Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Should A Womans Womb Be Considered Shared Property During Pregnancy?

page: 7
3
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 





There is no comparison between the legal financial obligations our society puts on fatherhood and the phsyical realty of actually carrying a child. To pretend this is comparable is absurd.


excuse me..?? The financial burden put upon many fathers leads them to a life of poverty, and often unable to afford a down payment for their own home, or to have the resources to start another family with someone they truly love.

I have carried children , and it was both a pleasure ,and a curse physically, but not a HUGE burden that lasted years. I really hate it when women carry on about how hard it is to carry a baby..yes..it can get uncomfortable...and it can have its complications, but it certainly doesn't affect life long quality.




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenofsheba
reply to post by Jepic
 


My husband never shared the womb with me, our child did, but not him. Different people. Completely different individuals who share DNA but not him in there, nope, he was in his mom's womb, though. Not mine.

Funny, funny boys....
edit on 25-6-2011 by queenofsheba because: add line


Uhm hello! Your whole body doesn't need to be in there to have shared a womb, just your penis which it was during sex.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
You men need to quit wallowing in this subject, to force a woman to carry a baby or abort it is taking her life and you the man being the owners of us, IF, and this is a far-fetched IF your reasoning would be one, say law, well then we woman just cut you penis's off. We do not have to have sex with the man, we are quite resourceful when backed into a corner. Therefore you men's obvious delusional dreams need to stop. Because we woman hold the aces.
Seriously



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


If she is healthy and capable of giving birth to a child, and the father is willing to raise the child, then i do think it is only fair that both their decisions be considered.

The only issue is when you look at it this way, as in the woman giving birth to the child, so the father can have it, then it's basically like she is just a surrogate. I think the fathers decision should always be highly considered.

The latter here though is always going to end up as ''it's her body, her decision''.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by queenofsheba
reply to post by Jepic
 


My husband never shared the womb with me, our child did, but not him. Different people. Completely different individuals who share DNA but not him in there, nope, he was in his mom's womb, though. Not mine.

Funny, funny boys....
edit on 25-6-2011 by queenofsheba because: add line


Uhm hello! Your whole body doesn't need to be in there to have shared a womb, just your penis which it was during sex.


Umm hello! You do realise that a mans penis never enters the womb during intercourse don't you?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dilligaf28

Originally posted by Bee2010
I am sick to death of you psycho people trying to argue a woman's rights to her own body away.
You will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best.



You will also never be able to opt out of paying child support purely because the government doesn't want to pay for your mistakes.


Your statement is riddled with hypocrisy. you say "you will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best" and immediately say "you also will never be able to opt out of paying child support".

It basically says "you will not tell me what to do but i will tell you what to do".

Do you really feel that its ok for you to claim that no one can control another human being and then immediately make the statement that human beings will be controlled?

edit on 25-6-2011 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


It's the government that tries to force a person to pay child support at the end of the day. They are the ones who made the child support laws. You could kill yourself or leave the country as a stowaway on a boat or change your identity. You could injure yourself so you are legally unable to work. The government does not have complete control.
When I wrote "you will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best", it was the father of the unborn that I was writing to.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by gabby2011
reply to post by Bee2010
 





I am sick to death of you psycho people trying to argue a woman's rights to her own body away. You will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best. You will also never be able to opt out of paying child support purely because the government doesn't want to pay for your mistakes.


How utterly hypocritical of you. You do not believe a woman should be controlled and told what to do with her body?..what about a man? does he have no say on what is to happen to his life.

Typical selfish response..".I can have a baby if I want to and you have to pay up....its my choice, and your choice is null and void.



Oh Gabby Gabby Gabby, do you not understand that it is the government of the country you reside in that decides if a man must pay child support or not? If it were up to the woman, without the laws, she would have no say. Just as a man has no say over a woman's body.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bee2010

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by queenofsheba
reply to post by Jepic
 


My husband never shared the womb with me, our child did, but not him. Different people. Completely different individuals who share DNA but not him in there, nope, he was in his mom's womb, though. Not mine.

Funny, funny boys....
edit on 25-6-2011 by queenofsheba because: add line


Uhm hello! Your whole body doesn't need to be in there to have shared a womb, just your penis which it was during sex.


Umm hello! You do realise that a mans penis never enters the womb during intercourse don't you?


My bad. You are right. It doesn't. But what does the womb have to do with anything here. It's about the baby. Which is the "product" of you AND the male.
edit on 26-6-2011 by Jepic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Bee2010
 





Oh Gabby Gabby Gabby, do you not understand that it is the government of the country you reside in that decides if a man must pay child support or not? If it were up to the woman, without the laws, she would have no say. Just as a man has no say over a woman's body.


