Abortion from a mans point of view

Originally posted by davidsander
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

 

copy and paste all you want. Another member on this thread has already established that 93% of all abortions are "Casual" abortions. Meaning non life threatening , and no extenuating circumstances like rape. Abortion in the manner we are talking about is a bi-product of loose morals and a cavalier attitude toward life. "Mr. Splooge blew his load in me, now im having second thoughts." Well thats what happens when your a hussy and give it up too easy. If people had more respect for themselves and others, they would find a partner to be with and there would be a courting process, where the families of both people would meet and there would be a level of dignity to the whole process. This whole western mentality of, "I gotta shop around to find me a man, gotta let him stick it in me, to find out if he is right for me." No honey, thats called being a whore.

What about Mr Spooge? Why isn't he a whore? How may loads has he dropped on the female population with no responsibility? Why is the woman he had sex with more of a whore than he? What makes you think that Mr. Spooge wants to be a daddy?

Sex is about a lot more than "mating." Men and women both have many sexual partners before they decide on one to stay with, and even then 50% end badly. Sex is a journey of self discovery, for both men and women. It is a physical need for affection and it's a social bonding. It's rarely about procreation.

I don't really care if you think that women that put out are hussies and that sex is undignified. Sex is a private thing, and really, no girl is asking your opinions about their morals. But, you're welcome to express them. What you may not do is pry into a woman's bedroom as the sex and womb police.

Originally posted by windword

Women can become pregnant anytime.

No, they can't become pregnant 'anytime'. If she's not risking the fertilization of her egg, then chances of pregnancy are very low (I'm referring to cases of rape).

Sex isn't usually about procreation any more.

It doesn't matter what you want it to be about. The reality of the matter is, as it always has been, that sexual intercourse is the direct process that prompts pregnancy and reproduction. There is always the choice of sterilization if you don't wish to risk pregnancy.

A lot more than 3 times, and she's not banking on an unwanted baby!

If you really didn't want a baby, then the logical thing to do would be to get sterilized or abstain. Every time you consent to sex while fertile, you are choosing the chance of pregnancy. There's just no excuse for playing the victim of circumstances.

So, when you demand that women "take responsibility" you really mean that they should be "victims" to their bodily function.

No one is a 'victim' to their bodily functions, as your body is not an entity choosing to inflict pain on you. Pregnancy and childbirth are natural processes and not an illness or disease. Females of every species bear the future generations. Are we allowing animal abuse by not stopping female animals from having to give birth? When you are directly responsible for a situation, you cannot claim to be a victim of it.

They have to suck it up, because that's the price they pay for having sex. Because to you, pregnancy is the "punishment" for having sex when she didn't want to have a child.

I'm not the one that's claiming pregnancy is some egregious atrocity. That's YOUR mindset speaking. Consequences of your actions are not punishments. That's an extremely childish thing to say. Do you think men should be forced to pay child support?

Forcing a woman who doesn't wan't a child to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term amounts to tyranny and slavery.

There are only two people responsible for a pregnancy. A pregnancy cannot be forced upon you unless you were raped. If you think of pregnancy as 'slavery',....well, you're the one that shackled yourself. There's absolutely no excuse for abortion resulting from consensual sex when there are the options of sterilization and abstinence. People like yourself just love to play the victim and act helpless.

Weren't you the one who said that menstruation is a curse from the gods?

Originally posted by windword

What you may not do is pry into a woman's bedroom as the sex and womb police.

...yet you think you have authority over your child's life.

Originally posted by TempleCat

Innocent unborn what? The unborn fertilized egg? The zygote? The embryo? Is this your excuse for forced incubation?

Once an egg is fertilized, a genetically distinct human being is created. A WOMAN WHO IS NOT FORCED INTO SEX IS NOT FORCED INTO PREGNANCY.

Are a few cells really more important to the Anti-Choice crowd than all else?

