Should A Womans Womb Be Considered Shared Property During Pregnancy?

reply to post by gabby2011


I saw your post right after I posted mine; I guess great minds think alike Her reasoning and logic is biased to say the least. Next time I won't have lunch in the middle of drafting my post so I can beat you to the punch

reply to post by Dilligaf28


No worries..she needs to hear it from more than a few..so she gets it.

I have to say, that I do believe in a woman's right to her body ,as well as a mans right. The key here is that both partners take the best precautions to avoid pregnancy , If unwanted pregnancy should occur , they need to look at it as a shared body experience , meaning it took a part of two bodies to create .

reply to post by gabby2011


What if the father doesn't want her to abort, what happens then?

Does he have the right to put a gun to her head and force her to carry the fetus?

Originally posted by HarmonicNights
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.

Yeah! Cuz it's just the feminists who tell us a child needs a womb to survive, right? It's a child and could live on it's own if the femiists didnt force to to develop in a womb, which the feminists just so happen to make sure ony exists in a woman!

Originally posted by Dr Expired

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.

I'm confused, you think you have joint property, which is the same as ownership during sex? Uhhh, no, we the female allow you the male to visit the womb have sex, then you leave, lol there is never a joint ownership ever. I'm no feminist ,intact personally I believe feminist harm family life, but what is on or in my body is my choice.

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

Well she basically answered the OP's question.

And to answer hers,

Oh please no.

Your body, your choice ma'am.


I really like this picture I found. I don't know how to imbed, but basically, it's a picture of a pregnant woman at a pro-choice rally with an awesome t-shirt that says "My baby is pro-choice".

Even if this idea ever pushed into law you would never be able to enforce it because a women would simply never tell the man she was pregnant. So there is little likelihood of a successful outcome of forcing this.

I can't get my head around a man thinking he can temporarily 'share' a womb without the woman's consent. With consent no problem whatsoever thoroughly recommend it. Apart from the everyday responsibility of parenthood 24/7 till they leave home, I actually wonder, were a man ever to experience the last month of pregnancy and birth, (not forgetting the 100 odd stitches and no epidural), whether he would really be so keen on womb sharing. Also would some men's vanity relish the after-affects pregnancy has on the body - stretch marks anyone? - and of course the bigger boobs (ulcerated nipples) and feeding throughout the night and the leakages on your tops - I think its more than just a womb that's involved.

The OP is correct.

Both DNA contributors have equal rights over any unique DNA code they created together from the moment that a zygote forms.

Most people don't realize this basic fact because they have been brainwashed by garbage information and they fail to question themselves and their faulty beliefs deeply. Also when they are told basic science and liberty fact, they will ignore it and continue believing their authoritarian one-way street bull.

They will express deep cognitive dissonance when you try to call them out on it. Instead of changing their point of view, they will express totally illogical and irrational ideas to back up their claims.

Originally posted by Lynda101

I can't get my head around a man thinking he can temporarily 'share' a womb without the woman's consent.

She did give consent.

That's how the zygote was created in the first place.

Duh!

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by Lynda101

I can't get my head around a man thinking he can temporarily 'share' a womb without the woman's consent.

She did give consent.

That's how the zygote was created in the first place.

Duh!

Yes, but the man gave up his 'property' when he released it into possession of the woman, didnt he?

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The OP is correct.

Both DNA contributors have equal rights over any unique DNA code they created together from the moment that a zygote forms.

Most people don't realize this basic fact because they have been brainwashed by garbage information and they fail to question themselves and their faulty beliefs deeply. Also when they are told basic science and liberty fact, they will ignore it and continue believing their authoritarian one-way street bull.

They will express deep cognitive dissonance when you try to call them out on it. Instead of changing their point of view, they will express totally illogical and irrational ideas to back up their claims.

Totally. The fact that the woman has to, you know, carry it for nine months and then do the majority of care for it for the next few years in no way means she has the right to make decisions that directly impact her body and health and well being.

Until the lungs are fully mature in a fetus and be able to survive outside the womb, the fetus cannot be considered a separate entity since it NEEDS the placenta (HOOKED TO MOMS BLOOD FLOW) to survive.

Therefore since it relies on maternal blood flow, it is a part of the mother. IT CANNOT BE A JOINT RESOURCE!!!!! That is just RIDICULOUS!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The OP is correct.

Both DNA contributors have equal rights over any unique DNA code they created together from the moment that a zygote forms.

Most people don't realize this basic fact because they have been brainwashed by garbage information and they fail to question themselves and their faulty beliefs deeply. Also when they are told basic science and liberty fact, they will ignore it and continue believing their authoritarian one-way street bull.

They will express deep cognitive dissonance when you try to call them out on it. Instead of changing their point of view, they will express totally illogical and irrational ideas to back up their claims.

Totally. The fact that the woman has to, you know, carry it for nine months and then do the majority of care for it for the next few years in no way means she has the right to make decisions that directly impact her body and health and well being.

So why do men have to pay child support if they have no ownership rights or responsibility?

Gotcha. You can't have it both ways.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Using that same logic would not a man have equal say based upon the years and years of financial burdens associated with the child; the child that if he does want and she doesn't he is denied but if she wants it and he doesn't that he's still obligated for?

Its a basic inequity in the law. Don't forget that justice is blind even to gender. If two people create something both of those two people should have a say in that somethings use/future.

And to clarify it is man and woman that give life, not man or woman.

reply to post by Starwise



The fetus would not exist if it were not for both parents. Both parents create the child and both parents should have a say in if the child is born. Equality is such a pain sometimes isn't it?

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by Starwise

 

The fetus would not exist if it were not for both parents. Both parents create the child and both parents should have a say in if the child is born. Equality is such a pain sometimes isn't it?

True, but until that child is born, the woman can always say she has slept with multiple partners. The only real truth known at the conception moment, is that the mother is 100% true........she can lie lie lie...not saying that is right...just sayin'.....

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by Starwise

 

The fetus would not exist if it were not for both parents. Both parents create the child and both parents should have a say in if the child is born. Equality is such a pain sometimes isn't it?

This is the fact of reality.

Your post is 100% on the mark.

Anyone who disagrees with the above poster is very selfish and hates equality and hates human rights.

This principal can be applied to all kinds of things, and it works.

reply to post by Starwise


I can't quite grasp how your text is in anyway a response to my statement.

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by Starwise

 

The fetus would not exist if it were not for both parents. Both parents create the child and both parents should have a say in if the child is born. Equality is such a pain sometimes isn't it?

Certainly should have a 'say', but if the man fails to recognize that ultimately, the decision is the woman's to make, as it has a direct impact on her body, and not the mans.

As far as your claims of 'equality', feel free to figure out how to split the first 9 months of child rearing between the man and the woman. Until then, learnt to defer to the woman you chose to have un protected sex with.