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.

 

Men's reproductive rights

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
"I look forward to seeing someone figure out how to grow a fetus from sperm cell"

Learn some science, we can grow a fetus using DNA and cloning. And, males carry both an X and Y chromosones, negating the need for females in scientific, not biological reproduction of the species. A male can, through science and genetic enginering, mix his female chromosones with another males female chomosones to produce a female. Women cannot do this, they have no male chomosone.

I think it's kind of nice that you support gay reproduction.
If a fetus rejects testosterone.. they turn female [though barren]. Are you saying that Jamie Lee Curtis looks like a dude? She is male genetically. All that aside.. a male human species is to not going to happen no matter what the sci-fis tell you.. doing away with the female gender would serve no scientific purpose and would be bad for genetic diversity.
Hey I know! Scientists could add abit of roo genetics and give men and women pouches so that the fetus can hop out when she's fixing the car! Or maybe.. emu genetics so that guys can actually hatch their own babies instead of waiting for the women to give birth!
Please use arguments based on reality. :shk:

When I mention "sex dolls" they could really be made any number of ways. A good AI in a semi biomechanical host could suffice, or women cold be geneticly grown so they can't reproduce. The latter is far more probable( within the next 5-10 years, not in the USA of course).

So you want women grown to be infertile sex slaves yet you expect us to believe you respect women??

I am not condoning rape, I am highly against it.

Really? You're all for farming women for sex.

What I am getting at, is that at some point in the near future, if men are pushed far enough into thinking that they have no say in the childs first 9 months of gestation, they can and will negate the need for you and females as a whole for procreation.

Pushed far enough? Is that some kind of threat on behalf of your gender?
What about the thousands of years of abuse women have endured?
Most men are grown up enough to realise the responsibilty that comes with sex.. if they aren't.. they soon learn that lesson. The majority are not under the impression that women are oppressing them.. nor are they under a delusion that there is going to be some sort of male master race. Thats just juvinile. Women aren't taking ANY rights away from men by wanting to keep their own. As for getting rid of women.. not all women believe in abortions so I fail to see the point in getting rid of them for that reason.
Unless it's just a case of womb envy maybe? How about you just chop it off? Then they'll have none of this evil advantage over you.


You as a person should not define yourself by what reproductive organs you are born/blessed with, its highly animalistic and unlogical. Gender is a road block for the evolution of humans as a whole. Science will negate that need.

Gender was actually an evolutionary advancement.

And no, I do not belive that if a female has 50% of MY genetic material growing in her that its soley hers until it comes out during birth. That is repression.

How is it repression? If he tells her to abort it and she says no? What happens then?

If I carried a child, the female has 50% say it what happens, I would accept this before procreation.

You are male so would have NO idea what you would do.

Now try telling us you know what morning sickness is like, that childbirth would be a breeze and that you wouldn't mind bleeding once a month and that you know exactly what PMS feels like. Just to make it fair.. I think you should get a pap smear to prove how much you empathise with us.


If they wanted to keep or terminate it, they have 50% say in the matter.

Would they have final say then? Or would you? Can't really be a 50/50 decision if they both disagree.

You might want to find out who you are arguing with first, I am celibate and do not masterbate, I see that as what monkeys and other animals partake in.

We share similar genatics to monkeys.. and we ARE animals.

Though I don't see them planning to clone their own species to use as sex toys.. not exactly civilised.

And no women are not designed for rape, they are designed to birth children if that is what is desired as a species. Reproduction can and should be through agreement only if it involes two people. My logic is that being male or female does not allow one to have a trump card over the other. And pretty soon science will get rid of the females trump card over men, concerning reproduction that is.

Yet women can get pregnant through rape.. do you think the rapist should have equal say?
It's still 50% his genetics.. seems you think women should be forced to have abortions on his say so.. thats a form of rape.

Medicly and scientificly that new zygote/embryo in you, is not part of you. It is seperate, its DNA is not yours, it is a mixture. Making it seperate from you.

Well then aborting a pregnancy shouldn't harm it then should it?
Look up the word 'umbilical cord' and tell me how they are 'seperate'.

To be honest, I do not belive that the female or male have a right to destroy a growing life form until it has means to actually protect itself from such ingnorant actions on the part of its parents. Who gave YOU the right to decide?