You can reduce anyone into something not worthy of rights just by using certain language. Everyone is technically just a clump of cells. It's the same method that slave owners used for slaves and how men once treated women. They were both treated as property, which you labeled the unborn as. The excuse that they were unevolved was used to deny rights, which is what the 'pro-choice' crowd does. Slave owners used 'states rights' as a facade for the 'right' to own slaves, like how 'pro-choicers' use 'women's rights' as a facade for the 'right' to abortion.

Most Anti-Choice people don't even believe in welfare or assistance to help support the children they want forced into this world.

Liberals have unfortunately created a welfare society of moochers, entitlement, irresponsibility, and victimhood. That's why so many people don't feel that they have any obligation to their children. Many are born as a welfare ticket.

Let me reiterate - using birth control IS responsible to begin with.

All that does is lessen the chance of pregnancy. If you would hate to have a child so much that you would consider killing them, then birth control is not enough.

Her body - Her choice.

If abortion is an issue that only affects a woman's body, then how do you explain the major gender embalance in places like China? You still haven't explained why a man should have any responsibility for a woman's choice.

Many, many women really are innocent bystanders when it comes to protecting themselves and then having that protection fail.

No, they're not. They took a chance of pregnancy.

should focus all their energy on better birth control, better education, and better free access to both.

That reminds me of a high school that handed out free condoms- the pregnancy rate increased 40% in just one year. So, you're all for 'staying out of private business', yet you think taxpayers should pay for the lifestyle choices of others?

I think what should be done is government subsidized financial compensation for those who will get themselves sterilized.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by windword

Women can become pregnant anytime.

No, they can't become pregnant 'anytime'. If she's not risking the fertilization of her egg, then chances of pregnancy are very low (I'm referring to cases of rape).

You really need to brush up on your biology

Sperm ejaculated into a woman's vagina can live in a woman's cervical mucus or upper genital tract for three to five days. Fertilization is possible as long as the sperm remain alive. www.mayoclinic.com...

Sex isn't usually about procreation any more.

It doesn't matter what you want it to be about. The reality of the matter is, as it always has been, that sexual intercourse is the direct process that prompts pregnancy and reproduction. There is always the choice of sterilization if you don't wish to risk pregnancy.

First off, lets take me out of the equation as I am well past child bearing age.

Some women do choose sterilization, but it's not for every one.

A lot more than 3 times, and she's not banking on an unwanted baby!

If you really didn't want a baby, then the logical thing to do would be to get sterilized or abstain. Every time you consent to sex while fertile, you are choosing the chance of pregnancy. There's just no excuse for playing the victim of circumstances.

No, not every woman who has sex is "choosing" a chance of pregnancy. Many count on their birth control. If their birth control fails, there are remedies.

So, when you demand that women "take responsibility" you really mean that they should be "victims" to their bodily function.

No one is a 'victim' to their bodily functions, as your body is not an entity choosing to inflict pain on you. Pregnancy and childbirth are natural processes and not an illness or disease. Females of every species bear the future generations. Are we allowing animal abuse by not stopping female animals from having to give birth? When you are directly responsible for a situation, you cannot claim to be a victim of it.

Yes, we are all victims of our biology. If birth control fails, pregnancy doesn't have to mean that a woman has to be a mother, if she doesn't want to. We have the ability and the right to override biology.

You claim that we are not victims of our biology, but then you go on to argue that if a woman has sex she risk pregnancy. How is that not being a victim of biological function? Even with birth control that fails you still want to force the woman to bear the child. How is that not you victimizing someone?

They have to suck it up, because that's the price they pay for having sex. Because to you, pregnancy is the "punishment" for having sex when she didn't want to have a child.

I'm not the one that's claiming pregnancy is some egregious atrocity. That's YOUR mindset speaking. Consequences of your actions are not punishments. That's an extremely childish thing to say. Do you think men should be forced to pay child support?

