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: 6
63
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
He has it backwards.

Many of these women know the man won't be there.




posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Saying its akin to cancer to alleviate guilt of erradicating it. It could have a healthy life without a father, but not without a heartbeat.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

Please! Like I said, that transition was incomplete, that why he still had his ovaries, uterus and a vagina.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

So you are taking the stance transgender men are not men and only women can get pregnant?

Ok. But the current societal stance of those who who think abortion is moral and just, that women have the absolute "right to choose" up until the day before they give birth, is that it is bigoted and wrong to say transgender men are not women.

Really, this is what you are hanging your hat on?

I think we are done, our conversations have become ridiculous and circular.


edit on 8/31/19 by The2Billies because: addition



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I actually agree with this. If a man does not want a kid, he should be able to say it needs to be aborted and he should not be liable for child support if she says no. If they are going to push for woman having a choice, the man should have a choice also. All I am saying is if the guy does not want the kid and is wanting it to be aborted, he should not be liable for supporting the kid.

Now if they kept abortion illegal except for certain situations with health risk, then the guy would not be able to do this, he would be liable. She has no choice so he should have no choice if abortion is illegal or at least highly restricted. I do feel that a woman should have a choice up to about three months or so, and if that is the case, maybe keep it the way it is now. Many times the woman does not even know she is pregnant for a couple of months, then needs to think things through and decide.

This makes sense, some women actually try to get pregnant so they can collect child support, I have known many women who did this over the years since I was a teenager. The state and the father supported the family, the woman only needed to get a part time job at the most to get spending money. This is not rare, many women do this kind of thing. It is happening just as much now as back in the seventies.


edit on 31-8-2019 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse
If a man does not want a kid he should wear a condom.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

What does your ridiculous hyperbole about transgender people have to with the idea that if "women can kill their babies, men can abandon the babies that women chose not to kill"?



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

If a woman doesnt want a baby she should use contraception.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain


My sister had two girls when she was on the pill and the father was wearing a condemn, just saying...



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse




I actually agree with this. If a man does not want a kid, he should be able to say it needs to be aborted and he should not be liable for child support if she says no. If they are going to push for woman having a choice, the man should have a choice also. All I am saying is if the guy does not want the kid and is wanting it to be aborted, he should not be liable for supporting the kid.


Fine. So let's tell children that their daddies aren't responsible to them because their mommies failed to abort them. Then, lets put them on the social dime, because their mother's can't provide health care, food, housing, clothing, child care, etc.,

What? You say that women who don't get abortions shouldn't be qualified for dependent family support from the government?


edit on 31-8-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: rickymouse
If a man does not want a kid he should wear a condom.



For those men and women who are allergic to latex, how does that work out. Now you are putting latex in some spots that are much worse than the rubber band on someone's underwear or latex gloves on a person't had.

A lot of people are now allergic to latex. Is this possibly the reason that more women are getting endometriosis?



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: The2Billies
In his latest Netflix concert Dave Chappell said "if women can kill their babies, then men can abandon them."

[snip]

Interesting philosophy.


Philosophy? Or cop out? Or just whataboutism? Men have been abandoning their children from time immemorial... just like women have been terminating their pregnancies since time immemorial.


Why not allow men to have a choice? Should choice be limited to just one gender?


That seems like a non sequitur to me. Obviously, if the child is born, then the mother didn't abort. So isn't that a moot point? It would be more logical to suggest that the father should have equal say in whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, not whether or not to support a child that is here.


When morality is taken out of the equation: no moral judgement on abortion up until birth, why should we make a moral judgement about the sperm donor? Why is refusing to parent or take responsibility for a child mandatory for one gender and a choice for another gender?


Morally speaking, it's never wise to let others determine one's own morals and standards. Doesn't matter if some men abandon their children, all women need to act according to their own conscience. Doesn't matter if some women abort their babies, all men need to act according to their own conscience and standards. Neither is justified nor exonerated by the actions of the other.

Practically speaking, carrying a child to term and giving birth poses risks to the mother -- including death, but also lifelong effects on the body and well-being of the mother. The father does not have the same health risks and consequences. The father's life and limb are not threatened by pregnancy. So the issues of completing a pregnancy are very different for a woman then they are for a man.

If a woman is willing risk her own life and limb to carry a man's child to term, to endure labor and delivery (or C-Section) to bring forth that life, she has already made a far greater sacrifice than the father ever will.

However, speaking to the legal aspects, neither party should be held to a higher standard of responsibility than the other. Everyone knows how babies are made. Everyone knows that the only sure way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is not to do the deed in the first place. Both men and women. Not one or the other. Barring instances of rape, both parties made the choice to engage in the activity which they knew could result in a pregnancy. Both are equally responsible for that choice and that result.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Lets tell children their mothers didnt want..... Oh wait.

So if a father dies pre-birth and the mother isnt financially suited for a kid should the public get the say? Your so worried about the financial responsibility of the public for a fathers bad decision, why should they not have a say in the mothers?



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: The2Billies

What does your ridiculous hyperbole about transgender people have to with the idea that if "women can kill their babies, men can abandon the babies that women chose not to kill"?



OMG circles upon circles

Please re-read all my posts, your answer is there.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha


You know what, how about if a woman puts the wrong mans name on the birth certificate she face some form of punishment, how about if a woman makes false claims in the court to push a father out of the childs life they face punishment.


If you want to cling to your abortion, then lets level the playing field to make it actually make it justice when the family unit breaks up.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Obviously, I disagree.
Please read my all previous posts in this thread. All your questions will be answered.

