is another thread where people are complaining that we ain't having enough babies and its gonna result in the white majority being replace by immigrant minorities..
Ya, just one big right wing circle jerk, pat each other on the back, assure each other your way is the right way..
And of course, liberals are the demonic enemies of the American way..


You are right there is another thread like that.

But some people, like me, think it is a good thing in the end.

With the coming AI robotic revolution, humans will be mostly unneeded and unnecessary to run basic services and create goods. We need far far fewer humans or will face a huge crisis of people with no jobs and who will forced to live purposeless and useless lives.

The causes are many and some include feminism, but definitely not all. But it is a good thing overall for XX to choose not to reproduce. In the short term it will hurt as economies will fall into the inevitable "2nd great depression". They will fall and collapse trying to support the elderly with too few young people. But in the long run it is good when robotic AI's take over the vast majority of jobs, and economies recover from the fall, in the long long run, it will be good as we enter into the AI robotic era.

So make the choice freely to "save the environment" as progressive liberals say and stop having children, per AOC and pop stars. Join the human extinction movement that has sprung up among the "woke".

XX, make the choice to use birth control, realize that it sometimes fails.
So, make the choice to also insist on condoms, make the choice to add spermicide,
make good choices so you don't have to make the choice to let fetal tissue fully develop and breathe or not breathe.


In today's society it is unreasonable to ask XX not to have intercourse with whomever they choose, whenever they choose, not going to happen in the "swipe right" all consensual adult sexual gratification is a basic human right, new morality, in today's society. So make the choice that will prevent you having to make the choice. Otherwise, it is even more of your choice and less of XY's responsibility.

Just don't make XY pay for your choices, or lack thereof, in the name of morality (what is "right") if you have eschewed traditional morality as basically outdated or oppressive or even the latest accusation, terroristic. If you won't realize that traditional morality has a place and purpose, then at least acknowledge that today's "new morality" is really no better because of the unintended consequences and ever changing idea of what is moral and what is immoral.

Today's "new morality" is just as oppressive and totalitarian as progressive liberals claim traditional morality is.
The "new morality" believes in: destroying people's lives and livelihoods for the wrong word, even said 14 years ago;
rioting when a person is invited to speak on campus and just might say something progressive liberals don't like;
committing "justified" violence at the sight of a hat or T-shirt with a message the progressive liberals don't like;
trapping business owners purposely into situations where they demand artists create works of art, or business owners create celebrations they feel are immoral so the "new morality" can make examples out of them of what happens when you don't follow their "new morals" by destroying their lives and business.

In the case of consensual adult intercourse between unmarried people:
XX if you make the choice not to use enough birth control to prevent pregnancy, and it IS your choice. Then you choose, and it IS your choice not to abort. Don't be someone in the "new morality" who believes you have to have a toxic, oppressive, man (who you have taken the choice away from) take care of you because you made a choice you can't live with alone.

Although, I have to admit that today's "new morality" has as one of it's highest tenants that "rich oppressors" are obligated to pay for the needs and wants of the oppressed, of which XX consider themselves.

So now I see why XX demands that toxic oppressors "take care of them" when they make a choice that results in them being unable to care for themselves, a bit hypocritical, don't you think? Bash the oppressors, call them horrid names, make them feel like pieces of dung and then tell them they have to be your ATM?

What ever happened to "I am woman hear me roar"? Women don't need men to care for them independence?
Which has evolved in today's new morality into, give me freedom to make my own choices, treat me as an equal who is independent from the oppressive XY, BUT the historically evil horrid oppressive XY is obligated to pay for my choices if they don't work out.



edit on 9/2/19 by The2Billies because: addition grammar



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:07 AM
link   

edit on 9/2/2019 by seizeX because: Wrong reply



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It’s interesting that you keep saying there is no “good reason” for a man to abandon their child... yet you defend the argument of a woman’s body, her choice.

Abortion is also a form of abandonment: “I don’t want the responsibility, so I elect, because it’s my body, to eliminate this burden.”

So outside of rape (and this is a whole other argument) or immediate medical concern, how do you justify one form of abandonment and not the other?

Whether I agree with either one, your logic and argument on this makes zero sense.

*shrug*



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:38 AM
link   
The only solution for this issue in our current leftist socialist form of government is to offer people who turn 18 years old $10K if they volunteer to have their tubes tied or a vasectomy. If one can afford to have the procedure reversed, one can afford to take care of children & abortion will be mostly eliminated. I agree with the bible on this matter.

1st Corinthians 11:3
3 But I will that ye know, that Christ is the head of every man: and the man is the woman’s head: and God is Christ’s head.
1st Corinthians 11:8-9
8 For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man.
9 For the man was not created for the woman’s sake: but the woman for the man’s sake.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

I am an older widow now. Has three kids with my husband of 40 years. In case you haven't figured this out yet, it wasn't the happiest marriage in the world, we had our problems and disagreements. But there was one thing we learned rather early, we couldn't afford to split up without being financially destroyed. So, we put our power struggles, our desires to change each other, all our expectations of what the other person should be doing.
He wanted to control the money, even when it was money I earned at work and he found ways to convince me that its better to just let him have that control, decide how much he could afford to give me and make do. He had to accept that I was no longer going nuts trying to keep a spotless house, that if he really wanted something done. His best option was to do it himself.. we learned to live with each other and quite frankly got along better at the end of the marriage.
Gee, I could have insisted on the separation, forced him out , went after him for all I could get, but then, it wouldn't have been that much and I realized that the govt would be propping me up for the long term. And he could have played the disability game that so many have, I mean he did have a history of back problems that they want to do surgery on at one point. But, neither of these options offered the same benefits as us joining forces and working together. So we change the word I into us and continued on.
My advice, to both the XXs and XYs would be to avoid sex till you find someone you can see as playing a major role in your life for a long time, dont count on birth control, nothing is 100% effective. And, if you screw up and make an oops, try like hell to stay together even if it means having to put up with some crap... unless of course your mate is physically abusive. You will never be as strong separately as you will be together.

