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