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.

 

Do poor women have a right to have children

page: 13
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Yes, women have the right to have children. The problem is we left the “game” so to speak and in this society all males and females believe they have the right to have children.

Dial it back to hunter gatherer times which is a majority of modern humanities existence only 1 in 20 men reproduced.

All viable women reproduced and with infant mortality rates over 50 percent and mortality itself in the 30’s you can begin to get a picture as to why only 1 man of 20 passed his genes on

Weak men have made constructs such as religion and money in order to trap women and force them to be with them so they can procreate thus not improving the gene pool with the best (chosen by the women)

So it’s not poor women who shouldn’t have kids, it’s weak men who have been able to pass on there # genetics because society has gotten easy

So any man with Any type of genetic mutation like colon cancer, Chrons, type 2 diabetes, millions of genetic defects, under 6 foot, under 180 lbs...should never be allowed to reproduce EVER, wayyy before anyone made a decision that a “poor” women isn’t allowed




posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77




So it’s not poor women who shouldn’t have kids, it’s weak men who have been able to pass on there # genetics because society has gotten easy


Good observation and probably a lot of truth to it.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: ADUB77




So it’s not poor women who shouldn’t have kids, it’s weak men who have been able to pass on there # genetics because society has gotten easy


Good observation and probably a lot of truth to it.




Its only a half truth, women also pass on their genetics.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: ADUB77




So it’s not poor women who shouldn’t have kids, it’s weak men who have been able to pass on there # genetics because society has gotten easy


Good observation and probably a lot of truth to it.


I have read what you have been saying and agree that people take pride in getting things for free from the government, I don’t know when this exactly happened but most likely it shows that people feel like the government doesn’t serve their best interest so try to take as much as they can

I think if we are to have any social programs at all, the very first one who be supporting women with childbirth through to childcare, so this question is an easy answer.

You want to save money, start with turning prisoners into workers in mines and farms...all proceeds going to the good citizens



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: ADUB77




So it’s not poor women who shouldn’t have kids, it’s weak men who have been able to pass on there # genetics because society has gotten easy


Good observation and probably a lot of truth to it.




Its only a half truth, women also pass on their genetics.


Study genetics more, humans both have x, only men have y. XX XY

Genetic deterioration of the Y chromosome has occurred because unlike with the two X chromosomes in women, there is very little swapping of genetic material between the Y and X chromosome during reproduction. This means mutations and deletions in the Y chromosome are preserved between (male) generations
edit on 8-9-2019 by ADUB77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: Zanti Misfit





to Deny or Prevent Another Human Being from the Basic Biological Function of Procreation

I assume you would not deny them abortion then.








Genocide

So now not giving birth means wiping out a People?

"the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation"



Yes , I Would . Abortion is the Murder of Ones OWN Unborn Prodigy for Obvious Selfish Reasons . Care to Continue a Debate on that Forthright Proclamation here " Sea Worthy " Concerning the Moral Repercussions of that Self Evident Belief > ? I am All " Viewing Monitor " With Baited Breath Sir/Madam/Whatever ..........




By the Way , I'm a Man , and I can't Help but Love you So in a " Christian " Sense that is ............


Thank you I love you as a Christian also.

Having lived a long long time, I have seen to many people I know commit suicide, from Families on welfare, with the feeling of not being loved, with hopelessness with parents who gave them drugs to "help them sleep" so they would shut up since babyhood..
I know all to well the suffering of the unwanted who came because someone wanted the check, didn't care enough not to get pregnant or need a useful creature for other reasons.




God Bless You for that Revelation ...........)



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

Are you saying women do not pass on their genes ?



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

Seems to me that women have had a long struggle just to escape those man made constructs you are speaking of though.
Kind of seems we are still struggling, not for the right to have babies we want, but rather the right to refuse motherhood if we choose.

