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

page: 89
55
<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


And the exact same could be said for the women that spreads her legs.

Haven't you stated repeatedly that you are all for "equality"?

Then you post up oneway rubish like that...




posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Well, read most posts and my opinion is still the exact same as the last time. There is a biological difference that will inevitably skew issues of equality. Men should be taking all precautions as should woman, men use condoms, woman go on the pill etc But inevitably, if a woman gets pregnant she will hold the decision as to whether he will be having a child or not and the responsibility that goes with it, if a guy is not willing to face this possibility then don't have sex at all. This just makes the most sense and i fail to see why we have to complicate it for no reason.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Men have 100 percent control over whether they have a baby or not. It begins and ends with the man.


As I've explained to you and your ilk a hundred times before: a man has absolutely no control over whether a baby is created.

Men, demonstrably, are physically incapable of creating a child ( unless you've been watching that Arnold Schwarzenegger film where he gets pregnant
).

It's just not biologically possible.


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
If he puts his penis inside a baby making factory ie a womb, he knows the end result could be a baby.


Again, I think biology 101 may me useful to you.

The last time that I had sex, I put my penis into my partner's vagina, not her ''baby making factory ie a womb''.

My penis has never entered a woman's womb ! ( Thankfully, as I think that if your fantastical, and worrying, scenario ever materialised, then she would be in need of urgent medical treatment. )


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Men must love playing these waiting games, oh is my spilled seed I 100 percent consetually dropped off at the baby making factory going to result in a baby??


Right, I don't want to be crude here, but the only way that a 'baby' could potentially occur, is if I drop off my ''seed'' in my female partner's vagina.

That is not creating a baby. That is creating an embryo, zygote and foetus.

The creation of the baby would entirely be down to my partner's choice, and I would have no choice in the existence - or not - of my potential son or daughter.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
Well, read most posts and my opinion is still the exact same as the last time. There is a biological difference that will inevitably skew issues of equality. Men should be taking all precautions as should woman, men use condoms, woman go on the pill etc But inevitably, if a woman gets pregnant she will hold the decision as to whether he will be having a child or not and the responsibility that goes with it, if a guy is not willing to face this possibility then don't have sex at all. This just makes the most sense and i fail to see why we have to complicate it for no reason.


I support simplifying things - you're responsible for the results of your unilateral choices (no one elses).

Pretty simple?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 




A man has ABSOLUTELY no control over whether a BABY is created??



Oh my god, classic! Thanks for the laugh, man. Maybe next year in Sophomore year of high school you can take biology, and learn the folly of your thoughts. Hey, I like fantasy too, but baby making has long entered the scientific field.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Whats an ilk? And, how does a zygote grow? Into a baby thats how! And how did the baby get grown? Thanks to daddy's sperm!



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
But inevitably, if a woman gets pregnant she will hold the decision as to whether he will be having a child or not and the responsibility that goes with it


No, I'll correct you there: ''if a woman gets pregnant she will hold the decision as to whether he will be having a child or not''.

Fair enough, I don't agree with the laws, but I can accept the above position.

The problem arises when a man is asked to financially support a child that he is not responsible for creating; this is patently unfair, and is tantamount to slavery.


Originally posted by Solomons
if a guy is not willing to face this possibility then don't have sex at all. This just makes the most sense and i fail to see why we have to complicate it for no reason.


Again, this argument can easily, and more accurately, be applied to women.

A woman has complete control over whether any sexual intercourse takes place; if she agrees to have sex with someone, then she's agreeing to the potential pregnancy that may occur from this.

If women don't want to face the possibility of pregnancy, then they shouldn't have sex at all !


I don't know about you, but I'd be rather disappointed if most women were celibate, as I enjoy their intimate company.



But why do you think that men who don't wish to have children should not have sex, when women who don't want to have children are free to have sex without any consequences ?

This isn't fair, and it's certainly not equal.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I'm all for taking care of your children and not being a deadbeat, plenty of men don't need the excuse, but I think it's incredibly unfortunate that males are put in such an awkward position when it comes to their potential children, good or bad. If they want a baby and mom doesn't, well # dad, he doesn't have a say. Oh but dad doesn't want the baby in this scenario? Oh well mom does, so dad has to pay. Proposed solutions can prove to be just as problematic as the issue has so many variables.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Whats an ilk? And, how does a zygote grow? Into a baby thats how! And how did the baby get grown? Thanks to daddy's sperm!


Sperm helps create a zygote, only one thing can cause that lump of tissue to grow into a baby - the unilateral choice of a Woman.

Providing something to another person doesn't make you equally responsible for the results of that person's subsequent unilateral choices (sperm>choice to make a baby, gun>choice to murder someone, prescription>choice to overdose etc. etc.).



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Whats an ilk? And, how does a zygote grow? Into a baby thats how! And how did the baby get grown? Thanks to daddy's sperm!


Sperm helps create a zygote, only one thing can cause that lump of tissue to grow into a baby - the unilateral choice of a Woman.

Providing something to another person doesn't make you equally responsible for the results of that person's subsequent unilateral choices (sperm>choice to make a baby, gun>choice to murder someone, prescription>choice to overdose etc. etc.).


