Abortion: Why Men Don't Get A Say

[Madeline]

That's why taking that requirement for child support away from the man who does NOT want the pregnancy to come to term is not only in the best interest of Choice, but the fair thing to do.

Its interesting to me that you girls are actually more sympathethic to horn-dogs than most men are.

How do I support this POV? Is there a poll of men that agree and disagree on the issue?

No, I couldn't find one: However, I can find a LOT of legislation passed into law by men.

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

Interesting that you defend the morals of men, Si. I agree, BTW...we have an accidential child in my family and I have no doubt my nephew felt/feels trapped. But where are you as dilloduck refers to women as "skanks" and trashes them for getting pregnant without planning to?

Why are you not standing up for sexually active women as you are for sexually active men?

 

[Samson]

That's why taking that requirement for child support away from the man who does NOT want the pregnancy to come to term is not only in the best interest of Choice, but the fair thing to do.

Its interesting to me that you girls are actually more sympathethic to horn-dogs than most men are.

How do I support this POV? Is there a poll of men that agree and disagree on the issue?

No, I couldn't find one: However, I can find a LOT of legislation passed into law by men.

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

 

[Si modo]

dilloduck wrote:

Because the woman DOES get to choose. Why do you continue to ignore the fact that we are talking about women who consented to sex, not raped ?

Why is the woman's right to choose objectionable? She gets to choose all the other things her body does, just as any grown man does. I'm mystified at this anger towards women merely because their reproductive system allows them options men do not have.

That's more or less the biology of the species. Go hate on God and pray we develop asexual reproduction; it would make just as much damned sense.

Ducky? Angry at women????










I guess we all need to get used to you arguing with yourself publicly. But, it IS freaky bizarre. Maybe meds might help.

 

[Si modo]

Its interesting to me that you girls are actually more sympathethic to horn-dogs than most men are.

How do I support this POV? Is there a poll of men that agree and disagree on the issue?

No, I couldn't find one: However, I can find a LOT of legislation passed into law by men.

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

Oh, I see what you are saying. Thanks.

I don't think it's so much sympathy for a man whore as it is acceptance that they exist. Shit happens and shitty persons are often behind it.

 

[Si modo]

Its interesting to me that you girls are actually more sympathethic to horn-dogs than most men are.

How do I support this POV? Is there a poll of men that agree and disagree on the issue?

No, I couldn't find one: However, I can find a LOT of legislation passed into law by men.

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

Interesting that you defend the morals of men, Si. I agree, BTW...we have an accidential child in my family and I have no doubt my nephew felt/feels trapped. But where are you as dilloduck refers to women as "skanks" and trashes them for getting pregnant without planning to?

Why are you not standing up for sexually active women as you are for sexually active men?

What the fuck are you going on about now?

 

[syrenn]

Captive vessels? Thimble full of cells cesarean sectioned out?

Yes pix. vessel was your choice of words for a woman. If a woman is forced to give birth then that is a captive vessel. As far as i am concerned life does not start until it is birthed. Cesarean section is NOT a violent abortion, it is a form of birth. If men are whining about wanting a child, fine, have the cells removed and given to the father to gestate.

Do you understand that men can't gestate them? Sort of an empty offer don't you think ?

Of course i understand that. So the sole persons decision to carry or not, is the woman's. End of story.

 

[syrenn]

Captive vessels? Thimble full of cells cesarean sectioned out?

Yes pix. vessel was your choice of words for a woman. If a woman is forced to give birth then that is a captive vessel. As far as i am concerned life does not start until it is birthed. Cesarean section is NOT a violent abortion, it is a form of birth. If men are whining about wanting a child, fine, have the cells removed and given to the father to gestate.

This is just looking to justify your position with no real facts to your supposition, it is just silly. The woman having all the power is just not right, it is unequal and unfair. But this isn't really about what's fair is it?

No more then it is for you justifying your opinion pix.

 

[Samson]

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

Oh, I see what you are saying. Thanks.

I don't think it's so much sympathy for a man whore as it is acceptance that they exist. Shit happens and shitty persons are often behind it.

Why do you think there should be no consequence for men's irresponsible behaviour?

Let me explain the motive behind my POV:

I have a daughter, who is 8 years old. I have friends whose daughters are 14, 16, 18 years old.

My friends warn that SOON I will need to begin chasing away horn dogs.

There is little enough already to contradict irresponsible behaviour. Taking away the little responsibility represented by child support payments contradicts MUCH MORE than the societal goal of making fathers responsible for their progeny.

 

[syrenn]

Now, a baby is equal to a wart...got it

Stop trying to bring religion into it, nobody else has but you.