If one wants gender equality, one must accept gender equality for all, not just for some.

If one wants choice for one gender, then one must accept choice for all genders, not just one gender.

Else, ones argument is specious, biased and based on gender inequality. Favoring, no demanding choice for XX as a basic human right, while at the same time denying XY the right to choose, actually demanding XY have no rights to choose is the very definition of inequality, bigotry and denial of rights.


edit on 8/31/19 by The2Billies because: grammar



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: rickymouse




I actually agree with this. If a man does not want a kid, he should be able to say it needs to be aborted and he should not be liable for child support if she says no. If they are going to push for woman having a choice, the man should have a choice also. All I am saying is if the guy does not want the kid and is wanting it to be aborted, he should not be liable for supporting the kid.


Fine. So let's tell children that their daddies aren't responsible to them because their mommies failed to abort them. Then, lets put them on the social dime, because their mother's can't provide health care, food, housing, clothing, child care, etc.,

What? You say that women who don't get abortions shouldn't be qualified for dependent family support from the government?



Sure, women could get government support, but they or the government should not get to collect child support from the father if the law is changed to one that allows the woman to get an abortion up till the day the kid is born. That is what some states want.

To say the woman has a choice and the man doesn't have one is discrimination. Right now there is limited time to make a decision so I cannot see a guy having any way of avoiding support payments for the child. If they expand the timeframe for abortions, then I say make it nondiscriminatory and allow the guy to say no to supporting the kid.

I am just trying to be fair, both parties should have sayso. I knew of a few girls in the past that went behind the back of their boyfriends and aborted, actually one of the couples was married. In both cases, when the BF/Hubby found out there was no more relationship, they did not want to abort the kid. I believe that the Husband should have the right to say no to an abortion, if the husband says no, then no doctor should be allowed to give an abortion. I have personal experience with this.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: Sookiechacha


You know what, how about if a woman puts the wrong mans name on the birth certificate she face some form of punishment, how about if a woman makes false claims in the court to push a father out of the childs life they face punishment.


If you want to cling to your abortion, then lets level the playing field to make it actually make it justice when the family unit breaks up.



I actually know half a dozen women throughout the years who put a guys name on the birth certificate that was not the father. It was contested, the guy paid....now with DNA testing, the mother will not allow the kid to have their dna tested on ancestry. Many women are against DNA testing of their kids, because they may get caught. Excuses are made that it may effect the kids health insurance costs by many of the women that are not sure.

I was told by the doctors long ago that I could not have kids, both my daughters, one from each wife, test as mine. Everyone was surprised, I always treated them as my daughters and since I am now proved to be their fathers, I actually get on their case more if they do things wrong, I am not going to allow them to keep making their own mistakes, I advise them of what can go wrong ahead of time. I am usually right too. I do not say things unless I know it for sure or have personal experience.

In the cases where the guy paid child support for years, when it was found it was not his kid, the child support was paid to the welfare department or sometimes directly to the ex-wife or ex GF. None of those guys got one cent back, and I do not think one of those guys got off the hook for child support either, Only a couple of the guys I knew of actually tried to get off support after DNA testing, the kids were already close to eighteen or they found out after the kid turned eighteen. Word spreads, waste of time trying to get off paying, the government does not give in easily
edit on 31-8-2019 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TheLead

Obviously not.



posted on Aug, 31 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
But, what if their choice is not to be pregnant?
Seriously, there is two possible reasons why women abort.. they dont want to have a child, or they just dont want to be pregnant. You can want to have the child but still end up not wanting to be pregnant, just ask any couple who spent a small fortune in a fertility clinic just to end up with a pregnancy that has serious complications. Above all else, pregnancy is a health matter, I really think that the women and her doctor shouldn't have have to worry about what the father wants once complications pop up. Even without complications 9 months of pregnancy is no small matter. It seems that what yous want to do is claim rights to the health, lifestyle, income potential, life of women simply because she is harboring a lifeform containing part of your DNA.
The simple fact is that you cannot physically force a women into an abortion clinic because that is what you want, and I just dont think you have the right to risk her life and well being to bring a child into the world. The women does not give up her rights to her own body simply because she is pregnant with your child. Accept that.
So, that leaves yous with this coercive tactic.. if I ain't the one with the final say, then I shouldn't have to be responsible for the kid...
Ummm...ya... it wasn't till less than the last century that men have had the final say in everything according to the laws and according to the main religions in this country. If they wanted another child,they had every right to rape their wife to try to have one.. or just rape her regardless.. and if he didnt, hey, there was places to take her to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy for a price.. women, for the most part had only what their husbands chose to give them...
If they decided they didnt want to play daddy anymore, they could just slip away, leaving the wife and children wards of the state. Heck, I was a parent myself before they started to seriously enforce child support laws...
And even then, most single moms didnt even get what would amount to half the expense of raising the kids. And, of course they weren't around much to help out with the care and nurturing end either.. 20, 30 years maybe of men actually having to be responsible for the kids they helped bring into the world and they are crying uncle, just abort the kid unless we decide we want that responsibility?
Women went centuries being forced into roles and responsibilities they may not have wanted!
I dont see society forcing women into getting abortions because you dont want to pay child support.. not when legislatures are working so hard to take that option away from young minor victims of incest.. sorry!
And, I dont see them opting relieve you of child support and leave the taxpayer stuck with the tab. If abortion shouldn't be used as a form of birth control, then I highly doubt if its gonna be considered an acceptable method of getting you out of child support.



new topics

top topics



 
63
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join