It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Men's rights to Women's reproductive organs - You don't have any.

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty



but you dont have a right to force another human being against her will to bring the child to term.


Yeah but no woman has the right to force fatherhood on a man who doesn't want to be a father either.



You are absolutely right. Ive already agreed with that point.




posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
You are right about a woman having final rights over her own body, but shouldn't a woman also be kind enough to consider the perspectives of those around her, including the man and the baby, when making her decision? I try to consider other people's perspectives when making decisions, I find it makes me a better person and not a dick.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 



Originally posted by Myendica
so we can abort up to, what.. The age of 9? Wen can a child survive on its own?


When it can be viable outside the uterus. "Surviving on its own", in this context, means it's able to breathe and live without the physical support of the woman's body.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty



but you dont have a right to force another human being against her will to bring the child to term.


Yeah but no woman has the right to force fatherhood on a man who doesn't want to be a father either.


Find me one case where a female raped a male, got pregnant, then made the man take responsibility for the baby.
Where are women forcing fatherhood on any men? What planet does that happen on?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Myendica

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Op is absolutely right. Not sure where the law says is the last change to abort but the fact of the matter is that a baby is not a living being untill it can survive on it's own.
cool, so we can abort up to, what.. The age of 9? Wen can a child survive on its own? My 19 month old is a pain.. Should I just do what the op said and "nip it in butt?" or "bud".


Not exactly. A baby is a parasite untill it can breathe on it's own and consume foods other that provided by it's host. Once born they can easily be "taken care" by anyone leaving the host to do as they please.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jepic

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by Socrato
No one would argue that a woman has a right to her body, but when she agreed to have sex with a man she agreed to risk getting pregnant.


In the age of the 21st century, risk of pregnancy in the fist world isnt as high as what it was. We've has such a thing as the sexual revolution in which women could embrace their bodies and sexual needs without constant threat of pregnancy. When she agree'd to have sex its very unlikely she was agreeing to risk pregnancy, she was more than likely agreeing to show physical affection to another human being - Yano, like were suppose to. If you only have sex to procreate then i feel sorry for you.



A baby is a separate entity which is NOT the woman's body.


That "baby" cannot survive without the woman's body, so by rights, she's laying down the law here, not the father and not the "baby"



It is a new body created by the man AND woman.


A man jacked off and he's got bragging rights for doing Sweet F.A for 9 months? NOPE. Its in her body and if she doesn't want it then like i say, TOUGH LUCK. Perhaps god should have given you a vagina?


Yes it happens to reside inside the woman's body


Its not coincidental my love, there's probably a good reason why dont have the capacity to give birth. Her body, her choice.




It's not about whether she was agreeing to risk pregnancy or not. It's that when a female and male have sex there is a risk that she will get pregnant. Just because she did it for pleasure and not to have a baby doesn't mean that if she gets pregnant she has full rights to the decision making for the baby. I mean to think that would even be hypocritical on her part. She had sex with a man to have pleasure and not to get pregnant, yet if she gets pregnant she controls the baby's destiny anyway. No. That is absolutely unfair: And we should all strive to make this planet we live in a fairer place to live. Not make it unfairer because life is already unfair.


EPIC JEPIC
Melt the so called progressives' retinas with your light, burning bright and loud



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


ha.. Cause all isms are bad. Feminism.. Racism. Is there even such a thing as "malism?". Im not saying a women cant have an abortion, but the op is on awitch hunt to prove she can keep here ego intact with such one sided view ism.



My mission is to preserve a woman's rights to control over her own body. Its not a witch hunt. You know how most men feel about having people take a flap of skin off their penis, well guess what? Women have a problem with men trying to own and command their reproductive organs.


I wish there was never rape, and I wish there was never abortion. But.. I cant stop them. I can only try and tell them to mke conscious and well thought out decisions.. Which for some reason makes people upset when they have to think of others before making decisions.



A rational woman will consider her partner's feelings, but if she decides she doesn't want to have a child a man has no right to dictate differently. You cant force her to bare children. Move along, find a woman that does.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Jepic
 



Originally posted by Jepic
Both parties should only have sex if they have accepted the fact that there is a risk that she will get pregnant and also accepted the fact that they have to take accountability if the worst case scenario arises out of casual sex.


That's a great personal standard for you to set for yourself and any woman you have sex with. But it simply cannot be forced or her or on society. When you have sex with a woman, and your sperm goes into HER body, you are, in essence, GIVING UP your right to what happens for the next 9 months. You have to know that. Make your decisions accordingly.


So basically your ideology is as follows.

1. Both partners decided to have sex with a risk that there is going to be a pregancy. But if there is a pregnancy, it's enitrely the man's fault.
2. And she decides what happens with the baby.

Bottom line. He is responsible for impregnating her. She is not. For a bonus she gets to have the last say on what happens to the baby.

Well are we living in a world of chocolate and roses, are we...



