Men's-rights activists seek right to decline fatherhood in event of unplanned pregnancy

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by kokoro

 

How is it not practical to practice responsible sexual habits? In today's society we have std's that can kill us. The same act that produces a child can produce a deadly disease. it is now more than ever the time to be practical in our sexual practices.

I do not recall anyone saying differently, but if we are debating you are trying to take us on a tangent, stds have no real bearing on abortion.

reply to post by nagabonar


Which Islamic nation are you from? Although the laws may vary alittle from country to country in Islam, the basics are the same.

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

HunkaHunka...

sex is for babies. It has the wonderful side effect of feeling good.

But I doubt that nature is spreading its seed everywhere for the purpose of just feeling good.

If all life on this planet worried about whether something felt good all the time, hardly any work would get done.

Yes, there is a greater purpose than to "get off" in this life.

Sex often results in babies.... but it is not "FOR" anything unless you believe in some sort of fairy tale like religion.

And no.. there is no greater purpose than experience in this life... anything else is subjective inference you have projected upon it.

We are beasts... nothing more.

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

Well then the women can get an abortion if the man also chooses not to have a child. Why should the woman get the choice if she isn't ready to have a child but the man doesn't? After all, they both choose to have sex. when a woman gets an abortion, she is a deatbeat just the same as if a man also chooses he is not ready. She can get an abortion if he also chooses he isn't ready. It shouldn't be her choice only and that notion is completely sexist and ignorant.

--airspoon

It is her choice only because it her body only. Abortion is legal as of the date of this debate, thus it remains a valid choice. The notion is not sexist and ignorant it is logical and biological.

Yes it is. You have a narrow mind indeed.

Yes it is in her body but the baby is, in its own right, its own person. Plus the baby is also part of the man so he equally has say so over that baby, as it is partly his, as it is part of HIS body.

ie If I loan you a tool to create something, doesnt mean the tool is yours to keep because its now in your possession.

edit on 17-9-2010 by AzoriaCorp because: add

A baby is its own legal entity upon birth. Until then it is a parasite upon it's host's body, and is also not afforded legal rights. Why would it be anyone else's choice what she does with her body and the parasites it contains with in itself?

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

If no one wants the child... well then I guess natural selection occurs.

The reaganomics of sex everyone!

You heard it here first!

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by mayertuck

 

Mayer: you are talking about pregnancy control... which is not BIRTH control... BIRTH happens after or during a pregnancy... you can CONTROL BIRTH even after conception.

From dictionary.com

–noun
regulation of the number of children born through the deliberate control or prevention of conception. Compare family planning ( def. 1 ) .

meriam-webster:
Definition of BIRTH CONTROL
1
: control of the number of children born especially by preventing or lessening the frequency of conception : contraception
2
: contraceptive devices or preparations

so even though it is called birth control, how is it anything other than preventing conception or pregnancy?

Originally posted by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

If no one wants the child... well then I guess natural selection occurs.

The reaganomics of sex everyone!

You heard it here first!

That's how it happens without any government... seems to work for tribes etc...

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


A man does have access to 100 percent effective contraception.

Seems easier to me to use that method (abstinence) then to let the world know they are a dead beat by trying to "decline fatherhood".

The time to decline fatherhood is before it happens.

Now that would be ideal wouldn’t it? But the reality is that both genders love to have sex and sometimes, that results in unplanned pregnancy. I believe the 8 page discussion is about the rights of the father and not a guide of how to not get knocked up.

Maybe it is about not getting knocked up because that is the only way a man can shirk his duty to fatherhood...by not becoming a father and by not engaging ina ctivity that produces children.

I assumed a biology lesson were needed, especially for those backing such reprehensible nonsense as the OP puts forth.

This is about two things, money and being ble to have sex at will with anyone and walk away if the end result is a baby.

Two things it seems overwhelmingly apparent men place great value upon, if this thread and the OP is any gage of manhood.

wow you hit the nail on the head, and for females they are able to choose to (abortion is having sex with anyone and walking away if pregnancy occurs) have those to things. Equality again men should have the same options.

Abortion is taking responsibility, it is no such thing as walking away. When men have the same body parts by all means have the smae choices. These fall under the legal umbrella of reproductive rights. Men and women have different reproductive because they have different reproductive organs that do 100 percent different things.

It is very sad that we have to have biology class 101 in this thread, I was under the assumption we all knew these facts to start with.

Ok then why if a man is under a certain age, or married he has to have his wive's consent for a vasectomy? You are trying to deflect the argument, but to play your game choosing to not be a part of the childs life or paying child support is a differnt choice is it not?

Because our laws are archaic, and it must not bother men too much or the law would be repealed.

What argument am I deflecting? I thought I was doing a damn good job rebutting the arguments with my points.

I do not understand what you mean by choosing to not be in the kids life or pay child support is a different choice.

reply to post by nagabonar


I know more of what goes on the Middle East than Indonesia. The two people are vastly different so is their culture and their views on Islam.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

This is about legal rights. Not moral opinions. Abortion is legal. Any opinions about abortion are not relevant to this discussion, IMO.

It may be read as a bit emotional or moral opinion however I feel murdering innocent children quite an emotional and moral issue.

Abortion is NOT legal everywhere. So dont be so naive. A judge's opinion or a court's legal position does not mean that is the will of the people or make it right. This site has TONS of topics to prove that.

