Should A Womans Womb Be Considered Shared Property During Pregnancy?

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   
With so many stories one hears about men having been trumatised by a Partners decision to terminate a life created by both Partners, against the mans wishes, the question should be asked perhaps...."Should a womans womb be considered Shared Property During Pregnancy?

And I do not mean that a womans body is a mans property at any time, just that for legal reasons the womans womb should be whilst life created by a man and a woman is within the womb.

If one thinks about it clearly and logically, it makes acute sense.

Once a child is born the Father and the Mother are Legally entitled to parent the newborn, but at any time before birth ( at least up to 28weeks now I believe from conception) a woman can kill the developing life without regard to the mans wishes.
Yet the man if the woman allows the developing life to set foot in the outside world, the man is fully legally responsible for that new life...its an illogical situation surely?




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


I think a child should be considered an entire seperate entity from the mother from the time of conception. I agree that a child is not any less their father's child inside the womb than outisde of it. Feminist hypocrisy needs to end.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
No. Never.

Should a man's penis be considered joint property?
edit on 24-6-2011 by Pilot because: edit to reply to op



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by HarmonicNights
 


It is interesting to read others are perhaps counting the cost of the growing legion of dead that never were ouside the womb.
I may be wrong but it ironic that the Christian West has oversaw the mass culling of Gods Children by virtue of encouraged Mass Abortion?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilot
No. Never.

Should a man's penis be considered joint property?
edit on 24-6-2011 by Pilot because: edit to reply to op


Slightly off topic but in a way it is joint property during intercourse and that is perhaps the point of this thread.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
No. A woman's body is just that, hers. You think it's easy to be pregnant for nine months to support life? Without that woman, womb; you would have no life.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Pilot
 


No because a man's penis is not made up of partial DNA from the woman, as a child is.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Not the womb, but the baby definitely should.
Never gonna happen, unfortunately to alot of men denied the right to be a father.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Yes. The woman's Womb should be considered Joint Property , not that i even agree with abortion , however its happening non the less , if the man wants the baby and the woman doesnt then it should be reasoned within themselves and possible murder charges if the life of the baby is taken without the Farthers consent.


Mothers expect Farthers to pay child support for the baby so if the man wants the baby and the mother doesnt , the mother should have the baby and give it to the farther , as it is BOTH of their creation.

Farthers cant get out of Child support , mothers cant get out of pregnancy.

Dont have sex and hope you dont get unlucky if you take the propper percautions


Before you go on a rampage saying what if i were in your shoes and all this stuff , the government wont allow me to be married or have a child for the next 12 years.

So its not my problem , however regardless of my one soul one vote , my opinion can still be stated in which it has.
edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Uhm, NO.
2nd Line
P.S. NO



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Yes, it should... to a degree.

If going through a pregnancy is dangerous for the woman, it should be her choice to terminate the pregnancy, but if everything is healthy the man should have EQUAL SAY when it comes to the fetus.

Last I heard, the mans sperm was needed to create that fetus.

You should need my permission to kill my #ing child.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 





Yet the man if the woman allows the developing life to set foot in the outside world, the man is fully legally responsible for that new life.


I've had a few incidents like this. Couple women claiming the baby was mine. I refused to sign the birth certificate/paternity form stating I was the father. DNA later proved they weren't mine.

To all soon to be father's, don't sign on the dotted line if your not sure the baby is yours.

As for the question, IMO shared property during pregnancy would be more of a nightmare than going through a divorce.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by randomtangentsrme
 


absolutely not. a womans body is hers and hers alone. if a woman does not wish to carry a child and give birth, you cant make her do that. a woman chooses what to do with her body. maybe one day men will be able to carry a child and give birth, and they will be able to make certain choices. but for the time being women are the carriers of children and women are the ones who choose. the abortion issue is getting to be a very complex one when it really doesnt need to be...women get to choose what to do with their own bodies. thats it. if people have an issue they should be taking precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   
You know, it's just a lot easier to simply state that the man's money, and labor is his, and does not belong to the child, or the mother.

Ever.

If the woman is not legally obligated to let it live, the man should not be legally obligated to pay for it.

edit on 24-6-2011 by ErtaiNaGia because: added pic



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by devilishlyangelic23
 


Then a man shouldnt have to pay CHild support if he doesnt want the child. If you dont have to birth the baby if you dont want too.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   
It seems like the supporters of this outlandish idea are backing it solely so a man could prevent a woman from getting an abortion without their consent, without even bothering to look at the other side of a coin. Say the doctors tell me with 90% certainty that my pregnant wife will die if she carries our baby to term. She wants to risk it, despite the danger out of aversion to killing a child.

In this scenario I'm not cool with the idea of having to raise a child all by myself if my wife dies. I'd be allowed to fight for the right to abort the baby off of that premise, no?

Or let's say I rape some girl. Because it's my seed and her womb is now jointly mine under this bizarre concept, I can force that woman to give birth, correct? Even if I'm in jail for the the child's entire life? Sorry but I can't even begin to fathom how anyone can think this is a good idea.

PS - Some of you might want to google how babies are made before commenting on the subject. Just a thought.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Boreas
 


Nice try. You are talking about specific cases of Rape or Death.

I am speaking of a woman opens her legs to one to many guys or the same guy to many times , he loves her and the wants the baby , she is scared and doesnt want the baby , so she aborts it.


If a Woman can abort it in a Normal unlucky situation such as this , dont expect the man to pay child support because he doesnt want the baby just like the mother doesnt want to birth the baby.

However , if the Mom wants the baby and the Daddy doesnt. To bad. Child support for him.

This is simply to give rights to a man who WANTS the child if the mother doesnt.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Boreas
 



Or let's say I rape some girl.


OF COURSE!!!!

All men are rapists!

That's it EXACTLY!

Let's base legislation, not on consensual sexual relationships that happens to result in pregnancy... Let's assume that all men are RAPISTS!

Congratulations, you just failed.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilot
No. Never.

Should a man's penis be considered joint property?
edit on 24-6-2011 by Pilot because: edit to reply to op


Sure. If you are willing to take good care of that penis.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenofsheba
No. A woman's body is just that, hers. You think it's easy to be pregnant for nine months to support life? Without that woman, womb; you would have no life.


Without a man's penis and sperm, you would have no life.





new topics
 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join