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: 16
63
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Then, I would ask why should you get any sympathy if the child support system drags you over the coals, into the brambles, through the mud, down the rocky cliff and leaves you in the middle of the desert to dry out and become vulture food..


Ummmm, getting a little over emotional.

If women don't care if men become "vulture food" why would men want to give them any assistance.

What your statement implied "I hate men, I loathe men, I would be happy if men died a miserable death." Then in all your earlier posts you implied "Men must be happy and grateful to pay for the choices women make, if women can't care for their choices women need men to take care of them".




posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Bloodworth

But then, couples spend quite a bit of money in fertility centers just to end up having to terminate the pregnancy...


When couples do that, they are contractually bound to each other and to the fetus legally through the marriage license.

What we are talking about here is 2 healthy consenting adults who have no legal or contractual obligation to each other. Completely different.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

On the basis of the statement, this David Chappell sounds like an absolute moron



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Sovaka

This is superb, well thought out and clearly defines the issue:




Here is some "arguments" to try and rebut.

1. The Man uses contraception in a clear indicator he has no desire for a child. The contraception fails resulting in pregnancy. Choices?

2. The Woman uses contraception in a clear indicator she has no desire for a child. The contraception fails resulting in pregnancy. Choices?

3. The Woman uses all the contraceptions (diaphragm, pill et c), the Man uses a contraception. A clear indicator neither want a child. The contraceptions fail and result in a pregnancy. Choices?

4. The Woman uses pregnancy as a form of control to "keep" a Man that has lost interest in her for any given reason. Choices?

5. The Man wants a child and sabotages a contraceptive. Choices? Regardless of these scenarios, the Woman can choose to abort at any given time up until the safe limit set by state laws. The Woman can choose to keep the child or prevent it from existing. The Man can not choose to keep the child or prevent it from existing.
The Man can not force the Woman to carry the child to term. Your logic states a Man is 100% responsible regardless of scenario and is a "dead beat" otherwise.
You consistently ignore the Woman's side of the argument for some reason and assume all responsibility on the Man.

The Woman is just as responsible for the child as the Man. Equally, both the Man and the Woman should have the same choices in the outcome.

Clearly we cannot force a Woman to term as that would be immoral so therefor the only option available to the Man should be that he can choose to "abandon" the child, in a similar fashion to the Woman as if she chose to terminate (without the Man's consent).

Anyone who thinks otherwise is stuck in old world thinking and needs to catch up to Equality.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:43 AM
link   


Have you considered that some females are told to have an abortion by their sex partners and do as they are told? And then spend their lives regretting it..... and feeling ashamed. And as they go though life they find that many people consider it murder and they have to hide that they did something just because their boyfriend was so forceful. Is it ok to be manipulated into murdering? Does he feel like he is a murderer or just her?



You make a great point.

However this thread is not at all about forced abortion.

It is about how XX has the legal choice and right to abort or not to abort

XY has no choice in the matter legally, but is held legally responsible for the choice XX made

This is about forcing one person to pay for 18 years the choice another person made (to keep the fetal tissue)

Whoa, I just realized the bigger picture: This is really about forcing people to pay for choices made by others. (socialism)


edit on 9/3/19 by The2Billies because: formatting



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: The2Billies

It was the constitution that said the govt couldn't exalt one religion above another. It gave us the freedom to come up with our own belief systems. Guess you would prefer to live under puritanical rule?
And, yes, it protects us from being forced to live under one set of beliefs, be they Christian based, Islamic based, or all hail satan, let's sacrifice the neighbors daughter tonight beliefs.. again would you prefer that the majority get to decide what beliefs you should adhere to? Even within the Christian sphere, I bet theres some groups that you would refuse to accept their edicts.

Why wont you or the poster I initially responded to answer my question I asked, did God throw out the wife with the husband when he decided she was to be his obedient little servant in all things??


Maybe no one answered because the question is so filled with rage, and there would be no answer that would make you satisfied.

Also, why even discuss religion when the reinterpretation by liberals of the constitution is "Freedom FROM religion". Why answer a question that has been made irrelevant in today's society. This question is so yesterdays morality.

Sure society has and can throw out all religion, and has and can made up it's own morality.

This is the new morality society has chosen after throwing out all traditional morals.

This is the result of demanding true gender equality which demands biological science to be irrelevant, in the new morality of gender equality.

Straight males are demanding equality too, something that makes all the other genders upset, because they felt gender equality only applied to everyone except straight males.

Surprise! Equality isn't equality if one "group" is excluded from being equal. One can't pull the biology card when one has called biology irrelevant to the gender equality.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: EnigmaChaser
A large amount of my job involves women and men being stuck in bad relationships.

It can be a deadly relationship for more than one individual, not just an unwanted child. While I understand the point you are trying to make, coercion to kill another living thing does not make one innocent of the crime. The decision to kill still falls squarely on the shoulders of the person that committed the actual act of killing.