I give myself the right to decide what happens to MY own body because it is MY body. It's not a hard concept to grasp.
What would give you the right to decide? Sorry.. but judging by your opinions on the lives of women [you want science to exterminate us] I think it's kind of ludicrous that you think you've got the moral high ground.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by riley]




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I don't belive ANYONE has the right to terminate the life after the egg becomes fertilized, re-read what I said. And I suggest learning a bit on cloning and gene splicing, it is not sci-fi it is reality. Gender becomes uneeded if we can reproduce through other means. Humans can evolve through science and technology, gender can be considered a weakness and therefore lead to explotation and or slavery. What I am saying is you have no more rights than the male. No party has the right to abort, therefore if you get impregnated YOU BOTH have to deal with it. A new life always has more potential than a life that is half over.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   


All Rise for the honorable and slightly psychotic Judge WolfofWar.

Okay, heres how we are going to dealwith this problem, a solution for everyone.

Men have a say in reproductive process, and the childs birth. But they also are forced to pay for an unwanted child is the female cohort in crime does not want to have an abortion.

We sit them both down in Fetal court, have the sides talk about it, and the Judge decides whether the male's need to pay for child support. This decisionwill hang on the circustance, the fact that he is opposed to the pregnancy and she isnt, and ofcourse, this:

The Sexual Obligation Waiver Contract
I ___________ sign as an agreement with the other signee that this sexual encounter is wanted, welcomed, and concensual. I agree to waive all charges upon the male signee in case of childbirth due to: Accidental mishap, Fradualent Negotations ("Yeah hunny, I'm on the pill") or other unforseen actions which would result on not procuring the proper birth control before and after this signed sexual encounter. If I become pregnant I understand that this waiver hereby forfeits my rights to procure childsupport money from the other signee.

X_____________ Date: ___/____/____


I think that fixes it. Go ahead and print that out gentlemen.

[edit on 9-7-2006 by WolfofWar]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   
The Sexual Obligation Waiver Contract
I ___________ sign as an agreement with the other signee that this sexual encounter is wanted, welcomed, and concensual. I agree to waive all charges upon the male signee in case of childbirth due to: Accidental mishap, Fradualent Negotations ("Yeah hunny, I'm on the pill") or other unforseen actions which would result on not procuring the proper birth control before and after this signed sexual encounter. If I become pregnant I understand that this waiver hereby forfeits my rights to procure childsupport money from the other signee.

X_____________ Date: ___/____/____



That should be law.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
I don't belive ANYONE has the right to terminate the life after the egg becomes fertilized, re-read what I said.

You said the 'other' should have 50% say in regards to termination.

And I suggest learning a bit on cloning and gene splicing, it is not sci-fi it is reality.

With cloning they use an empty egg cell. You cannot splice sperm.. but if you could.. are you fine with male + male conception? Should they be married? What do you suggest they are grown in? These magical incubators will probably exist in a few hundred years for medical reasons.. but not to give life to your 'no women alloud except for sex slaves' fantasy world.
I'd call it a misoginsist paradise but it wouldn't be without any women to degrade.. but hang on! Thats what the sex slaves are for!


Gender becomes uneeded if we can reproduce through other means. Humans can evolve through science and technology, gender can be considered a weakness and therefore lead to explotation and or slavery.

Yet you've been promoting this idea of cloned sex slaves..?

What I am saying is you have no more rights than the male.

Men have the right to not impregenate women in the first place.

No party has the right to abort, therefore if you get impregnated YOU BOTH have to deal with it.

No.. the woman has to deal with it and the man can walk away as he does not have it inside his body. If men get legal say in pregnancy.. then they can legally demand women abort against their will. Never going to happen unless slavery become legal again.

A new life always has more potential than a life that is half over.

I'll be sure to tell that to the next pregnant 15 yo girl I meet that her life has less potential than an unintended pregnancy. :shk:

Right after I tell her that her grandchildren are destined to be cloned, sterilised and sent to work in brothels. Apparently the third Reich attempted similar experiments and sterilised many young girls. Aren't you even going to TRY and defend what you said or are you just going to keep avoiding the issue? You're so pro-life yet think cloning women into slavery and having them 'fixed' is fine?! They used to breed people into slavery as well. No difference. Do not try and say you are a moral protector of life when you have ALREADY expressed contempt for it.