A zygote is not a baby, PixieStix. Only through application of your values, your emotionality and/or your religion does that tissue acquire the significance you want to imbue it with. And then you want to elevate the zygote to a position so high, it warrants government action to severely curtail the rights of the woman to decide what will happen to her own body!

You also seem willing to do this where the male who impregnated her is concerned. The irony of your "Geez anyone else but her" POV as to who gets to decide what she will do is that the criminal in the Op sought to use force to compel his girlfriend to get an abortion she did not want.

So I guess in your view, government gets to choose and men get to choose, but the woman herself does not?

How is this even remotely rational?

Not one person has convinced me of why the woman gets to choose and why the man does not. Choice only applies to the female gender according to some of you. If the same principle is applied equally then he should also have a choice because the child would be depending on him for sustenance.

When a man can carry a pregnancy to term within his own body, then he as all the power of choosing to carry one or not.

Again pix, if the father wants the cells from a Cessation section he is more then welcome to gestate them for himself, by himself.

If a man does not want to be financially responsible for a baby then the man has the option to keep his sperm to himself.

 

[Madeline]

A man does not have to be a 'horn dog' to find himself in an unexpected pregnancy situation.

And, I'm not really understanding your question(s). Could you please clarify?

Interesting that you defend the morals of men, Si. I agree, BTW...we have an accidential child in my family and I have no doubt my nephew felt/feels trapped. But where are you as dilloduck refers to women as "skanks" and trashes them for getting pregnant without planning to?

Why are you not standing up for sexually active women as you are for sexually active men?

What the fuck are you going on about now?

See the bolded language in your post, above.

 

[syrenn]

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

I am sympathetic to neither. Both are responsible for the situation. Once a man lets go of his sperm and gives it to a woman, he has no more say as to what that woman does with her body.

Support of the baby is a separate issue. If the man is flat telling the woman within the first month he does not want the baby and she chooses to carry that baby, then she should better be damn well able to take care of it all on her own. She knows up front that the father does not want to pay for his share in the responsibility of the baby. That being said, it does not excuse the father from his finical responsibility.

 

[Madeline]

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

I am sympathetic to neither. Both are responsible for the situation. Once a man lets go of his sperm and gives it to a woman, he has no more say as to what that woman does with her body.

Support of the baby is a separate issue. If the man is flat telling the woman within the first month he does not want the baby and she chooses to carry that baby, then she should better be damn well able to take care of it all on her own. She knows up front that the father does not want to pay for his share in the responsibility of the baby. That being said, it does not excuse the father from his finical responsibility.

I disagree, for a whole raft of reasons. Here's just one.....

Accused killer of attorney Margaret Allen goes on trial | cincinnati.com | Cincinnati.Com

This murder victim was a friend of one of my law school classmates. What they think tipped her boyfriend into murdering her was learning she was pregnant and did not intend to have the baby. BTW, he is also charged with murdering the man who had helped him after the fact when he killed the woman.

You tell men they can dictate to women whether to have a baby and that is exactly the sort of crime that will occur more often.

 

[Si modo]

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

Oh, I see what you are saying. Thanks.

I don't think it's so much sympathy for a man whore as it is acceptance that they exist. Shit happens and shitty persons are often behind it.

Why do you think there should be no consequence for men's irresponsible behaviour?

Let me explain the motive behind my POV:

I have a daughter, who is 8 years old. I have friends whose daughters are 14, 16, 18 years old.

My friends warn that SOON I will need to begin chasing away horn dogs.

There is little enough already to contradict irresponsible behaviour. Taking away the little responsibility represented by child support payments contradicts MUCH MORE the societal goal of making fathers responsible for their progeny.

Physically, there IS little responsibility for a man's behavior in this matter as far as bringing a pregnancy to term. That's just the way it is.

I understand where you are coming from better. However, I'm not so sure that having financially punitive laws in place is that much of a deterent to folks at a time when they are seriously hot and bothered.

Also, as I find the right of a woman to choose what to do with her body and how to do it is an inalienable one, I am willing to make a trade-off of responsibility after birth to protect such an inalienable right of women.

If a man wants the woman to have an abortion and goes on record for that desire and uses this as a method to have a free ticket to sex, so be it. It's no different than it has been throughout the ages. I think it's a small cost to keep women's choice from being threatened by some other legal argument from men.

 

[Si modo]

Interesting that you defend the morals of men, Si. I agree, BTW...we have an accidential child in my family and I have no doubt my nephew felt/feels trapped. But where are you as dilloduck refers to women as "skanks" and trashes them for getting pregnant without planning to?

Why are you not standing up for sexually active women as you are for sexually active men?

What the fuck are you going on about now?

See the bolded language in your post, above.

Again, what the fuck are you going on about now?

Get a grip.

 

[syrenn]

No, I didn't mean that there were no LUCKY horn dogs.