And, I don't care, above all else abortion is a health issue, it's intended use is to treat a health condition. Just like I never had any right to decide weather my husband had that back surgery, which did affect his earning potential and thus my "ATM" as some of yous put it, the father has no right to decide what a women will do about her pregnancy. I had the right, and obligation, to listen to his hopes, his fears, try to help him weigh the pros and cons, and then support him in whatever decision he made..
That is what your job is guys if the dreaded oops happens.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: JBIZZ

Just one question... if the man chooses not to allow christ to be his head, but he is still the head of the women. Who, what, is the women following when she is following her head? If she is to obey god in all things, how can she accept christ as her lord if her husband does not wish her to?
I dont believe she can, read the bible, any other oath, contract, agreement, promise can be automatically vetoed by her husband..

All of which leads me to this question.
Why are Christians always saying that if the women didnt want the kid, she shouldn't have had the sex when their own believe system really seems to not want to give her a choice in that, or anything else, once she is married.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain


originally posted by: Itisnowagain
Is this thread a pro abortion thread?
Men seem to be demanding abortions.

Or is it just 'women are bad' thread?



This thread, initiated by a XX, is about:
When intercourse is between consensual unmarried adults:


XX can choose to use birth control pills, can choose to insist on condoms, can choose to add spermicide, to prevent pregnancy - if XX does none of these, or only one and it fails

XX legally has the choice - XX is the only one who has the legal choice to abort financial and all responsibility for fetal tissue and can choose to literally throw that responsibility in the trash

XY has only one limited choice to insist on condoms that fail in real life usage 25% of the time, where if XX is fully responsible and exercises all choices will only see failure .01% of the time (basically almost never)

While XX has the legal right to abort responsibility for the fetal tissue
XY has no legal right to abort financial responsibility for the fetal tissue

It is gender inequality when XX can abort all responsibility including financial for the fetal tissue; while XY can be forced to shoulder the financial responsibility for the same fetal tissue and has no choice.

True gender equality would allow a mechanism for XY to "abort" (i.e. not have legal or financial) responsibility for the fetal tissue that XX allowed to develop.



P.S. Also morality is moot. Today's society demands no judgement on any form of sexual gratification between consensual adults. Traditional morality must be left out of the equation as it has been ejected from modern society, which thereby makes it moot to the conversation.



edit on 9/2/19 by The2Billies because: addition



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

But, if she accepts that other part of parenting by taking full custody.. she has no financial responsibility to begin with..

I disagree with you because quite frankly,
I went through hell to avoid laying our responsibility onto the taxpayer while watching our taxes keep rising.. always with the excuse that they needed if for Medicaid. I lived among the people my taxes were helping, and most of them were going above and beyond what I would consider to me what their responsibility would be in your traditional household. In most cases, if they were getting child support, it wasn't enough since they were still dependent on food stamps, hud, heap, and on and on.

Yous lost me as a taxpayer when I couldn't afford my own healthcare and now I cant even walk through my own yard without looking like a drunk ready to fall down! Well, my husband and me paid plenty into the social security system so I dont feel one bit guilty now for collecting some back.
But just like I don't see why people who never eat at McDonalds should have to pay taxes to subsidize their employees, I dont see why taxpayers should have to pay out so dead beat dads can go skipping off to have a good old time. The taxpayer didnt play any part in creating that kid.. alot of the single moms are doing their part, they are getting up early in the morning, bundling up their kids, running them to daycare centers, and heading to school or work. I know, I was there neighbor. And even those who aren't trying to hold a job or prepare to enter the work force are fulfilling their part of the bargain. Ya theres a few that are trash, but most of them are taking care of the homefront.. they are doing the best they can..
But well. Dad needs to be in the picture, then, if they fall short, ya the taxpayer can step in to help out.
WTH, they are talking about going after the social security again, now that they've managed to create such a huge deficit once the 2020 election is over if the Republicans are still in charge... some of these new abortion laws would prevent young child incest victims from having the pregnancy terminated, women who are miscarrying in catholic hospitals are being sent home or left to suffer, cancer patients are denied tubal litigations during their c-sections, women are jailed when they fall down the stairs or are in car accidents and is causes a micarriage...
and of course men feel they should be able to just walk away, wash their hands when when their sexual misadventures results in a kid because some women are opting not to carry a pregnancy to term..
In case you haven't noticed, alot of these women are opting to do this because it is what the dad wanted! Dont believe me, do a little research! Heck some go so far as to threaten and terrorize her till she does.
edit on 2-9-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
62
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join