A question for people who are pro-abortion

reply to post by James1982


What a load of sexist drivel. You pretend to be moral, but you are just ranting the usual patriarchal misogynist clap-trap.

It is horrendous to think young men actually believe this rubbish. So many clichés. Like - if a woman get pregnant it is her own fault, A woman should take responsibility.... Like it doesn't take 2 to tango?

You need to sit down and have a good long think about the stupidity of some of your ridiculous, ignorant, and down right divisive male chauvinistic drivel.

Originally posted by Honor93

in case you don't know, one (just 1) pregnancy changes a woman for LIFE, whether or not the child survives to delivery.

Awe...a 'ruined' body. Still not as bad as dealing with the loss of a child for the rest of your life.

it is not a question of I or YOU, it is what is the best outcome for ALL involved.
not one entity should be excluded unless the circumstances warrant such an exclusion.

I think you need to express your position more coherently.

reply to post by Charmed707

Do YOU think men should be forced to pay child support for 18 years?

dude, this thread isn't about child support and now i'm sorry i mentioned it.
please, stay on topic.

the relevant question was avoided rather answered and i'm sure i'm not the only one who noticed.

and btw, for you to think 18yrs is the 'limit' is laughable ... i sure hope you don't end up facing the reality cause many are still paying, 30 yrs later.

if you don't want the 'burden', keep your pants on ... see how easy that is ??
your 'protection' methods never fail, do they ???

the rest is clueless rubbish.

@ James1982
who are these "pro-abortion" people, exactly ???
can't say as i've ever met one.

Originally posted by Honor93

yes ... and equally, both men & women have been legally obligated to pay for a child they never participated in creating

I've never heard of a woman being forced to pay child support for a child that's not biologically her's.

happens every day and with 'women' who have barely reached puberty

so, why isn't hell breakin' loose already ???

I meant legally expected, which you should have been able to tell from context.

Originally posted by Honor93

what difference does it make if a woman thinks it's 100% her choice/decision ??

That's a huge part of the abortion issue.

sorry dude, that's a 2-way street no matter how you look at it.

A man's choice only results in the creation of a 'blob of cells' that has no rights. The creation of an 'actual person' that has rights is 100% the result of a woman's choice.

User-generated sites like ATS should have mandatory IQ tests to join.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by Honor93

in case you don't know, one (just 1) pregnancy changes a woman for LIFE, whether or not the child survives to delivery.

Awe...a 'ruined' body.

clueless

Still not as bad as dealing with the loss of a child for the rest of your life.

if the father has no voice in the decision, how is that anyone's fault but his ??

it is not a question of I or YOU, it is what is the best outcome for ALL involved.
not one entity should be excluded unless the circumstances warrant such an exclusion.

I think you need to express your position more coherently.

more coherently ??
which words were too big for you ?

no entity involved (m/f/u) should be excluded from the decision making process.
it is not a decision for you, i or any other.
if circumstances warrant an exclusion, then so be it.
(rape, incest or any other unlawful copulations)
is that more 'coherent' for you ?

Originally posted by Honor93

and btw, for you think 18yrs is the 'limit' is laughable

For MANDATORY payments- it is.

if you don't want the 'burden', keep your pants on

That's the same line many pro-lifers use. Either it's an acceptable excuse to 'force' parents to take responsibility, or it's not. It's not 'acceptable for one scenario but not the other'.

Originally posted by Honor93
if the father has no voice in the decision, how is that anyone's fault but his ??

If the woman has no voice in the decision, how is that anyone's fault but her's?

more coherently ??
which words were too big for you ?

Try typing like a mentally stable adult and not a rambling 9-year-old.

reply to post by Charmed707

I've never heard of a woman being forced to pay child support for a child that's not biologically her's

really ???
never heard of a woman paying support for adopted children, eh ?
google can be your friend

don't suppose you've read about the custody/support issues between the 2 women who biologically produced a child but only one of the 2 is the biological contributor ??

"legally" expected happens with parents of minors EVERY day, what's your point ?
Obamacare provides for the procedure sans parental input, notification or 'consent', did you know that ?

reply to post by Honor93


In those scenarios, those women DECIDED that they wanted to be a parent. Only a man can be opposed to becoming a parent and be legally FORCED to take responsibility for it.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by Honor93

what difference does it make if a woman thinks it's 100% her choice/decision ??

