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.
Originally posted by JackofBlades
to deny someone the right to a child is as bad as denying someone the right to give up a child.
Originally posted by riley
How then do you FORCE a woman to continue a pregnancy without physically FORCING her to..? You are the one that proposed it.. either you believe they should be or believe they shouldn't.. but you might want to ask yourself how 'humane' you really are.. in essence you are suggesting slavery become revived.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You're proposing the law make abortion illegal so that she either is forced to go through with it or must pay afterward.
I just don't see how people can think that's fair... :shk:
Originally posted by drogo
Originally posted by riley
How then do you FORCE a woman to continue a pregnancy without physically FORCING her to..? You are the one that proposed it.. either you believe they should be or believe they shouldn't.. but you might want to ask yourself how 'humane' you really are.. in essence you are suggesting slavery become revived.
very easy you have a judge inform her that she will carry this child to term, if she somehow ends said pregnancy or purposly does things to harm the fetus than she will be faceing murder or other applical charges. is this slavery? not realy they can be considered entering into the chance that pregnancy will occure as a concequince of sex. so it can be considdered volinteered by haveing sex.
now someone mentioned about a motherly bond being formed at birth, that would make it cruel to seperate her from the child. well she was going to kill it so she should give up all rights with that. the possibility to grant her visitation could be looked at by the courts. mabe if she gets pregnant again she will remember that before considering abortion. at least she would know that the child she so selfishly wanted to kill was still alive.
now when men can carry the child to term then mabe this can be looked at again. and if the mother was to lazy to carry the child, instead of an abortion the guy could take over.
Originally posted by drogo
now when men can carry the child to term then mabe this can be looked at again.
Originally posted by nowthenlookhere
Personally I have no problem with a woman who chooses to give up her child not paying support to the man.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
l0rds0fcha0s - What are you proposing the 'say' consist of? Making a woman go through a 9 month pregnancy and childbirth then giving up the child? Do you realize what you're asking a woman to do?
What if she changes her mind once she sees the child? You guys have absolutely NO IDEA what it's like to hold a life within your body. You have no idea the bond that forms during that 9 months. Then you want to force her to bear the child and hand it over to you? How realistic is that?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's called sexism.
Ohh and the person who is making out that a woman who is pregnant that has no medical worries and has not been raped chooses to have an abortion but the father wishes to keep it and has subsequently turned that argument into a forced Slavery thing....erm, no.
Originally posted by JebusSaves
First of all, to the person that is constantly suggesting that when a man and women begin to have sex, he makes the decision to wear a condom or not that is his only decision as far as the whole pregnancy goes....what the 'chunk'?
BUT if she doesn't mind this, infact allows it and both parties have intercourse and the result is a pregnancy, then both are accountable for the action, so both should be involved in the childs upbringing, even if its only child support.
My issue is when the Father wishes to keep the child, and the mother aborts.
Isn't it a good thing that both parents would wish to be apart of the childs life.
No, its a mixed up world when someone is using a possible bond developing between a mother and child as a reason to justify abortion.
Life isn't a side effect of Sex, Life is the reason for it.
So is the fact that a man has no say in this matter....hasn't stopped the women here enforcing their belief he has no choice.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You have totally misunderstood my point. What I'm saying is that as regards being pregnant, carrying a child and giving birth, a man biologically simply doesn't have that choice. That's the way it is.
So, for him to avoid getting into a situation that he has no control over, he needs to make sure not to get a woman pregnant.
I'm not addressing the woman's responsibility here, just the man's. Of course the woman has responsibilities, and if I were taking to a group of women, I would go into those. But since this thread is about MEN and abortion, I was addressing the men. To assume that I'm saying the woman has no responsibility as regards birth control is just incorrect. She is even more responsible because it will be her body (at the very least) that is affected.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's assuming a child results from the pregnancy.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Ideally, yes. If there is a child.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's not at all what I said. I was asking would you force a woman to carry and bear, then give up a child?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So... people who aren't breeding shouldn't have sex?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
There are so many 'shoulds' in your post, I lost count. I'm just glad you're not in a position of power to control women and their reproductive organs.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Talk to the creator if you believe in such a thing. Biologically, men can't carry and bear children. It's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of biology. He made his choice when he let his sperm go inside her. After that, it's her choice. That's just the way it is, regardless how you think it 'should' be.
Originally posted by dawnstarwhat's the matter, you learning just how dependant you are of her now?
Originally posted by JebusSaves
Not at all misunderstanding your point. You claim that any rights regarding the foetus are lost the moment he ejaculates inside her to the moment of a child birth(if the outcme of the ejactulation results in pregnancy). If the man has no choice then, he should not be forced into a situation later.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's assuming a child results from the pregnancy.
Hence why i actually put the words 'result in a pregnancy' in that comment.
There is NO point in discussing Men and Abortion IF we aren't talking about the sexact resulting in pregnancy
I do happen to believe in a 'Creator', or God as i prefer, and i'm confidently sure when he created life and made it so that both sexes had to be together to create life he didn't mean for one to have all the rights and one to have none, especially when it comes to terminating a new life created by them both
Originally posted by dawnstar
and if a company needs a living, breathing human being to do a job, they should be obligated to pay a wage that will keep that human living and breething, if they expect a future generation to pick up the workload after this generation retires, they should be accomodating to the idea of having to support the children a little. they shouldn't be expecting their employees to go elsewhere and find someone else to depend on for what is lacking out of their paycheck!!!
Originally posted by dawnstar
because I am reading it like this......
Originally posted by dawnstar
the doctor decides her job is endangering the child, so the father can make her quite her job, he'll look after her needs. of course, he can't afford her apartment and his, so well, I guess she can give up her apartment and live in his. she can also disregard whatever it is she feels that she needs and accept his assessment of her needs.....
she can become dependant on him.....hopefully by the time the child is born, she will become attached to it, but in this dependant state, she will not be able to break free from him and regain her apartment back...she will be forever his, or at least his until the child is old enough that she can hold a job, of course by the time this happens, she will be pregnant again!!!
Originally posted by dawnstar
I'm also getting the impression that well, most of the relationships we are talking about are not married couples. why in God's name are so many of yous having sex without first making this commitment to each other to begin with??? you're opening yourselves up for these kinds of problems!
Originally posted by dawnstar
"obey your husband in all things"-- Biblical version
"because you are dependant on him, obey him"-- Islamic version....
I think way too many men want to believe that God wishes the man to hold all the cards.....l