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: 78
56
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kirill
You are correct that people can't be relied on to do the sensible thing. Which is why there should be mandatory sterilization and only until a person can prove they are financially, mentally, and physically able to provide for a child should the sterilization process be reversed.


There is no way in a million years that any government should have control on who or who cannot have children.

Especially not on such vague definitions as financial, mental and physical reasons.

The ability to procreate is about as fundamental a human right as you can get, and this right should never be compromised in any way ( least of all, by governments ! ).
edit on 12-10-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 12 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


I quoted your post, sorry I assumed you would know my question was directed at you.

Again where is this fantasy island located of which you discuss?



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 



I quoted your post, sorry I assumed you would know my question was directed at you.


I'm sorry, I responded to your Ignorance, but I guess you were not able to Read it.


Are you Insulting Me DIRECTLY *AS YOUR POST*?

OR was there an ACTUAL POINT OF DISCUSSION in your post?


Again where is this fantasy island located of which you discuss?


Oh, I get it.... you are under the impression that your question is mature, or relevant, or "Cutting" or something along the lines....

Here, Let me spell this out for you:



-Edrick



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Hard core feminists are probably frigid
women who couldn't keep a man happy.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Hard core feminists are probably frigid
women who couldn't keep a man happy.
Really? What do you mean by that?



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 

That's ok if you do not want to answer my question. Deflection is the weak man's game after all.



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 



That's ok if you do not want to answer my question. Deflection is the weak man's game after all.


Are you going to Explain what you mean by "Fantasy Island"?

OR are you going to continue to Deflect?

-Edrick



posted on Oct, 13 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamabeth
Hard core feminists are probably frigid
women who couldn't keep a man happy.


I tend to find that they have trouble even getting a man in the first place !

That's where the bitterness stems from.



posted on Oct, 14 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 

So just curious what is it when you deflect questions?



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


You think they should share 50/50 cost? Perhaps better the man pays 100% since the woman is going through the procedure and every medial procedure has it's risks. That's 100% of medical costs UP FRONT and in advance paid in full to the medical centre or hospital.



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Feminists are not doing themselves too many favours in this thread. When you continually use phrases like "strong women" and "weak men", you are kind of suggesting that the average women isn't strong and the average man isn't weak. So what does this imply?

edit on 15/10/2010 by Dark Ghost because: typo



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 

That would be ok, if we were not talking about equality here. No one can help the inherent biological risks associated with pregnancy. I could very easily argue that it should be all on the female, since she is most subject to those risks and as such should be more responsible for the consequences of those risks. If I decide to do a dangerous activity, should I make someone else pay for my medical bills if that activity causes myself harm? I think not. I would rather it be equal. One extreme or the other is bad in my opinion.

edit on 15-10-2010 by mayertuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Ghost didnt you know that is how gender feminists play their cards, they claim most women are weak and therefore need the added protections of the unequal protections put in place. But at the same time say that all women are strong. Classic double talk. If all women were strong as they claim then those protections would not need to be in place.



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


If the man pays 100% for the procedure since the woman is actually the one risking it then I would think that's about fair and square. Fact is my friend.....a majority of young men don't hang around when informed of a pregnancy; he bolts like lightening.



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Kirill
 


Nice one that since more than half of earth's male population can't afford to have children let alone keep a wife so best he keeps his zipper up and taste a life of celibacy.



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 


yep....since the artical does'nt exist

nice try



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


You want equality of the sexes?

Try paying women the exact pay as her male counterpart in the same job and let's stamp out sexual harrassment in the work place....perhaps in another 100 years?



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Kirill
 





You are correct that people can't be relied on to do the sensible thing. Which is why there should be mandatory sterilization and only until a person can prove they are financially, mentally, and physically able to provide for a child should the sterilization process be reversed.


Quoted for absolute truth.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 





There is no way in a million years that any government should have control on who or who cannot have children. Especially not on such vague definitions as financial, mental and physical reasons. The ability to procreate is about as fundamental a human right as you can get, and this right should never be compromised in any way ( least of all, by governments ! ).


What?
I sincerely do not understand why the ability to procreate should somehow be a right, enlighten me. It should be a privilege, granted only to those that are ready - financialy, mentally and physically.

Human right to grow up in good conditions is far more important than this so-called "right" to procreate you speak of. You are completely disregarding the rights of the baby!


For example, chinese government does regulate procreation very succesfully, and the rest of the world should implement something similar, IMHO.
edit on 15/10/10 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Parents with a better education and financial standing does'nt automatically make them better parents. Parents from a working class foundation in fact are superior parents AND their children are higher achievers and well rounded kids than their counterparts from, shall we say, those of higher standing in society. Those from single parent families are at greater risk of life long failure however they are among largest portion of the highest achievers of any two parent families - I call these the Xtrem kids.

So going by your comment, parents who can't afford kids should'nt have them?



posted on Oct, 15 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   


You want equality of the sexes?

Try paying women the exact pay as her male counterpart in the same job and let's stamp out sexual harrassment in the work place....perhaps in another 100 years?


People start businesses to make money,not to lose money,if women in general could do the same work as a man for less pay,then only women would be employed.

Heck I`ve been payed more than other men in the same job and I`m no lone ranger there.

If your a woman that is as good or better than a man at your job and your boss does not reward you for it,you have a very stupid boss,get another job where you are paid for your abilities.

Trouble is some people get their fantasies and abilities mixed up.



new topics




 
56
<< 75  76  77    79  80  81 >>

log in

join