Of course it is to someone who doesn't want to be a mother! Although I wouldn't use the term atrocity, it's certainly an abomination to the woman who is experiencing an unholy alliance. When a child is neither wanted or welcome, forcing a woman to carry it anyway is the atrocity.

Forcing a woman who doesn't wan't a child to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term amounts to tyranny and slavery.

There are only two people responsible for a pregnancy. A pregnancy cannot be forced upon you unless you were raped. If you think of pregnancy as 'slavery',....well, you're the one that shackled yourself. There's absolutely no excuse for abortion resulting from consensual sex when there are the options of sterilization and abstinence. People like yourself just love to play the victim and act helpless.

A woman's biology is forced on her. Pregnancy is forced on a woman every time birth control fails. Consensual sex is not the same thing as consensual parenting. Having sex is not a commitment to motherhood.

How do you define abortion? Do you consider abortionificants the same as an abortion? How about the morning after pill?

Weren't you the one who said that menstruation is a curse from the gods?

No, that wasn't me. Although the Bible certainly makes it clear that the Hebrew men thought so.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by windword

What you may not do is pry into a woman's bedroom as the sex and womb police.

...yet you think you have authority over your child's life.

I have the authority to decide whether or not my body can be used as a gateway for my child. When and if a child is born, I have authority over that child's life too, you betcha!

(Continued from previous)

Originally posted by Charmed707
Treating people like victims just because they are unhappy with the situations they created for themselves is dangerous. Saying that it's a right to avoid the consequences of your actions is dangerous. Condoning and allowing the murder of innocent human beings is overwhelmingly dangerous.

The Anti-Choice crowd is all about making women and children the victims of their group's desire to control others. If you believe that the moment a sperm enters an egg there's a living, breathing, baby then you are seriously mistaken. You may believe life begins at that moment, and is then a complete child, but that is a belief system. Forcing a belief system into government in order to control its citizens is called a "Theocracy". Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Somalia are a few examples of countries where abortion is illegal or severely restricted. Islamic Law prevails. This is an example of a Theocracy. America is not a Theocracy. Nor do most want it to be. Nor did the founding fathers envision America as such.

Women who are utilizing their right to make responsible choices are facing the consequences head on. There is no avoiding it. Avoiding it would be carrying a child to term while being in denial for 9 months. Most don't do that. Again, taking the morning after pill or going in for very early abortion is not "murdering a child". You are resorting to your belief system again. Forcing your religious or personal beliefs on everyone else is usually frowned upon in this country.

That's why there is no good excuse for abortion when the pregnancy resulted from consensual sex and the mother's life is not in danger.

This is a very naive assumption. There are plenty of "excuses" for not being ready to start a family. Poverty, Homelessness, Divorce, Loss of a job, Abusive relationships, Addiction, and Illness to name a few.

Bristol Palin didn't abstain.

She claimed to practice abstinence before and after her pregnancy. Go figure.

Abortion is NOT an issue that merely affects a woman's 'body' and her future. We can see concrete proof of that in China and other areas where there are millions of missing girls. Why should a father even have to be 'dependable' if the birth of a child is a mere result of the woman's choice?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make about China. China restricts births to one child. This is the government controlling the reproductive rights of its people. Much like the Anti-Choice crowd wants to do here, but in reverse. Both ends of the spectrum are devastating. Many girl babies have died after being born because of this one child law. Families wanted sons, not daughters. So they would murder their child in the true sense and try again. Not a pretty picture. And rumor has it that they perform forced abortions there. Forced abortions are equally as bad as forced birth. Like the Anti-Choice crowd, it seeks to remove the rights of the individual by the government.