However my statements are relevant as they are specifying the child or unborn baby has rights just as much as anyone else. So my statements ARE relevant since this topic seems to be more about equal rights, is it not?

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by mayertuck

 

Another misrepresentation. I don't do personal attacks of other members. What I am engaging in called debate. I am presenting my case, and responding to opposing points.

if you are practicing debate, then why all the fallacies? To debate you argue the points and nothing else. Feelings and emotions should not be part of the equation.

Then I have a fallacy, I am only human. I have feelings, especially on this topic. Does it negate my points because I am passionate about the subject?

Last time I looked this is not a formal judged debate.

And you know its perfectly ok to have feelings on a subject, what you gotta do is be able to put those feelings aside and see all points of an argument. That is the only way to solve anything. Have you read my first post and saw how I came to my conclusions? If not please go read it. I too have strong feelings on it, but I do not let those feelings interfere with the facts of the matter at hand.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Holy crap is it that hard to use the REPLY TO button. Sheesh...

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
Would you rather the father stay around, resent the child and remind the child about that every moment like my own father?

If they do not want to responsibility of actually raising a child, of being in a child's life, they do not have to be. They're responsibility begins and ends at their pocketbook, simple as that.

I am sorry your father was either too cowardly or too stupid to realize that was within his power.

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by mayertuck

 

Mayer: you are talking about pregnancy control... which is not BIRTH control... BIRTH happens after or during a pregnancy... you can CONTROL BIRTH even after conception.

From dictionary.com

–noun
regulation of the number of children born through the deliberate control or prevention of conception. Compare family planning ( def. 1 ) .

meriam-webster:
Definition of BIRTH CONTROL
1
: control of the number of children born especially by preventing or lessening the frequency of conception : contraception
2
: contraceptive devices or preparations

so even though it is called birth control, how is it anything other than preventing conception or pregnancy?

Sounds like some idiot used the wrong phrase... should have said "Conception control" For example contraceptive is proper. Birth Control... well abortion falls into that easily

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Abortion is taking responsibility, it is no such thing as walking away.

I don't understand this position. A woman has an abortion so she won't have a baby and have to deal with the responsibilities that entails: financial, emotional, physical, etc - A child is a HUGE responsibility. While having an abortion may be the responsible thing to do it's only because she doesn't want the responsibility of having a child at that time.

When men have the same body parts by all means have the smae choices. These fall under the legal umbrella of reproductive rights. Men and women have different reproductive because they have different reproductive organs that do 100 percent different things.

I agree, but I think we should make it as equal as possible under the circumstances.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
By engaging in sexual intercourse both male and female are agreeing to accept the outcome of that union. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

And a woman has the power and choice to absolve herself of that outcome. Saying that an abortion is being "responsible" does not change that fact. She has an out AFTER pregnancy. He does not. He should. That's my position. She can still choose whether or not to bear a child.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
If he didn't want it why was he having sex in the first place?

Do ALL people - women, too - who have sex want a baby? No. Humans have sex for recreation all the time, never intending to have a child.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

edit on 17-9-2010 by AzoriaCorp because: add

A baby is its own legal entity upon birth. Until then it is a parasite upon it's host's body, and is also not afforded legal rights. Why would it be anyone else's choice what she does with her body and the parasites it contains with in itself?

Just cause the law says that, don't make it true.

The law says that for the purposes of its argument. But the reality is that the law is supposed to protect people, not call them parasites and destroy them.

But of course, in our not-so-perfect society, because the law does judge in favor of this particularly rotten idea about an innocent-child (who just happens to be inside your womb instead of out of it yet - as if the act of passing through a womb gives something life when its heart was already beating 20 days in....), then we must also assume that the father doesn't yet have a child and is a consenting party, along with the host of the parasite, as to the existence and placement of said parasite. Therefore, if the host has the choice to claim that the parasite is not her property, then HOW MUCH MORE-SO is the man also not responsible for claiming the parasite - considering he is not even the HOST?

Hmmm...

At the end of the day... if you feel like forcing anyone to take responsibility is a good idea this means you have deeper issues.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I believe abortion IS taking responsibility and it is certainly no secret to men that it is a likely outcome of a sexual union.

So because men are biologically different reproductively and are mad because they want an abortion too, you advocate trampling female reproductive rights so a man can walk away from what he created?

This is not a male abortion this is nothing more than a great deal for man whores.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

A baby is its own legal entity upon birth. Until then it is a parasite upon it's host's body, and is also not afforded legal rights. Why would it be anyone else's choice what she does with her body and the parasites it contains with in itself?

A PARASITE??? Wow, I now realize debate is an utter waste of time with you. I.G.N.O.R.E

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by AzoriaCorp

 

Since when is exercising the choice to abort not taking responsibility?

It is part of a females valid legal and responsible birth control choices.

I am sorry you feel the need to degrade the woman by acting like abortion is not a valid legal responsible choice, and even comparing it to not paying child support or shirking parental duties as a father is disgusting reprehensive and very telling.

Please show me where it says that abortion is birth control? It is not birth control, it does not prevent a pregnancy. No matter how you cut it is taking action after the fact.

edit on 17-9-2010 by mayertuck because: (no reason given)

If scooping my uterus of it's contents is not preventing pregnancy what is?

Are you serious? You want to say people need biology 101 and you seriously say that scooping out your uterus is preventing pregnancy? How are you preventing something that has already happened? Once you have the need to scoop something out guess what you are PREGNANT.

Of course, and the abortion prevents the pregnancy. What are you missing here?