Another thing I have hinted at...
One poster mentioned being on the free and reduced school lunch program as meaning you shouldn't have any more kids.. somewhere around 70-80 % of the school kids are on this program...
To restrict parenthood to that big of a portion of the population would not be good for the country. So, I imagine the burden of having the kids would have to be laid on the shoulders of those who can afford it, weather they want it or not.
Once you open the door for the one, it becomes a two way pathway. A persons right to have kids is directly linked to a person's right to not have kids.
edit on 8-9-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm


You must not be very old.


Irrelevant. Appealing to age or tradition is lazy.


Time has indeed changed.


Time does that.


There was a time when there was shame. You actually felt bad if you couldn't provide, you felt lower than a worm if you couldn't feed your kids. Now people are almost proud of it.


There have always been welfare queens. Whether they sold their children as slaves or whores, or married widowers with money, welfare queens have always been around and they’ve always been as shameless as welfare queens are today.


You know the solution as well as I, stop taking from those that work to give to those that don't. Stop punishing the responsible with the burden of the irresponsible.


So no social programs at all? Or just not for the people you disapprove of? Don’t equivocate.


My other guess is those inflamed, angered and don't even want to talk about this topic are those said people enjoying the fruits other peoples labor.


Maybe some of us just don’t think letting people starve in the streets is a solution.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: SeaWorthy


Why can't you think about what is best for the kids and not what People want?


Not starving is probably best for the kids.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: ADUB77

Are you saying women do not pass on their genes ?


No, I’m saying that the Y chromosome is passed through the male and the Y chromosome decides the sex of the child

Also if you read above, if a male passes on an X to a women and they have a baby girl with genetic recombination whereas if the male passes the Y to the women and they have a boy there is much less genetic recombination as the y and x don’t mix and you would see the father’s genetics in the son more


so Yes women provide half genetics for the birth of a women and about 25 percent for the birth of a male so all in all about 38 percent and not half like you said



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: ADUB77

Seems to me that women have had a long struggle just to escape those man made constructs you are speaking of though.
Kind of seems we are still struggling, not for the right to have babies we want, but rather the right to refuse motherhood if we choose.


That’s a whole other topic and an interesting one I would say. Based on science, we split into two species 170 million years ago and “apparently” will recombine in the future

But as it stands, we split into 2 and both have requirements for reproduction...I think you are referring more to what is expected of motherhood and the sociological issues involved and not so much the act.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

" Seems to me that women have had a long struggle just to escape those man made constructs you are speaking of though. "


Seems to Me that Only a " Real Woman " could Answer that Question . Ma'am ?



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

Ok thanks for explaining that, would you agree that women can also pass on their #ty genes ?

I think argueing percentages is really just argueing semantics.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

No, I am talking about practically selling the little girls off at very young ages to men for wives, telling them to be obedient little servants and have lots of children..
Which was the norm in most of the judeo-christian world through most of history.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: ADUB77

Ok thanks for explaining that, would you agree that women can also pass on their #ty genes ?

I think argueing percentages is really just argueing semantics.


Yes I agree women and men can both pass on the X gene and that both can equally be corrupt

But My main contention is that Y gene can’t mix with the X so it doesn’t have a chance to “refresh” like when two X genes meet to make a girl.

When a man has a son, if that man is defective the son will be too because he would only be a “son” by getting that Y gene



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: ADUB77

No, I am talking about practically selling the little girls off at very young ages to men for wives, telling them to be obedient little servants and have lots of children..
Which was the norm in most of the judeo-christian world through most of history.


Yah definitely and exactly what I was referring to in the man made constructs, forcing women’s choices or removing options to force a choice

There is a reason women are attracted to 2/10 men



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I'm not even gonna even bother answering this post since I have no idea what you are trying to say...



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

Sure, that makes sense, obviously I have a simple understanding of genetics.



posted on Sep, 8 2019 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ADUB77

But the mitochondrial DNA comes only from the mother and a defect in that can cause a whole mess of problems also..



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join