Now, onto fathers. Nature, God, Allah, whatever, dictates it is the woman who carries a child. I heard on a TV show called "ER" once that "If men needed abortions, there would be drive-thru windows with beer on tap and ESPN". I can sympathize with men who may think they want the responsibility of a newborn and 18+ years of child rearing, but TPTB didn't give them the equipment to handle it on their own. Women got that job. Maybe someday reproductive science will come up with a way for men to have children on their own. In the mean time, men share 50% of the responsibility of creating that child. When they consent to sex they would do themselves a big favor by remembering that. Once it's done they are at the mercy of the person who nature (or whoever) dictated must make the decision. If she decides she's good to go then his 50% comes to fruition. He may like that. He may not. If he is not taking his own responsibility for birth control then he must accept the consequences. If his birth control fails then he must accept the consequences. The only one to really be mad at is nature (or whoever) that made life so unfair as only to give one the power. That one is the woman. No one else.

No she doesn't. Individuals are created at conception. A fetus is a genetically seperate human being with rights of their own. Fetuses are not any less the child of the father than the mother-not at any stage of development. I'm not any less my father's daughter now than I was in my mother's womb. Genetics are what determines parenthood- not location. Do you not think Siamese twins are two different people?

Again, this is a belief system. A fetus is not a separate human until it is born. Biology 101. It is actually physically connected to the mother until birth. It feeds and lives off of its mother until it can survive on its own as a viable human.

Originally posted by windword

I have the authority to decide whether or not my body can be used as a gateway for my child.

It's very clear why the majority of 'pro-choice' women are 'pro-choice'. It's because it gives them a power-kick. Deciding whether someone else will live or die is the ultimate power, and this gives them the control that they are lacking elsewhere in their life. I have to question the mental stability of any woman who doesn't immediately feel unconditional love and the instinct to protect their child the moment they find out they are pregnant. Once again, there's absolutely no reason why a woman's desire to avoid the consequences of her actions should outweigh their child's right to life.

Surely you don't think men should be obligated to pay for the mother's choice...right?

Originally posted by davidsander
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

 

Another member on this thread has already established that 93% of all abortions are "Casual" abortions.

That 93% is WORLDWIDE. Might want to remember that. Those social reasons can mean a lot depending on what country you are in. Also, there's no such thing as a "Casual abortion". Abortions are not a party. They are a serious and very personal decision. No one goes in to have one lightly. No one in their right mind would imagine that there's anything "casual" about it.

There's also no such thing as being "Pro-Abortion". The only thing there is is "Pro-Choice".

Originally posted by windword
What about Mr Spooge? Why isn't he a whore? How may loads has he dropped on the female population with no responsibility? Why is the woman he had sex with more of a whore than he? What makes you think that Mr. Spooge wants to be a daddy?

Sex is about a lot more than "mating." Men and women both have many sexual partners before they decide on one to stay with, and even then 50% end badly. Sex is a journey of self discovery, for both men and women. It is a physical need for affection and it's a social bonding. It's rarely about procreation.

I don't really care if you think that women that put out are hussies and that sex is undignified. Sex is a private thing, and really, no girl is asking your opinions about their morals. But, you're welcome to express them. What you may not do is pry into a woman's bedroom as the sex and womb police.

I never understood this either. Why do they always make the man out to be the victim of the woman's biology? Did he not know how babies are made? Where does his 50% personal responsibility come into play? Why do they want him to mess around and then tell the woman she has to carry a child for him just because he says so? Why does he get away without persecution? Where the heck is this poor, pitiful, innocent man mentality come from? Seems awfully convenient.

Originally posted by windword

You really need to brush up on your biology

What did I say that wasn't true?

Some women do choose sterilization, but it's not for every one.

It's for anyone who would hate to have a child so much that they would kill them.

No, not every woman who has sex is "choosing" a chance of pregnancy. Many count on their birth control.

As long as they are fertile, yes they are. Birth control is not 100% effective, thus the chance of pregnancy still exists. Birth control only works to LESSEN the chance of pregnancy.

Yes, we are all victims of our biology.

No, no one is a victim of biology and certainly not a victim of situations brought about by their own actions.

You claim that we are not victims of our biology, but then you go on to argue that if a woman has sex she risk pregnancy. How is that not being a victim of biological function?