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


*nipped in the bud. Although nipping in the butt would be funny.

If you don't want to give your body as a part of your contract, then don't get married. Problem is, people forget what marriage is about.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
21st century woman can have her loving man give her oral sex or use a vibrator if she is so in NEED of sexual pleasure but doesn't want to risk getting pregnant. The "pill" is fine for women who like to disrupt their hormones and live unnatural existences just so they can have their sexual pleasures met.

I'm very glad for the wife I have who ACTUALLY has respect for her body which she has shown by not having sex until she married me and not taking a pill to avoid adult consequences of adult actions.

I feel sorry for all the little children out there trapped in adult bodies brainwashed by the media to think they have sexual pleasure needs. I feel even more sorry for their children and the society they pollute with their murderous ways.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Let's watch the tone people.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
You are right about a woman having final rights over her own body, but shouldn't a woman also be kind enough to consider the perspectives of those around her, including the man and the baby, when making her decision?



Absolutely. Any rational women would talk to her partner about the decision.



I try to consider other people's perspectives when making decisions, I find it makes me a better person and not a dick.


That's very human of you.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Well, I believe if someone is married than there should be joint rights with more consideration given to the woman. In all other cases the main consideration should always be given to the woman. There is no way that a relationship between two people is going to work if one person is given power by law over the other. This has to be something a couple works out, not an individual if a continued relationship is to be desired.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Sorry men, you just don't have any say, if it was in your body, then the woman wouldn't have a say.

Let me tell you, my first child was conceived to a married man, he knew I wasn't on any birth control, we took our chances.

I fell pregnant, he wanted me to have an abortion......Guess what, it was my choice to keep the baby, what he wanted didn't even come into it, and never would have, I was the one carrying the life inside me, not the other way around, men must never loose sight of this.

Before you all bleat on about another humans rights, it is first and foremost the right of the person who is pregnant to have carte blanche over the pregnancy's future, end of, if you don't like be born again as woman !

Sorry to be so blunt, but thats how it is, and how it should be in my opinion, no woman should ever allow herself to feel manipulated to carry an unwanted pregnancy, just as no woman should ever be manipulated to end one, and believe me, there are enough men out there who would rather see a woman terminate, than continue with a pregnancy.

Ok I'll be off now .
edit on 26-8-2012 by solargeddon because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-8-2012 by intrepid because: Offensive content removed.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 



Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
As a man I don't have any rights in regards to your reproductive organs, so we agree on that, but I do have rights to the unborn innocent human being that I am 50% responsible for creating.


If you want a 6 week old fetus, then she can remove it and give it to you. But you CANNOT use her body to incubate your fetus for you. Unless there's a legal agreement up front, of course.



It isn't about your ovaries, it's about the respect for and preservation of innocent life.


You also cannot dictate that others have respect for the same things you do. If she doesn't share your respect, then there's nothing you can do to make her.

To force a woman to carry and bear a child that she doesn't want is nothing more than sexual slavery. Welcome to 2012, where a woman cannot be forced to give up her autonomy.


I agree with you. I was only clarifying that the debate isn't about ovaries, it's about life. I realize that I can't literally force a woman to carry a child if she doesn't want to, and I realize that others may not share my views on life or when life actually begins. I am married with three young kids, so this debate doesn't involve me. I made sure that I would never have to be involved in such a situation by marrying a woman who shares my values. I don't think abortion should even be a political issue to be honest, but I do think that it is a state's rights issue and not a federal one.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


Thanks
. That's about all I have to say. I agree with you, then.
Edit: Sorry to imply you wouldn't be willing to consider another persons input.
edit on 26-8-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Not another abortion thread.....

Why don't we just let the men eat the babies like lions do? Problem solved.

/sarcasm



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
You are right about a woman having final rights over her own body, but shouldn't a woman also be kind enough to consider the perspectives of those around her, including the man and the baby, when making her decision? I try to consider other people's perspectives when making decisions, I find it makes me a better person and not a dick.


This discussion is being manipulated to benefit the "progressive agenda"

The progressive agenda is to convnce westerners that they shouldn't even THINK of breeding and meanwhile slowly sterilize you with chemicals in foods ..
But we should also give all our money through taxes to africa!



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


i never got a say in my circumcision. And I never tried to force a woman to do anything. But it seems only womens opinions matter..



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


Agreeing to that point is one thing, it is also against the law... if a woman gets pregnant and decides without his consent to bear that child to term she can LEGALLY hold him responsible for said child for up to the next 22 years of that childs life.

Until that law changes, then the man should be entitled the exact same rights from the same consentual sexual relationship, whether it only lasted 7 minutes or not... if she gets pregnant, he should have the right to say YES I want this child.... since he does NOT have the right to say no...

take away that legality on the man, then you can take it away for the woman too.... until then, it is not a fair system because ONLY the woman has any rights!

If she didnt want to chance pregancy she should not have taken willingly that chance!




top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join