[edit on 7-9-2006 by riley]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
The Sexual Obligation Waiver Contract
I ___________ sign as an agreement with the other signee that this sexual encounter is wanted, welcomed, and concensual. I agree to waive all charges upon the male signee in case of childbirth due to: Accidental mishap, Fradualent Negotations ("Yeah hunny, I'm on the pill") or other unforseen actions which would result on not procuring the proper birth control before and after this signed sexual encounter. If I become pregnant I understand that this waiver hereby forfeits my rights to procure childsupport money from the other signee.

X_____________ Date: ___/____/____



That should be law.


ya....and more men should be celibate...
ain't no women in her right mind gonna sign such an agreement!! and where's it's counterpart, the one for the men, who attests that he too is using birth control and agrees that in the event that that birth control method fails, he will accept the baby, bring it into the world, nuture it, care for it, teach it, and support it??
okay, let's take out the part about bringing into the world....and just have the nuturing, supporting and caring for the baby....how many are willing to sign it? what if both sign statements agreeing to this, and still end up with a baby...what happens then? should one trump the other, should they both be able to walk away scott free, just what?

there is no birth control method that comes with a guarentee!! so, how do you prove that someone was neglectful in the method they were using, or it was just the unlucky recipient of the one in a thousand lottery?

like I said before, women through the ages had to put up with alot of crap "for the sake of society". what, the men wanted everything their way so badly that they had to have God command women to obey their every desire? give their daughters away in marriage before she even had a clue as to what life was about? stoned for getting pregnant after a rape. can't divorce the guy, but he can easily walk away from you. can divorce the guy, but hey, the kids are his. have the clergy tell you your the daughter of satan so quite complaining.
hey, suck it up guys!! FOR THE SAKE OF SOCIETY!!!



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar


ya....and more men should be celibate...
ain't no women in her right mind gonna sign such an agreement!!


Then she wont have sex. Takes two to tango, if she doesnt like the heat, dont go into the kitchen, right? after all, thats what women say to men the entire thread. "Its not fair" "well you shouldnt have had sex." Heres a contractual agreement. Theyre agreeing that theyre using birth control, and are taking protection, and/or she is claiming she is on the pill. If an accident happens, she lied about the pill, and she doesnt take proper day after birth control methods, she voided her contract as it was not in the agreement.


and where's it's counterpart, the one for the men, who attests that he too is using birth control and agrees that in the event that that birth control method fails, he will accept the baby, bring it into the world, nuture it, care for it, teach it, and support it??


Thats the status quo though, this is a supplement for men who feel they need extra protection. Since no matter what, even with birth control, the male gets stiffed with the bill, figuratively speaking. Therefore the female doesnt need her own contract, the males contract is a waiver to this status quo.


there is no birth control method that comes with a guarentee!! so, how do you prove that someone was neglectful in the method they were using, or it was just the unlucky recipient of the one in a thousand lottery?


Neglicting proper birth control methods is either lieing about being on the pill, or not using the proper morning after pills to prevent possible pregnancy. In not doing so shows ill-regard for the male in the contractual agreement and therefore voids his necessity to pay for a child, since its against the contract.

Its really simple, and foolproof, and contractually fair. If she doesnt like the agreement, she doesnt have to sign, and they don't have to have sex.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I said I wouldn't return, but WolfofWars' contract has inspired me to draft my own example.


While with child I, ___________ , hereby agree to be subjected to routine tests and dispositions to assure the present and future health of mine and my partners child.
These tests shall include but not be limited too, blood, urine, and hair analysis for the presence of toxins, drugs — legal, and non-legal, acceptable levels of vitamins, minerals, proteins and acids.

I agree to never smoke, be within breathing range of smokers, or otherwise allow any toxic substance to enter mine and my childs body.

I agree to eat a meal plan provided to me by a nutritionist that me and my partner have jointly agreed upon.

I agree to keep my weight in a healthy range. The range of which to be determined by a general practioner jointly agreed upon by me and my partner.

I agree that I will stick to an exercise regiment that promotes good health, provided by a fitness trainer that is agreed upon jointly by me and my partner.

I agree to maintain insurance and follow impecably the guidelines of the state of which I am to carry this child.

I agree that at any time, I fail any of the clauses in this contract, my partner shall be waived from any and all responsibilities afforded him through conception.