'Victims' are innocent bystanders. Making choices includes choosing any consequence that may go along with it. Pregnancy is not even an inherently bad thing.

Even with birth control that fails you still want to force the woman to bear the child. How is that not you victimizing someone?

No one forced her to take the risk of becoming pregnant in the first place....yet you want to strip away the very core natural right from a certain segment of the population.

Of course it is to someone who doesn't want to be a mother!

If she would hate to be a mother that much, then why engage in the procreation process while fertile? Petty excuses.

When a child is neither wanted or welcome, forcing a woman to carry it anyway is the atrocity.

What if she gives birth and decides later on when the child is older that it's 'unwelcome'? Would it be just to kill them then?

A woman's biology is forced on her.

Everyone's biology is forced on them. When you feel hunger, thirst, the need to relieve yourself, sexual desire, the need to sleep etc., none of those things are a part of your choices.

Do you condone animal abuse? If not, are you taking part in making sure female animals are not being 'victimized' by 'forced biology'?

Pregnancy is forced on a woman every time birth control fails.

No it's not. She is taking the risk of pregnancy, no matter how small.

Having sex is not a commitment to motherhood.

Then it shouldn't be considered a commitment to fatherhood either, right?

How do you define abortion? Do you consider abortionificants the same as an abortion? How about the morning after pill?

If it terminates a life, then yes it's abortion.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by windword

I have the authority to decide whether or not my body can be used as a gateway for my child.

It's very clear why the majority of 'pro-choice' women are 'pro-choice'. It's because it gives them a power-kick. Deciding whether someone else will live or die is the ultimate power, and this gives them the control that they are lacking elsewhere in their life. I have to question the mental stability of any woman who doesn't immediately feel unconditional love and the instinct to protect their child the moment they find out they are pregnant. Once again, there's absolutely no reason why a woman's desire to avoid the consequences of her actions should outweigh their child's right to life.

Surely you don't think men should be obligated to pay for the mother's choice...right?

Your statement makes no sense. It's the Pro-Choice crowd who advocate for personal responsibility and freedom of choice. The Anti-Choice crowd is the one who advocates for control of others. That sounds far more like a "power-kick" to me. They want the power over an entire nation (or even the world!) to tell another person when they MUST have children. Ready or not. This sounds like it is THEY who are compensating for lack of control elsewhere in their life. I have to question the mental stability of any woman who thinks it's okay for her, a man, or the government to control another woman's right to choose what is best for her life, herself, and her children.

Surely I do think men are obliged to pay for a child they helped conceive. They didn't go into it totally stupid. Most men I know are pretty intelligent. If they aren't thinking the consequences through then they can only blame themselves for the surprise they may get. The ultimate decision is up to them. They can either get a vasectomy or abstain. Otherwise they throw themselves at the mercy of nature, the law, and the burden of a woman's decision.

reply to post by TempleCat

The Anti-Choice crowd is all about making women and children the victims of their group's desire to control others.

Deciding whether someone else will live or die is the ultimate form of control.

If you believe that the moment a sperm enters an egg there's a living, breathing, baby then you are seriously mistaken.

All cells are living. A fetus is a living human being. Humans are constantly developing throughout their life span. It doesn't matter if it's a baby, teenager, or adult. Being less developed is not a reason for the denial of rights.

Forcing a belief system into government in order to control its citizens is called a "Theocracy".

You are choosing to dehumanize a certain segment of the population under the guise of protecting your own rights- similar to slavery.

This is a very naive assumption. There are plenty of "excuses" for not being ready to start a family. Poverty, Homelessness, Divorce, Loss of a job, Abusive relationships, Addiction, and Illness to name a few.

If you feel that you are in a position to take the risk of pregnancy, then you are ready to 'start a family'. Those are selfish excuses.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make about China.

You claimed that abortion is only an issue concerning 'women's bodies'.

I heard on a TV show called "ER" once that "If men needed abortions, there would be drive-thru windows with beer on tap and ESPN".