However there are plenty that manage to score.

You feel horn-dogs should be able to forfit their paternal responsibilities by simply agreeing to abortion, and then moving on to the next female.

I have no question: I'm simply making the observation that you females are more sympathetic to these men, than most men.

I am sympathetic to neither. Both are responsible for the situation. Once a man lets go of his sperm and gives it to a woman, he has no more say as to what that woman does with her body.

Support of the baby is a separate issue. If the man is flat telling the woman within the first month he does not want the baby and she chooses to carry that baby, then she should better be damn well able to take care of it all on her own. She knows up front that the father does not want to pay for his share in the responsibility of the baby. That being said, it does not excuse the father from his finical responsibility.

I disagree, for a whole raft of reasons. Here's just one.....

Accused killer of attorney Margaret Allen goes on trial | cincinnati.com | Cincinnati.Com

This murder victim was a friend of one of my law school classmates. What they think tipped her boyfriend into murdering her was learning she was pregnant and did not intend to have the baby. BTW, he is also charged with murdering the man who had helped him after the fact when he killed the woman.

You tell men they can dictate to women whether to have a baby and that is exactly the sort of crime that will occur more often.

So what is it that you are disagreeing with M?

I am saying that men have no right to tell women what to do with their bodies.

 

[Luissa]

False imprisonment is kidnapping, still you make a valid point, if one believes they would rather suffer death or kidnapping instead of having a beautiful bundle of love that person should be locked up for their own health as well as the fetuses health who most likely would vote no to abortion, at least while still in the womb.

I wonder if you were pro-abortion as a ten week old fetus.

That is a good question when did your position change, it is more than reasonable that before you were born you were pro-life, when did you change your mind.

This is a good point to begin the debate.

Five minutes after I knew that a chick in my freshman high school class suicided over being preggers and unable to face it. These fetuses you're so fond of (and yes, I love babies too) are sometimes female.

Should your daughter not own her own body? Should her boyfriend get to "rent" it for nine months against her will?

Insist on keeping it ? pay for it.

It takes two people to have a child.
I insisted on keeping my child, and trust me his father has gotten off pretty easily. I think only paying less than 8o every month and never seeing your child, is pretty fair for someone who didn't have want him, but still donated sperm.

 

[eagleseven]

See the bolded language in your post, above.

I think she means that the condom can break, or she can forget the pill, in a steady monogamous relationship. Particularly if the couple is drinking together (a common thing for boyfriend/girlfriend couples to do).

Hell, I remember when a married friend of mine called me at 3AM, desperate for the morning-after pill. Unemployed and with $130k in student loans, they were in no position to raise a child.

 

[JBeukema]

I am sorry Si, this is where I disagree with you. Why is it that they are both responsible for the conception but not the rest??? Really. The babie's body is not her body, she is just a vessel. Not a dictator

because they don't bear the repercussions of carrying the pregnancy to term.

you have every right to make whatever determination for yourself that you think is appropriate.

you have no right to make such determinations for anyone else. and i always find it really funny when the people who claim to want 'small government' want to legislate relationships between people. if a woman's relationship with the person who got her pregnant is a good one, she will take his opinion into consideration. if it isn't, she won't.

and someone has to have final say. it should be the person whose body it is.

or do you think a man should have veto power?

Absolutely a man should have veto powers to abortion, he should NOT be able to force a woman to get one, but neither should HE be forced to endure the pain of losing a child he wants.

Is it that you don't think men have feelings, or is that you don't care about their feelings? Let me tell you, I was in the room when both of my children were born, the emotions I felt were incredible, I can even think about how crushing it would have been for a woman to have robbed me of that experience.

Why is being a man hater acceptable on this board and in this country?

It's called Fourth Wave FeminNazism

 

[JBeukema]

The man's "say so" occurs in peak of the moment and after the fact only goes so far as his ability to communicate with his sexual partner. Her body, her choice at that point.

Her, body, her voice, her responsibility.

Oh wait, only men have to be responsible...

 

[JBeukema]

When the men willfully engages in intercourse he has obligated himself, at that point, to child support, should a child result.

Then any woman who has willfully engaged in intercourse has obligated herself to having a child should one result. See how THAT works?

No, that's retarded. Abortion is a legal, constitutionally protected option.

So was your 'right' to your chattel (Dred Scott)

So was segregation (Plessy v Ferguson)

So was desegragation (Brown v. Board of Education)

Is there nothing higher than the law? Are your principles so fickle and meaningless that they can be decided by the whims of men in robes?

Anyone who appeals to parchment and not to principle should remain silent and obey what his masters tell him.

Parchment can be burned, torn apart, inked over, shredded, died, and replaced at a whim. Let me know when you're mature and brave enough to base your arguments upon principle.