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

page: 15
56
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


A woman is stepping up when she aborts. Reproductive rights are different than individual rights, as females and males have different reproductive rights and the same individual rights. Their reproductive rights will and should only be equal when their reproductive organs ar the same for both genders.




posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Exactly why abortion exists, it is a responsible choice and a valid one. If a man does not want a child he cn choose to only have sex with women he would have as mothers for his child or use what is in his arsenal of preventative measures. If a woman doesnt want a kid she has hte choice to abstain or use birth control, which for her arsenal includes abortion.

It is not a woman's way of eschewing responsibility because it is a valid legal reproductive choice she has available to her.



Whoa. Talk about a double-standard.

Women can have sex with whomever they please. IT's the man's responsibility to choose who will be his wife.

Women can be whores. Men shouldn't.

Wonderful. Just brilliant.

You are for equal rights..............right?

Oh wait. I just noticed that your avatar says, "femicentric". Never-mind. Enjoy your-self-.


edit on 9/17/2010 by TarzanBeta because: "femicentric"... really?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


hotbakedtater- - I know what you mean, but for the sake of semantics, I would change your post to say "preventing birth" and not "preventing pregnancy".
No thanks since I am correct, why would I want to change? I am pregnant, I abort, it prevented the pregnancy. See above post of mine too.


If you GOT PREGNANT, you didn't prevent it.

???

That's like saying that a bullet was dug out of a guy's head, so they prevented him from getting shot.
Prevent means stop. if I am no longer pregnant I stopped pregnancy/prevented pregnancy.

How did I get it wrong?

Abortion prevents pregnancy from continuing, abortion prevents pregnancy from resulting in live birth, abortion prvents pregnancy from obtaining its natural outcome, abortion prevents pregnancy. In each manner contraceptives when properly working do the same.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by mayertuck

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.
What facts would those be? My feelings do not interfere with the facts at hand.


You yourself have said that our laws are archaic correct? Then let me ask you this besides not having sex how would you remedy men's lack of reproductive rights? If you are unable to come up with a solution besides keeping it in his pants, when females have many more options pre and post concetion and refuse to see how this is an issue to many men then you are being blinded by your emotions and not seeing the facts of the matter.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Men, if you don't want any kids, just get a vasectomy. It can be reversed if you change your mind. It's not 100%, but quite successful in many cases.

You keep that information to yourself. Nobody needs to know that you are sterile. Not even your current sexual partner.

I've heard it called "the perfect crime" before, and it does seem to be.


edit on 17-9-2010 by sticky because: I like editing my posts!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by mayertuck
 


A woman is stepping up when she aborts. Reproductive rights are different than individual rights, as females and males have different reproductive rights and the same individual rights. Their reproductive rights will and should only be equal when their reproductive organs ar the same for both genders.


Can you please show me in the constitution where it says that? Please.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Their reproductive rights will and should only be equal when their reproductive organs ar the same for both genders.


This, I agree with.


At the point of conception, as it stands, the woman has the choice to abort or bear a child. If the woman decided she doesn't want to bear a child, it's 100% her choice. The man has no say. For it to be TRULY equal, he would be able to say, "No, you cannot have an abortion. We started this child and I want it, so you have to have it."

BUT, he can't do that. Because he cannot carry the child. So she gets 100% of the decision.

She can abort it and absolve herself the responsibilities of having a child.
She can have it and legally force the man to abide by her choice.

I think the man shouldn't be forced to care for a child that he didn't want. I know he should have chosen not to have sex if he didn't want the child, but so should she. And if SHE has an out, I think he should, too.

This thread is moving so fast, I hope you didn't miss my last post.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by sticky
Men, if you don't want any kids, just get a vasectomy. It can be reversed if you change your mind. It's not 100%, but quite successful in many cases.

You keep that information to yourself. Nobody needs to know that you are sterile. Not even your current sexual partner.

I've heard it called "the perfect crime" before, and it does seem to be.


edit on 17-9-2010 by sticky because: I like editing my posts!