Responsibility is the key that few want to take ownership of. Our society seems to encourage the lack of ownership, shown in the ease that so many have with wanting to shift blame of their actions onto someone or something else.

You have some that want to take ownership with the idea that "My body, My choice." Yet they then want to place the responsibility of their choice onto someone that may not agree with their choice.

Having said that, equal does not mean equitable.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: EnigmaChaser
A large amount of my job involves women and men being stuck in bad relationships.

It can be a deadly relationship for more than one individual, not just an unwanted child. While I understand the point you are trying to make, coercion to kill another living thing does not make one innocent of the crime. The decision to kill still falls squarely on the shoulders of the person that committed the actual act of killing.

Responsibility is the key that few want to take ownership of. Our society seems to encourage the lack of ownership, shown in the ease that so many have with wanting to shift blame of their actions onto someone or something else.

You have some that want to take ownership with the idea that "My body, My choice." Yet they then want to place the responsibility of their choice onto someone that may not agree with their choice.

Having said that, equal does not mean equitable.


Your point about responsibility is a good one and frankly that responsibility goes beyond supporting the child.

With the exception of truly dangerous relationships - of which there are definitely a number of - there’s also a “throw away” mentality towards marriage or relationships that also underpins this issue.

The OPs post makes sense in the context of a sperm donor who wants to be a father, is willing to work it out with the mother of the child, wants to be engaged in the process, etc. but the woman says no and rings the register on the way out. That happens quite a bit as well.

So creating rules that apply to the lowest common denominator and then being able to weaponized those rules for the advantage of the mother is the issue at hand here.

It’s a complicated subject with few easy answers. Thought proving none the less.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: EnigmaChaser
I so agree with everything you said. except .......

There are very easy answers. It becomes complicated when people want to make excuses for everything and anything. Biology, nature, individual rights, morals, religion, etc.........

We are so good at making things complicated that we can write a 224 page book on how to sharpen a pencil.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

It didn't though. I got full custody of both my kids when I divorced (she knew the kids were better off with me and agreed to it without stipulation).

But my point still stands. If women have abortions -- NOT because they don't want the child -- but, because they don't want the (potential) complications (which I get, because there are a lot, especially if you are older)

Then similarly men might not want to "take responsibility" for the child -- NOT because they don't want to be a father -- but rather because they know the mother well enough at that point and don't want to have anything further to do with her.

You don't get to have it both ways. The goal is perfect equality between the two sexes. NOT the elevation of one over the other.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

None of us are responsible for the way the world used to work. We are only responsible for our actions, in the here and now. You'll need a better argument if you want "more" "equality" for one sex over the other, based on the grievances of earlier generations because you are (understandably) not willing to "pay for" the misdeeds of your grandmother's generation, just as we have zero interest in "paying for" the misdeed of our fathers or grandfathers.

Equality means having an equal share of both obligations and rewards. It does not mean "it used to be really bad for us so now it's ok to make it extra bad for you."



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There is a portion of the left that wants to ban comedy altogether. They should be mocked -- loudly -- every time they open their stupid mouths.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Wooooohooooo!

Thinking back to your earlier post, it looks like we found the bitter one! lol



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

I never said men should be happy and grateful about being in child support hell.. theres some major issues with the system that could make you feel close to how I descibed.. I've tried to raise up these issues on threads and like this one, I did on this one, but it was just ignored by everyone... replaced with a more.. I just shouldn't have to support because....
And, I've explained far too many times that abortion above all else, its primary purpose for being in the doctors toolkit is as a treatment option for pregnancy because, sometimes it's the best option to treat the complications that come up with pregnancies.. complications that might not be risking the mothers life but are severe enough to result in long lasting negative effects to her and family. Gee, we have people killing people, standing their ground. We have people bowing away trick or treaters or knock on their door. Shooting trespassers for just being on their property. And a great big war machine that has dropped radioactive bombs and poisons around the world not only effecting the innocent strangers that happened to br around the explosion but the unborn for generations to come.. if all that can be justified as "self defense" and not murder.. then neither is an abortion when the complications get that extreme. And, at least one on this thread has shown very little concern for those women on other threads.. threads about laws that would take the option away from young victims of rape and insist. " religious rights," have trumped a women's right to terminate a pregnancy that is terminating itself to slowly and allowing infection to run rampant in her body in many hospitals.
So, ya I ask why should I care if you end up in child support hell, if you dont care about these cases? Are you ever gonna care enough about them to have laws that require the father of the child to at bnb least try to help her out, maybe take charge of her living breathing children when he can, help with the medical care and drugs she needs? Or is it more of a it's her pregnancy to deal with, not really my problem, but hey if she doesnt opt to terminate someone is gonna and we men dont get the final say, I guess we are off the hook!