Well, as someone put it earlier in this thread, there are plenty of laws that govern what a woman,and a man can do to their bodies.
I understand that it is the government that makes the laws, and to an extent they serve a good purpose, yet can very much work against the rights of the man.
I think these laws should be more adjustable,and perhaps they will be some day. Let's face it , men aren't given much "free choice", therefore need to take more precaution than the woman.

oh..and ..whats with the "oh gabby gabby gabby".....I'm not a child....I understand how the laws work , and they are not taking into consideration the rights of men enough...and perhaps that will change someday.
edit on 26-6-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bee2010

Originally posted by Dilligaf28

Originally posted by Bee2010
I am sick to death of you psycho people trying to argue a woman's rights to her own body away.
You will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best.



You will also never be able to opt out of paying child support purely because the government doesn't want to pay for your mistakes.


Your statement is riddled with hypocrisy. you say "you will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best" and immediately say "you also will never be able to opt out of paying child support".

It basically says "you will not tell me what to do but i will tell you what to do".

Do you really feel that its ok for you to claim that no one can control another human being and then immediately make the statement that human beings will be controlled?

edit on 25-6-2011 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)


It's the government that tries to force a person to pay child support at the end of the day. They are the ones who made the child support laws. You could kill yourself or leave the country as a stowaway on a boat or change your identity. You could injure yourself so you are legally unable to work. The government does not have complete control.
When I wrote "you will never be able to control another human being and force them to do what you think is best", it was the father of the unborn that I was writing to.


It was the father of the unborn child you were writing to when you said you will never be able to control another human being and it was the mother of the unborn child that I say you will never be able to control another human being regarding child support.

How is it any different? I feel like your being deliberately obtuse or intentionally hypocritical. You are ardent that a woman can not be forced to do something but equally ardent that a man can. Its not equality you seek its some sort of misplaced feminine superiority complex that you desperately are seeking validation for IMO.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
A few of my opinions on the issue...

Is a baby the property of the mother? Or is it joint property of the mother and father? If it's joint property, then both should have a say in what happens to the baby, and both have a responsibility to provide for that baby.

If it's not joint property, and the mother is the owner of the child, and the only one who can choose what happens to the baby, then the mother should be the only one that is responsible for providing for that baby.

You shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If it's your property, you pay for it. If it's both parents property, then both have a say in the baby's birth, and both have a responsibility to provide for it.

Thinking otherwise is hypocritical, and there is no way around it. So if someone thinks a woman should have 100% control over the child, but then only share 50% of the financial burden to raise that child, that's fine, but just admit you are a hypocrite. It's either 100% control, and 100% responsibility, or it's 50/50 for both, in which case the father has a say in the birth of the child.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by James1982
A few of my opinions on the issue...

Is a baby the property of the mother? Or is it joint property of the mother and father? If it's joint property, then both should have a say in what happens to the baby, and both have a responsibility to provide for that baby.

If it's not joint property, and the mother is the owner of the child, and the only one who can choose what happens to the baby, then the mother should be the only one that is responsible for providing for that baby.

You shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If it's your property, you pay for it. If it's both parents property, then both have a say in the baby's birth, and both have a responsibility to provide for it.

Thinking otherwise is hypocritical, and there is no way around it. So if someone thinks a woman should have 100% control over the child, but then only share 50% of the financial burden to raise that child, that's fine, but just admit you are a hypocrite. It's either 100% control, and 100% responsibility, or it's 50/50 for both, in which case the father has a say in the birth of the child.
I agree. I would have no problem with women deciding what to with their own bodies, as long as the man doesn't have to pay for the possible result of that choice.
edit on 27-6-2011 by technical difficulties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
My final say on the subject for what its worth as there have been many reasoned replies on this thread and it hasn't degenerated into a juvenile Male v Female kitchen argument

If a man gives his Penis for a time and his sperm , when the Partner is a consenting Adult, there surely should be a law that decrees that man has a right to expect that the Woman does not kill a resultant life/

If a woman cannot face mothering a child then at least give the man the option of fathering the child?

At the worst allow the Child tolive and be Adopted by those who want a child to nurture and give a loving upbringing to as if the child was their own.

No LIFE SHOULD BE STOPPED?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Human beings are not property. No part of any human being can be considered the property of another.

This includes unborn children who are very much people by the way...



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl
Human beings are not property. No part of any human being can be considered the property of another.

This includes unborn children who are very much people by the way...


YES people who are killed by the millions by DOCTORS with the CONSENT OF WOMEN?

Damm the mans feelings , he doesn't exist in the ROOM , when the LIFE IS TERMINATED.

The UNBORN doesn't exist once in the INCINERATOR or RESEARCH LAB.

Of course the woman has the right.....totally agree, wonder what the CHILD THINKS as he is killed.?





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join