Women don't need abortions unless their life is in danger. If men beared children, feminists would still claim that abortion is ultimately the woman's choice....because they are just self-serving oppurtunists.

In the mean time, men share 50% of the responsibility of creating that child.

Wrong. Men share 50% of the responsibility of creating 'a few cells'. All they do is contribute sperm. Growing 'an actual child' and giving birth is the responsibility and choice (and ONLY the choice) of the woman. Once a woman is pregnant, that is a result of the choices of both the man and the woman. Once a woman finds out she's pregnant, it is up to only her what to do with the pregnancy. If she decides to allow that clump of cells to grow, then the 'actual child' that develops is a result of her choice and ONLY her choice. Don't you think women should be financially independent and pay for their own choices?

When they consent to sex they would do themselves a big favor by remembering that.

Why is that a good enough excuse for men to have to take responsibility for the children they create while a woman who is expected to do the same is a 'slave'? If the fact that men consent to sex is a good enough reason for them to be forced to pay child support for 18 years, then it's a good enough excuse for women to be 'forced' into a measly 9 months of pregnancy.

Once it's done they are at the mercy of the person who nature (or whoever) dictated must make the decision.

Nature didn't dictate any 'decision' that feminists created. I can't believe you have the nerve to talk about 'control' when you think men should be slaves to the personal decisions of entitled women. Why are women not at the mercy of nature (pregnancy)?

If she decides she's good to go then his 50% comes to fruition.

If you don't have the obligation to sacrifice your body to bear his child when he wants it, then he has absolutely no obligation to sacrifice his income and resources just because you want him to. Modern women are supposedly financially independent to boot. They don't need men to financially provide for them.

If he is not taking his own responsibility for birth control then he must accept the consequences. If his birth control fails then he must accept the consequences.

Why should men have to accept the consequences of failed birth control while women don't have to?

The only one to really be mad at is nature (or whoever) that made life so unfair as only to give one the power. That one is the woman.

That 'whoever' is insane feminists. Thanks for confirming what I have always thought- that pro-choicers are just trying to make up for a sense of powerlessness that they have in their life. Feminists like to decide when biology does and doesn't matter. When it comes to reproduction and violence against women, it matters. When it comes to the military, sports etc, it's suddenly irrelevant.

[continued]

reply to post by TempleCat



....continued

A fetus is not a separate human until it is born. Biology 101. It is actually physically connected to the mother until birth. It feeds and lives off of its mother until it can survive on its own as a viable human.

So you think abortion is okay at any stage in the pregnancy? Genetics are what determine individuals. Siamese twins may be attached, but they are two separate individuals. Furthermore, a baby can't survive on its own for a while after its born. It has to live off of someone else.

Originally posted by TempleCat

Surely I do think men are obliged to pay for a child they helped conceive.

'Children' are not conceived. Children are grown through the choice of the woman. The only thing the father did was ejaculate. The mother is the one who decided to grow a child within her body that would need to be taken care of for at least 18 years. The father is an innocent bystander. To force him to pay for a child he made no choice in growing is what you like to call 'slavery'. How can you dictate what someone does with their paycheck?

They didn't go into it totally stupid. Most men I know are pretty intelligent. If they aren't thinking the consequences through then they can only blame themselves for the surprise they may get.

Women didn't go into it totally stupid. Most women I know are pretty intelligent. If they aren't thinking the consequences through, then they can only blame themselves for the surprise they may get.

The ultimate decision is up to them. They can either get a vasectomy or abstain. Otherwise they throw themselves at the mercy of nature, the law, and the burden of a woman's decision.

Since pregnancy is an issue surrounding women's bodies, the ultimate decision is up to them. They can either get their tubes tied or abstain. Otherwise they throw themselves at the mercy of nature, the constitution, and the burden of the right to life.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by TempleCat

 

Deciding whether someone else will live or die is the ultimate form of control.

Again - a belief system that thinks a fertilized egg is a "person".