And, we dont have dead beat dads because of the loss of Christian values or moral decay, or because women are now given an option to abort.. those dead beat dads have always been around and because they were leaving too many women and children destitute in their wake, they allowed abortions. Which is why I say yous are blaming women!!

And, before you say that those women i am describing are too few to be considered in these discussions... between them and the babies that are terminated because the pregnancy is not vaiable.. (it doesnt matter how long the pregnancy lasts, the child will not survive long once its born and quite possibly will suffer every minute of it's short life)...that number comes close to the number of of third trimester abortions and for danged sure is more that the number of abortions that would occur days before natural birth, if that is even a thing! But yous sure want to raise those up discussions every chance you get!!

If one night stand dick and one night stand Jane are as dumb as they seem to be, they deserve whatever comes their way...
But dont use their existence as an excuse to pretend that women have to make a decision between no abortion along with pain, agony, possible disability, possible death or no support of any kind from the father of the child.. the result just might be a go f yourself the next time you go hunting for your one night stand!



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

It's a question I've been asking people for decades..
No one really has managed to answer it to my satisfaction.
It's not backed by rage, its backed by the hurt of realizing that the Christian god really didnt give a damn about the female sex to begin with. It's the result of reading through the bible time and again and finding so much that affirms that conclusion and next to nothing that gives a clue as to why I would be wrong.
Dont ever tell me that we are in the mess we are in because me and others have turned our backs on your religion! Your danged god didnt want me!!
edit on 3-9-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

So, "rage" then?

I'm sorry god didn't want you. I thought the point of being human was that we could work together to create a tool that would keep that god out of our business, or at least over on its side of the bed where it belongs and not in the middle hogging all the covers?

You do have a big rage, Dawn. That's ok though and I totally get it. I have a big rage toward the people who abused and tried to destroy 8-year-old me too. I try to stay ahead of that rage by reminding myself that there is no perfect good on this planet, tuned into these radios, expressing the godhead imperfectly.

Anyway, I'm gonna go do something else. For the record, I strongly believe men SHOULD take responsibility for their children AND that they should be in those children's lives as much as possible, given we live within a slightly fallen or crooked "experience of reality."

Chappelle just canceled "cancel culture" vs. comedy. It's supposed to make you laugh and maybe make you think a little extra because you did. That's what it's good for.

Men and women are in this together. Recognize and speak on/against anything that threatens either one, because their union is all we got (or will ever need).



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Wooooohooooo!

Thinking back to your earlier post, it looks like we found the bitter one! lol


I don't know what you think you've found, other than proof that I am avidly pro-choice.

I am opposed to forced births as much as I am opposed to forced abortion.
I am opposed to a financial test, or any kind of government imposed parenthood qualifications.
I am opposed to anyone abandoning and/or punishing a child, especially when it's based on the actions one parent not aborting it.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

I didnt ask that question because of rage..
Those posts where made to people who were bringing their religion into the discussion, one quoting scripture which prompted me to ask the question the other seems to be saying we wouldn't be having these problems if only we kept christianity as a focal point in govt policy.
I'm old enough to know that yes, we did have these problems. And, I've had the experiences that taught me that what is being really said is that we want to go back to the time when husbands legally had the final say IN ALL THINGS and women should be graciously happy what the husband chooses to give her, be it plenty freedom and liberty or little to none.
I've debated with women and men who tried to impress the "women obey your husbands in all things" theology to Christian domestic abuse victims, just to see one of those women post a "oh, look what time it is, I need to get off the computer, my husband doesnt want me posting on these forums".. obviously, she wasn't practicing what she preached.. well I spent a good many years practicing. I suggest those women read the bible and try living it for awhile..


edit on 3-9-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-9-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies
Although he has a point both are wrong IMO. What society today lacks is HONOR. It is a me me me society. No one wants responsibility. The generation of I want free health care, pay for my school, and everyone should get a check from the government. Madness.

We need booster shots for responsibility and honor all that is good. Karma is a BITCH so abandon those kids and for women kill them because I don't want to be in your KARMIC SHOES!!!



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: SilentWindofDoom




A woman has a right to decide what happens to her body in regards to having the baby,


Obviously a woman's right to decide what happens to her body begins way
before the baby is born. So if she decides to let some lop enter her
body she had the final say in what happened to her body. Then she has the
final say again. So where is the baby daddy's say in any of it.

I never understood why Mr. Slutlop's life can be decimated that way?
What about the psycho bitch that targets Mr. Slutlop?
He go's from being a single bachelor party guy to an 18 year train wreck.
Lic suspensions and garnished wages and he may never find out about the
bulls eye baby mama put on his back.

And what about woman who artificially inseminate? Do they have a right just to
change their mind and abort without good reason? What if Ted Bundy donated
sperm all over the country? There isn't anything sane or moral about this world.

Beam me up this place is for Gawd damned idiots.

edit on 3-9-2019 by carsforkids because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
63
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join