___________________



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar




The Sexual Obligation Waiver Contract
I ___________ sign as an agreement with the other signee that this sexual encounter is wanted, welcomed, and concensual. I agree to waive all charges upon the male signee in case of childbirth due to: Accidental mishap, Fradualent Negotations ("Yeah hunny, I'm on the pill") or other unforseen actions which would result on not procuring the proper birth control before and after this signed sexual encounter. If I become pregnant I understand that this waiver hereby forfeits my rights to procure childsupport money from the other signee.

X_____________ Date: ___/____/____




[edit on 9-7-2006 by WolfofWar]


Do you date women who would be stupid enough to sign this?
You may want to step it up a notch and start squiring a blow up doll! Accidental pregnancies happen, crappy women lie about being on the pill, and crappy men say things like, "I can't feel anything when I wear a condom, I'll pull out, I promise!" Come on. If you are old enough to be sticking your willy into some chick's nether regions then you are old enough to consider the possibilities, including pregnancy, STDs and the occasional stalker. Grow up already! In every way sex is a roll of the dice.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
I
I agree to eat a meal plan provided to me by a nutritionist that me and my partner have jointly agreed upon.

I agree to keep my weight in a healthy range. The range of which to be determined by a general practioner jointly agreed upon by me and my partner.

I agree that I will stick to an exercise regiment that promotes good health, provided by a fitness trainer that is agreed upon jointly by me and my partner.

I agree to maintain insurance and follow impecably the guidelines of the state of which I am to carry this child.




[edit on 7-9-2006 by nextguyinline]


So I assume from reading this that you mainly have sex with fat, drug addicted, twinkie eating, couch potatoes? Who are you men dating? Because really, there's probably someone better out there. Hmmm may want to take off the beer goggles!


[edit on 7-9-2006 by stanstheman]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, but it made me laugh, and I feel better.

The contract was a good way for me to express my thoughts. I think a contract between lovers is silly. It was definately sour, and I'm sorry. This subject makes me sour.

Please carry on.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, but it made me laugh, and I feel better.

The contract was a good way for me to express my thoughts. I think a contract between lovers is silly. It was definately sour, and I'm sorry. This subject makes me sour.

Please carry on.


Well I'm glad you feel better.
I would like to think most men and women who are in each other's knickers have ironed most of this out prior to the knickers entering the picture! For those who are stupid and/or selfish enough to disregard taking precautions or discussing possiblities then I shudder for the future of that child, forget about who is paying for what.

I think we all know people who are that way, and also people who try to avoid pregnancy, talk about possiblities prior to sex and end up pregnant and at each other's throats anyway. There's nothing like a hormonal pregnant woman and a guy next in line to be called "Daddy" to get things heated, fast!

The real way to end this issue is to do the simple, obvious thing and consider the needs of this child first. As a parent I know where my priorities are and it's not always fun, cheap or easy to do the right thing, but if you do you may end up with a son or daughter who will be a happy healthy adult, your best friend, a comfort to you, and a great addition to society.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanstheman
Do you date women who would be stupid enough to sign this?

This contract would be there to protect men from not stupid women, but smart, and sneaky women. Like the ones that purposely try to takea used condom, inpregnant herself, and keep the baby just to get the child support cost.s


You may want to step it up a notch and start squiring a blow up doll!


I call my doll Loletta, and we're quite happy together, thank you very much.



Accidental pregnancies happen, crappy women lie about being on the pill, and crappy men say things like, "I can't feel anything when I wear a condom, I'll pull out, I promise!" Come on.


And the contracts not for the pull it out types. Its for those who either (a) CLAIM they are on the pill or (B) are using a condom. And if either A or B fails, she is taking a day after bill as emergancy contraception. Otherwise, she did not fulfill the contractual agreement and took the decision to nullify her birth control capabilities. She waived her contract. Its simple really.

If you are old enough to be sticking your willy into some chick's nether regions then you are old enough to consider the possibilities, including pregnancy, STDs and the occasional stalker. Grow up already! In every way sex is a roll of the dice.


Yeah, and now that roll of the dice could now finally be in the favor of a man. Since the construction and decision process is entirely out of his hands, this gives him the ability to lay the groundwork of theyre agreement right away. This entire thread we are talking about a taboo subject of the fact that men have no control over whether they have to pay child support, even if they did not want the child, and the woman refused to use emergancy birth control to stop the pregnancy.

Finally, a contractual agreement protects him from this. Its simple really.

Since obviously men have no say in the abortion process, and as many said, he contributes by giving his seed, this contract is essentially saying that he used a condom, or she used birth control, allegedly. That they dont want a child and if an accident happens shes taking a day after pill just to be sure.