All cells are living. A fetus is a living human being. Humans are constantly developing throughout their life span. It doesn't matter if it's a baby, teenager, or adult. Being less developed is not a reason for the denial of rights.

Being the host of a fertilized egg is not a reason for denial of rights to an actual viable human being.

You are choosing to dehumanize a certain segment of the population under the guise of protecting your own rights- similar to slavery.

Nope - Forcing another person to do your bidding by forced incubation is slavery.

If you feel that you are in a position to take the risk of pregnancy, then you are ready to 'start a family'. Those are selfish excuses.

Nope - Already covered birth control and personal responsibility therein. The right to choose is not just done for "selfish reasons".

You claimed that abortion is only an issue concerning 'women's bodies'.

Women's bodies carry a pregnancy. Therefore - whether she carries it or not is ultimately up to her. I recall saying there are many issues that factor in.

Women don't need abortions unless their life is in danger. If men beared children, feminists would still claim that abortion is ultimately the woman's choice....because they are just self-serving oppurtunists.

Hogwash and belligerence. Next...

Wrong. Men share 50% of the responsibility of creating 'a few cells'. All they do is contribute sperm. Growing 'an actual child' and giving birth is the responsibility and choice (and ONLY the choice) of the woman. Once a woman is pregnant, that is a result of the choices of both the man and the woman. Once a woman finds out she's pregnant, it is up to only her what to do with the pregnancy. If she decides to allow that clump of cells to grow, then the 'actual child' that develops is a result of her choice and ONLY her choice. Don't you think women should be financially independent and pay for their own choices?

Um... no. Biology 101. Men contribute 50% of the genetics. Please study up on Human Reproduction!
No, again, because the man also has 50% responsibility in getting her pregnant in the first place. You play, you pay. Whether it be emotionally or financially. The woman pays, why shouldn't the man?

Why is that a good enough excuse for men to have to take responsibility for the children they create while a woman who is expected to do the same is a 'slave'? If the fact that men consent to sex is a good enough reason for them to be forced to pay child support for 18 years, then it's a good enough excuse for women to be 'forced' into a measly 9 months of pregnancy.

You do know men don't own women in America, right? Also, if she's forced into carrying a child to term for 9 (not so measly) months he's going to end up paying for the support of that child anyway. So either way he's going to pay. Should men be responsible fathers or not? You're advocating for control of women and then telling them it's the only reason men should take responsibility. I don't think you're really thinking any of this through.

Nature didn't dictate any 'decision' that feminists created. I can't believe you have the nerve to talk about 'control' when you think men should be slaves to the personal decisions of entitled women. Why are women not at the mercy of nature (pregnancy)?

You're confused again. Nature dictates that the woman carries the child. What's right for the woman and the child is paramount. If he really cared about the person he was doing the horizontal bop with he would be supportive of her struggles to make the right choice for them all, anyway.

If you don't have the obligation to sacrifice your body to bear his child when he wants it, then he has absolutely no obligation to sacrifice his income and resources just because you want him to. Modern women are supposedly financially independent to boot. They don't need men to financially provide for them.

Children should have their father's emotional and/or financial support.

That 'whoever' is insane feminists. Thanks for confirming what I have always thought- that pro-choicers are just trying to make up for a sense of powerlessness that they have in their life. Feminists like to decide when biology does and doesn't matter. When it comes to reproduction, it matter. When it comes to hitting women, the military, sports etc, it's suddenly irrelevant.

Again, hogwash and belligerence. Your personal skewed opinion does not equal reality.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by TempleCat

 

....continued

A fetus is not a separate human until it is born. Biology 101. It is actually physically connected to the mother until birth. It feeds and lives off of its mother until it can survive on its own as a viable human.

So you think abortion is okay at any stage in the pregnancy? Genetics are what determine individuals. Siamese twins may be attached, but they are two separate individuals. Furthermore, a baby can't survive on its own for a while after its born. It has to live off of someone else.

