It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Mothers are legally responsible for their infants, which is why it's illegal for mums to starve their babies, to leave them alone too long, to deny them medical attention or to put their babies in dumpsters, even if they decide they don't want to keep them.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
"Men! Beware! Don't have sex with women unless you are ready, willing and able to support any decision she may make, because you have NO reproductive rights once you give her your sperm. NONE! Don't believe anything she tells you and don't take anything for granted. Protect yourselves!"
For example, the National Scruples and Lies Survey 2004 polled 5,000 women in the United Kingdom for That’s Life! magazine. According to that survey, 42% of women claim they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partners.
Jo Checkley, the editor of That’s Life!, is correct when she says “to deliberately get pregnant when your partner doesn’t want a baby is playing Russian roulette with other people’s lives."
There are women who seem to think men are Viagra-toting Neanderthals who have little commitment or tolerance for the intricacies of contraception.
Originally posted by Aeons
Intellectually dishonest about the concept of Rights?
Why, yes you are. Or you simply do not understand rights. Which is far more likely.
Even more likely than that, is that you have tendencies to not see other human beings as important as yourself and therefore don't give a flyin' rat's ass about anything remotely like rights unless it happens to be about you personally.
Intellectually dishonest. Emotionally dishonest. And somewhat Inhuman. Oh, and manipulative at that.
edit on 2010/9/20 by Aeons because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by KilrathiLG
if a man gets a woman pregnant he would have 3 months or some arbirary(let the law figure it out) time period to inform the woman he didnt want to be a part of the childs life(hes not ready dosent have money it was an accident take your pick)and thus surrender all rights(visitation seeing the kid birthdays paying for college etc)the woman would then get the option to do one of the following 1.have an abortion 2.give it up for adoption 3 keep it as a single mother and get no fiancial aid from the father.conversly the womans rights would be the following 1.no woman can be forced to have an abortion OR bear some ones child she does not want to 2.if the woman wants to abort the baby that is solely her call as its her body 3.if she wants to give it up for adoption she can carry the baby to term and do so.4 if she wants to have the baby but dosent want to be fiancialy responsible for it she can take the baby to term and then give it to the male that wants said child who will then be SOLELY responsible for its care
Originally posted by Kailassa
It doesn't work, because abortions are really hard to get after three months, and with this the decision would be even later than that because first the woman has to find out she's pregnant. Sometimes it's months before she knows or before the pregnancy test shows positive. It's really hard to find a doctor who'll do an abortion after 4 months because it's much more dangerous then and really traumatic for the mother.
Besides, any child has a right to be supported by both parents,
Not all women can have an abortion. Some of us care too much about our babies to do that.
Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Getting the laws changed? The guy in the OP tried and lost that already, supreme court level, years ago.
What is the angle that is going to change the law? And to what?