Originally posted by windword
You don't seem to understand the basics of female biology and ovulation or understand the life of the sperm. A woman can become pregnant up to 5 days after intercourse. Ovulation can be brought on, out of cycle, by sexual arousal, and happen hours, even days, after intercourse. Remedies like a diaphragm and the rhythm method will fail inder these circumstances.
That doesn't equal 'anytime' as you claimed.
Your argument is circular, illogical and based on your personal bias.
If mine is, then so is yours. I'm only speaking about the biological process while you're attributing subjective characteristics to it that you have formed an opinion about.
On one hand you say the women are not victims of their biology and then on the other hand you if a woman indulges her biological urges and gets pregnant, then ethically, she must bear the biological responsibilities forced on her by biology.
You have a choice whether to entertain your urges. Are pedophiles and rapists victims of their biology as well?
You place some sort of magical attributes on a biological process and then impose your personal morals accordingly.
You're the one treating the biological process of reproduction as a curse and acting like it's unique to humans.
You "believe" that the fertilized egg is sacred, therefore condemning a majority of the kinds of birth control being used today
You 'believe' that women are too stupid to realize the consequences of their actions and are therefore 'victims' who have authority over someone else's life.
Your only argument is that women should either abstain and ignore their physical needs, or get sterilized, ending any prospect of motherhood at a later date when they are ready, willing and able to be a parent.
Desire is not the same thing as a 'need'. You are 'ready' to be a parent when you're sexually mature. Someone who would abort their child, especially for a purely self-serving purpose, is easily a danger to any child they may have later on. Sterilization doesn't end any prospect of parenthood anyway. There is always the option of adoption.
Your viewpoint is unreasonable, outdated and puritanical. That sex Genii isn't going back into the bottle. Sexual expression isn't going to diminish, and stifling it is only going to make matters worse.
Your viewpoint in purely based on the twisted notion that an adult can be a victim of their own choices and actions. As for 'outdated', I don't conform to a certain mindset just because it is en vogue at the time. You're the one is trying to stifle the outcome of 'sexual expression'. Offering financial compensation to those who will get themselves sterilized would be an extremely good thing for all involved. Women who took the offer could have all the sex they want with no worry of getting pregnant. Not to mention it's good for eugenics purposes.
Victims often act out their abuses and the cycle of abuse continues and is perpetuated.
That doesn't even have any relevance to what I said.
You STILL haven't answered to the animal abuse problem. Do you condone animal abuse? Yes or no? If not, are you lending a hand in saving the animals from their biology?