A zygote cannot grow without what? A sperm to create it in the first place. And of course your sperm is not responsible for a females choice. You are however, not absolved from all of the responsibilities that come with placing your sperm inside the baby factory. Those minclude providing finances for the resulting baby that your sperm has the potential to create.

Dont want that potential responsibility, that is yours and yours alone to make? Don't drop the sperm into baby making factories. Simple.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
A zygote cannot grow without what? A sperm to create it in the first place. And of course your sperm is not responsible for a females choice. You are however, not absolved from all of the responsibilities that come with placing your sperm inside the baby factory.


I'm equally responsible for creating a lump of tissue that can safely and affordably be removed and thrown in the garbage. If someone else unilaterally decides instead to create a baby with it that requires 20 years of support, good for them, but I'm not responsible for the results of their choice.

Can you think of any other examples where you accept equal responsibility for the results of another persons unilateral choice?


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Dont want that potential responsibility, that is yours and yours alone to make? Don't drop the sperm into baby making factories. Simple.


That is like saying, "don't want the potential responsibility for arson, forest fires, burns etc. etc. than don't give anyone a match you dumby."
edit on 16-12-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 





Dont want that potential responsibility, that is yours and yours alone to make? Don't drop the sperm into baby making factories. Simple.


I like how you metaphorically refer to a woman (or her parts rather) as a baby making factory. It helps to simplify my following point--Let's view her reproductive organs as a "factory", great...now who owns the factory? I believe she does, I think that has been pretty well settled in law...and as sole owner of the factory, she would have sole liability for any financial obligations the factory accrued. Unless of course she can produce a contract wherein a man has agreed to share the responsibility, (that would be marriage) she would remain the sole proprietor of the factory. I agree, it's pretty simple.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by joechip
 


By entering the factory, the sperm assumes that their is a chance the visit will result in a couple of decades of financial servitude for what is potentially created. The factory owner is allowing a guest in the door, it does not mean the factory assumes full responsibility for what the guest on purpose leaves behind. The cost of visiting the factory can be as little as fifty cents for a condom to thousands for the end product of the baby.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   


The factory owner is allowing a guest in the door, it does not mean the factory assumes full responsibility for what the guest on purpose leaves behind.
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Wait, aren't we talking about a "baby-making factory," here? I mean that's the whole purpose of the factory--to create babies...they are "allowing a guest in the door," but not to make babies? Really? At a baby-making factory?! I hope you can see how your failure to make a cohesive metaphor here illustrates the disconnect in your logic.
But let's take a look at the factory again. Is the factory required to take the sperm left in its inner workings by a "guest" and make a baby with it? NO. Absolutely not. The owner of the factory chooses to do so. A unilateral choice. Even if the owner chooses to to so, they can in no way be held liable for the baby produced, if they choose not to be. But they can force the "guest" to share a liability they choose willingly to accept.
I realize some people have difficulty grasping metaphorical arguments. But I would recommend spending a little more time grappling with one before responding. Your post didn't make sense.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


A man has ABSOLUTELY no control over whether a BABY is created??



I'm afraid that a plethora of smilies does not nullify the accuracy and correctness of my point.

A baby is a child in it's infancy.

It is physically impossible for a man to create a baby; ergo, a man has no control over the creation of a child.


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Oh my god, classic! Thanks for the laugh, man. Maybe next year in Sophomore year of high school you can take biology, and learn the folly of your thoughts. Hey, I like fantasy too, but baby making has long entered the scientific field.


Would you care to elaborate on your words ?

Biology vindicates my point of view; some terribly weird feminazi literature ''validates'' your position.

I have logic and science on my side... You have foot-stamping, toy-throwing, man-hating ideology on your side...



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


The sperm unites with an egg, and nine months later that sperm created a baby when the fetus is pushed from the womb.

No sperm no baby.

A female cannot grow a baby without that sperm.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


I guess you have no answer for how the owner of a "baby making factory" can hold someone else liable financially for a baby they created in their factory. I guess you're gonna gloss over my reasoned arguments concerning "ownership," and "responsibility". I really love it when an point, clearly unanswered, is conceded. Then maybe we can move on to other points. Capable of that? Or answering the point with something approaching logic?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Well as i said, a man can simply choose not to have sex if he is uncomfortable with the possibility(even if using contraception) that it may result in a pregnancy. As you said a woman can have sex without the responsibility that a man has in terms of a possible child, as she can simply have an abortion....but who will she be having sex with? If she is having sex with a man then he has already accepted the responsibility of a possible pregnancy/child, if he did not then he wouldn't be having sex with her...



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Whats an ilk? And, how does a zygote grow? Into a baby thats how! And how did the baby get grown? Thanks to daddy's sperm!


LOL...'tater, you are better than this.


A zygote is just that: a zygote.


If that hypothetical embryo/zygote/foetus gets turned into a child, then why should that concern me ?



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
The sperm unites with an egg, and nine months later that sperm created a baby when the fetus is pushed from the womb.


Thank you for that. I never knew how babies were created.



Originally posted by hotbakedtater
No sperm no baby.


No ovum, no baby.


Originally posted by hotbakedtater
A female cannot grow a baby without that sperm.


A female does not ''grow'' a baby.


Sperm creates an embryo/zygote/foetus...

Only a woman can create a child, so why are you trying to deflect the blame and responsibility ?

edit on 16-12-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
55
<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in

join