That's a huge part of the abortion issue.

please clarify your thoughts here ... it makes -0- sense.

what 'abortion issue' ?? it is legal and should remain as such.
are you suggesting that if a woman thinks it's 100% her decision then she should be denied ?
if so, why ?

who in the world taught you this ?

A man's choice only results in the creation of a 'blob of cells' that has no rights

The creation of an 'actual person' that has rights is 100% the result of a woman's choice.

i really don't follow which straw you're reaching for here

some men choose to enhance and participate in the pregnancy experience, some don't.
as for 'developing the fetus', with or without the father, nature does its own thing.

if vocabulary is still hindering you, think of it in terms of reality ... we (m/f) created a parasite. nature developed it into this Living, Breathing, Human being ... it's simple really.
once you can accept the reality, it is much easier to rise above the 'emotional' arguments of many.

If the pro abortion argument is that the child, fetus, sac of cells whatever is dependent on the mother then it's the mothers body.

Then why are we not killing of all dependent humans at will? What is the difference?

Those on feeding tubes, in wheel chairs, in comas, those with cerebral palsy, severely handicapped, brain injured, on welfare?

How can make that distinction. Either killing a human is murder or it isn't. Calling it something else doesn't change that fact.

Imagine all the resources that could be freed up if we get rid of everyone who can't make it on their own......wouldn't that be civilized of us?

The true test of being human is how you treat the most at risk.

And don't come at me with the Roe v Wade thing.

There are plenty of laws on the books that are wrong. Just because its a law passed by idiots doesn't make it right. And laws can be changed.

Unfortunately, there are more selfish, morally corrupt people in the US right now, than those who believe in protecting the innocent.

Anyone who could trade responsibility for murder is soulless as far as I am concerned.

We treat animals better than humans in this world.

Originally posted by Honor93

please clarify your thoughts here ... it makes -0- sense.

Pro-choicers frame their argument around the idea that no one has a right to tell a woman what to do with 'her body'.

what 'abortion issue' ?? it is legal and should remain as such.

There are restrictions varying by state. It will always be a controversial issue.

reply to post by Charmed707

For MANDATORY payments- it is

not automatically it isn't.
and considering most have more than ONE child, unless you think they were all born the same year them 18yrs extend quite some years after and under MANDATORY order.
been there, done that.

reply to post by Charmed707

It's not 'acceptable for one scenario but not the other'.

then why don't you accept abortion as a viable solution to the way things used to be?

making abortion illegal isn't going to stop them from happening, you do realize this don't you ?
so, which do you prefer ??

reply to post by Honor93


Stop playing with semantics and at least ACT like you have adult-level reading comprehension and reasoning skills.

Originally posted by Honor93

making abortion illegal isn't going to stop them from happening, you do realize this don't you ?

Making anything illegal doesn't stop it from happening. You don't have a point.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by Honor93
if the father has no voice in the decision, how is that anyone's fault but his ??

If the woman has no voice in the decision, how is that anyone's fault but her's?

more coherently ??
which words were too big for you ?

Try typing like a mentally stable adult and not a rambling 9-year-old.

huh ?? when doesn't an adult woman have a voice in the decision ?
please explain.

you first

Originally posted by Honor93

huh ?? when doesn't an adult woman have a voice in the decision ?
please explain.

Pro-choicers act like a woman who is 'forced' into carrying a child to full-term is somehow being victimized.

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by Honor93

 

In those scenarios, those women DECIDED that they wanted to be a parent. Only a man can be opposed to becoming a parent and be legally FORCED to take responsibility for it.

what man ever has been 'forced' to take responsiblity for being a parent ??
paying a bill is not the same thing, try again.

for most of the years of my life, the biggest complaint has been regarding 'fatherless families', so which is it ??
are they there, taking responsibility and being held accountable or have they bailed and been subsequently 'forced' to contribute financially ?

with regard to development of the child, there is no comparison between the two.

as a caveat, i will say this ... imho, if the contributing male (barring irregular copulations) does not approve of the birth and the woman insists, then there should be legal framework alleviating his responsibility.

however, that circles right back to communication and cooperation.
and just how much of that is going 'round ??