Finally the male is protected.

You dont want protection for the male?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Originally posted by stanstheman
Do you date women who would be stupid enough to sign this?

This contract would be there to protect men from not stupid women, but smart, and sneaky women. Like the ones that purposely try to takea used condom, inpregnant herself, and keep the baby just to get the child support cost.s

In fact this has apparently happened to rich sportsmen.. [basketballers?] where women [fans] fish used condoms out of the rubbish. To me, this is a violation/rape though personally I think the hotel/turkey baster scenario is kind of gross anyway.

But since in these incidences the woman haven't had sex with a guy, a sex contract would be absolutely pointless.

And the contracts not for the pull it out types.

Shall we draw up a seperate contract for thse as well? :shk: How can us women spot these 'pull out types' so we can present them with a contract without too much embarassment?

Its for those who either (a) CLAIM they are on the pill

The pill can be rendered useless through things like anti-biotics etc. Even forgetting one day can prevent it from working. It also is NOT 100% effective. If she falls pregnant it does NOT immediately mean she was intending to. I know two women where this has happened.. your little contract would effect mostly innocent women and children.

or (B) are using a condom.

Condoms can break.

And if either A or B fails, she is taking a day after bill as emergancy contraception.

Which is not 100% effective either.
I think perhaps you should read the thread again as I've already said this.
Again: Birth control is not 100% effective.

Otherwise, she did not fulfill the contractual agreement and took the decision to nullify her birth control capabilities. She waived her contract. Its simple really.

You do realise that women can't tell there own eggs not to fertilise don't you?


Yeah, and now that roll of the dice could now finally be in the favor of a man.

Yeah.. I can see plenty of upsides to getting pregnant, having to put a career on hold, having to figure out how to pay for the rent and food etc. while waiting to go into labour, paying for hospital visits, going through childbirth, broken sleep, nursing, and working as well to support it. That sounds really easy!!

Since the construction and decision process is entirely out of his hands, this gives him the ability to lay the groundwork of theyre agreement right away.

He makes a decision to impregnate her in the first place. Being 'horny' doesn't prevent him from saying no.
Lets see:
Offensive legal contract thats designed to bully women into abortion lest she and the newborn be put into the poor house.

or

Cold shower.




This entire thread we are talking about a taboo subject of the fact that men have no control over whether they have to pay child support, even if they did not want the child, and the woman refused to use emergancy birth control to stop the pregnancy.

Both the women I mentioned earier who got pregnant because anti-biotics stuffed up the pill.. they didn't 'want' their children either but definently didn't want abortions. I see nothing manipulative about this at all.

Finally, a contractual agreement protects him from this. Its simple really.

So would zipping his fly.. but that would mean not having sex at all wouldn't it? Better get the contract out..

Hmm.. I wonder if prositutes would sign such contracts? Probably.. but then again they are providing goods and services for money. It's business.. if you want to treat a lover like a hoar.. rent one and you can.

Since obviously men have no say in the abortion process, and as many said, he contributes by giving his seed, this contract is essentially saying that he used a condom, or she used birth control, allegedly. That they dont want a child and if an accident happens shes taking a day after pill just to be sure.

Finally the male is protected.

You dont want protection for the male?

What about the female? Oh thats right.. you want to legally be alloud to have sex with a girl, get her pregnant and then walk away if she doesn't have an abortion on command.


To be honest my cousin had a gf say "don't worry I'm on the pill". Conception via 'stupidity' doesn't count. He is now considering the implant or vacectomy to protect himself. Why? Because, whether it be accidental or deliberate, he actually realises that sex can cause pregnancy and he doesn't want anymore children. He is already a fantastic father and is going for custody.. though he has NEVER tried to weasle out of his responsibilities with "but she trapped me'.

Edit. I'm wondering.. if a woman were to sign this.. she gets pregnant but she gives him AIDS.. does that mean she won't have to pay his medical bills?

[edit on 8-9-2006 by riley]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar

This contract would be there to protect men from not stupid women, but smart, and sneaky women. Like the ones that purposely try to takea used condom, inpregnant herself, and keep the baby just to get the child support costs.


Do you know how much work and other sacrifices go into having a baby? Why would a woman get pregnant and have a baby and go through all the loss of freedom and responsibility it takes to care for a baby just so she can con a guy for a few hundred dollars a month? That is not a smart woman to me, that's a stupid woman.