Depending on the circumstances, maybe. Babies born before about 32 weeks gestation are going to have a very hard time surviving outside the womb. If the child has a very good chance of surviving with medical help outside the womb then I believe it should be carried to term. After 32 weeks then it depends on if the child is still living or has a serious birth defect that will cause it to die in utero or die after birth (ie; babies born without a brain and other serious abnormalities).

The problem with Anti-Choice laws is that they often encompass so much that they lead to far more suffering and death than before. A woman carrying around a dead fetus can lead to infection and serious complications. A woman in danger of miscarrying and bleeding out is another example. Some of these can lead to hysterectomies or other complications that render her unable to have children again. Some laws can force a woman to give birth only to watch her newborn die a painful death. Why? Because the idea of a growing fetus is ALWAYS more important to Anti-Choicers than the children themselves.

What percent of abortions are done in the case of rape or incest or to preserve the life of the mother?

reply to post by MeesterB


what does it matter if it's .5% or 95% that may die in childbirth. all the woman is gonna be focused on, all her husband, the children she has that are looking to her for their care are gonna be focused on, is that she is no longer with them, that there was a way to prevent that death, only society deemed the unborn child to be of greater value than her and let her die!!! leaving hubby alone to work his arse off while seeing to it that the kids were taken care of, the homework was done, the baths were given, and all the other stuff that mom used to do.

as far as the idea of if you don't want kids, don't have the sex....
well, I am still waiting for the religions to change the words in their holy books, giving women the right to say no!!!
till that happens, I don't see that as a valid argument.

as far as men having the right to force a women to bring the child into the word....well, if the women does happen to be one of that 5% or whatever and ends up dying or being permanently disabled by doing so, can we hold the man responsible....make him play mommy to any kids that might have been dependent on her, pay for her support if she ends up being disabled?? with no stings attached whatsoever, no obligations or expectations directed at her???

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
...I do think it should be left up to the woman...

You got that right ...

What about Mr Spooge? Why isn't he a whore? How may loads has he dropped on the female population with no responsibility? Why is the woman he had sex with more of a whore than he? What makes you think that Mr. Spooge wants to be a daddy?

Sex is about a lot more than "mating." Men and women both have many sexual partners before they decide on one to stay with, and even then 50% end badly. Sex is a journey of self discovery, for both men and women. It is a physical need for affection and it's a social bonding. It's rarely about procreation.

I don't really care if you think that women that put out are hussies and that sex is undignified. Sex is a private thing, and really, no girl is asking your opinions about their morals. But, you're welcome to express them. What you may not do is pry into a woman's bedroom as the sex and womb police

If a man gets a woman pregnant in this society, he will have responsibility. Sex is not more than about mating. Humans with their feeble minds pretend its about pleasure and vetting a partner, but no, your wrong. Sex is about pregnancy and pregnancy is about life. A parallel we could draw here, is eating. eating is very pleasurable, if you havnt eaten in 12 or 14 hours, try cooking yourself a nice healthy meal and eating it. Probably one of the most pleasurable things you will do all day. but eating isnt about pleasure at all, its about life. its about continuing your life.

Your very right, no woman is asking me about their morals in the bedroom, and I would agree I have no right, and at the same time, I am not asking a woman her opinion on murder. I am telling her murder is wrong. If you don't want a kid, don't have sex. Womb police lol. Did you know a womnas chance of committing suicide goes up after she has an abortion? Certain types of cancer risk goes up too. Whatever, this is all a product of American, no muss no fuss. Americans want to do everything the easy way. I want the sex but not the kid, I'll just murder it!

For me, I will find a woman who isnt a whore, and doesnt believe in murdering children, that will be a fine woman for me.

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


Impose morals? How about imposing your morals of murder? Ya, im a monster for believeing in self control and willpower. Abstaining from an activity that you have no business partaking in, because a mother who aborts her child is obviously not ready for the consequences. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.