More failed logic. Ok, women, just get a hysterectomy if you dont want to get pregnant.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
There are some instances where this needs to be done for example, if a female does what I will call a biological raid. She sees a guy and likes his genetics, but has no interest in having a long tern relationship with him. All she wants out of him is a baby, and then dumps him, that's her plan all along. I know this because it happened to a guy I know. Because the girl was such a !@#$% that she actually told the guy right to his face all she wanted out of him was baby, that's it. Sex, pregnant, relationship over, child support, it's tough to be a guy sometimes.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I am sorry you are correct her reproductive rights have not been trampled. But why would you advocate a scenerio in which an innocent baby is put into a negative position of having their rights trampled, particularly the child's right to be supported by both halves of the dna soup that created it?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


There is no need to remedy male reproductive rights, they already have them.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I am sorry you are correct her reproductive rights have not been trampled. But why would you advocate a scenerio in which an innocent baby is put into a negative position of having their rights trampled, particularly the child's right to be supported by both halves of the dna soup that created it?


At the time of the decision, it's not a child, it's a parasite. The woman would have plenty of time to decide whether or not she could handle having and caring for a child without the man. Women get abortions all the time because they can't afford it.


edit on 9/17/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by sticky
 


There you go Sticky.......PROBLEM SOLVED !!!!

Thank You

ok girls....off your birth control pills, the men finally realised a vasectomy solves the abortion and pregnancy issue so now we no longer have to worry about birth control.

Now Sticky...STDs?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I am sorry you are correct her reproductive rights have not been trampled. But why would you advocate a scenerio in which an innocent baby is put into a negative position of having their rights trampled, particularly the child's right to be supported by both halves of the dna soup that created it?


Because the mother made that choice when she slept with him. Should a man step up hell yes, should a women step up hell yes (sadly that isn't the case) We come full circle you see. The mother put the child in that position because a man really has no say in it. Might sound callous, but that is the price of having the reproductive power. With great power comes great responsibility.

Sadly that is one of the greatest flaws with gender feminism, the lack of wanting or understanding to accept that with power comes responsibility. The desire for power is there, but the taking responsibility is not.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I think the man shouldn't be forced to care for a child that he didn't want. I know he should have chosen not to have sex if he didn't want the child, but so should she. And if SHE has an out, I think he should, too.


Once a child is born, the mother and father have the exact same outs. If the child is put up for adoption, neither parent will have any responsibility to it. If the mother decides to leave the child in the care of the father and not be involved in the child's life, her responsibilities are exactly the same as a father who makes the same decision.

No one is forced to care for a child. If the non-custodial parent does not want to participate in the raising of the child, they do not have do. There is nothing to legally compel them. Sending a check is not "caring" for a child, it is not participating in their life. It is just another bill.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by mayertuck
 


There is no need to remedy male reproductive rights, they already have them.


really where? please do not say by absitnence, that is utterly unrealistic,



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by joechip
 


I agree with this 100%

Men should have the right to decline fatherhood.

I know a girl who in fact LIED to her boyfriend telling him she was on the pill so she could have her first child.
She got prego and now he is stuck with the HUGE payments and wants nothing to do with her or the child.

He had no say, he doesn't want to be a father, never did as he already had a PLANNED child with his exwife.

The laws right now are set against men. ITS so unfair.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by sticky
 


There you go Sticky.......PROBLEM SOLVED !!!!

Thank You

ok girls....off your birth control pills, the men finally realised a vasectomy solves the abortion and pregnancy issue so now we no longer have to worry about birth control.

Now Sticky...STDs?



Yeah, you wear a condom, maybe two if she looks like a whore. STD's don't have anything to do with this issue. It's pretty clear that the man in the OP isn't going to win his case. Like I said, get a vasectomy and keep that information to yourself. It's not her right to know that you can't have kids.

I've heard a few stories about women confronting men that they are pregnant, only to find out that the man they hoped to be its father was, in fact, sterile.


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



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


So you are advocating forced abortion.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


FINANCIAL care.


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


So you are advocating forced abortion.


That's ridiculous! No one is forcing her to have an abortion. It's totally her choice.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join