Also, is it really that common for women to run out and get the morning after pill every time she has sex?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 01:10 PM
link   
As a man if I were to get a woman pregnant, I would stand up and do whats right by taking care of my child. The thing that I would like men to have a choice in is that if the woman really wants an abortion, no matter what the man wants, she can still go and get it. I think if the man wants to have the child, the woman should be bound by law to have it. Just as if she wants it, a man is bound by law to pay for it. I think that would be completely fair.

Aaron



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aaron_Justin
As a man if I were to get a woman pregnant, I would stand up and do whats right by taking care of my child. The thing that I would like men to have a choice in is that if the woman really wants an abortion, no matter what the man wants, she can still go and get it. I think if the man wants to have the child, the woman should be bound by law to have it. Just as if she wants it, a man is bound by law to pay for it. I think that would be completely fair.

Aaron


Aaron,
I agree in theory. But I have to say if a woman were to engage in a sexual relationship with a man and got pregnant and he then told her he wanted to have the baby but not neccessarily a relationship with the mother, the mother would not be inclined to have that baby. For whatever reason, spite, anger, rejection - pick one. There's the problem. Furthermore the woman is protected by law but not the child because there is no concensus on the precise moment life is present.

Putting myself in that scenario, I'd be pretty darn upset if a guy I had sex with and gotten pregnant by said to me, "hey I'd like you to have that baby, I'll raise it and pay for everything but I am not interested in continuing our relationship." I am sorry to say that my reaction would not be favorable! As much as I know the risks of sex, I still think I'd be illprepared to go through a pregnancy and hand a baby over to man who didn't care about me. This feeling must be pervasive because if it weren't more woman would not opt to abort but have the baby and put it up for adoption. I am in no way saying this is right, but I do think it happens fairly often.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   
If a man & woman fool around and the woman gets pregnant and wants the baby, she should be ready and willing to care for that child herself. No man should be forced to pay or care for the child. She doesn't need to have the baby, and frankly she shouldn't if that child will not receive adequate care. The woman has a responsibility to make sure that child is brought up in a decent environment. The best way of course would be to have sex with a guy who actually wants a family and can support one. Women can go around having sex with whoever they please and are rewarded... not only with the grace of having a child, but with the guy's money to take care of it.

As for those women who are against abortions, well they shouldn't fool around if they're not willing to abort, or not willing to accept the consequences of raising a child.

Of course there's always adoption. I have 3 brothers, all adopted and they're just as much my brothers had they been of the same blood.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Has anyone come to the conclusion that those archaic, traditional social norms prohibiting premarital sex and encouraging marriage and family were meant to avoid these very issues?

A couple of posters have suggested signing a contract with every sex partner. Isn't that an awful lot like the marriage contract, except for the duration of the relationship and the number of partners.

Isn't the old way simpler and less costly from a social perspective, albeit, perhaps a little less exciting?

Isn't the old way the more responsible way?


[edit on 2006/9/8 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Has anyone come to the conclusion that those archaic, traditional social norms prohibiting premarital sex and encouraging marriage and family were meant to avoid these very issues?


Absolutely! Abstinence is the only 100% sure-fire way to prevent a pregnancy. The problem is that even in committed relationships, there will be instances were an unintended pregnancy occurs. Then what? We're back at square one.

As far as men's reproductive rights are concerned, I see the following concerns/arguments pop up again and again:

1) Financial obligation. Some men feel they should not be forced to support the children they sire. These reluctant fathers feel they are being forced into parenthood. If the woman will not succumb to an abortion, then she should face the road to parenthood alone. After all, it is her choice.

2) Lack of control. Some men feel threatened by the lack of control over a woman's right to autonomy. They feel they should be able to have the final say in whether or not a woman can or cannot have an abortion. They feel the need to be the sole decision maker. A woman should not be able to have an abortion without their permission.

3) All of the fun, none of the responsibility. Some men feel they should be free to embrace their sexual freedom with no strings attached. The woman assumes all the risk when engaging in sexual activity.

In each of these scenarios, it is the woman who gets the short end of the stick. As has been stated on this thread time and time again, abstinence is the only 100% effective form of birth control. If a couple chooses to engage in sex, they should both be willing to assume the risk and responsibility should an unexpected pregnancy occur.

[edit on 9/8/2006 by maria_stardust]



new topics




 
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join