Abortion: Why Men Don't Get A Say

[Colin]

Yes yes, I understand that you a view a baby inside a woman's body much like you view an unwanted soda can in your car. It's your and if you just want to toss it out, then who's to stop you. But that is because YOU have no care for what a man wants or how he feels, you just know that he's a dirtbag if he says fuck you and walks away from you and the child if you don't even bother to consult him on the decision making process (and yes I realize some men just walk away b/c they are scum, just as some women do, but there are many others who walk away b/c they are discouraged b/c women like you AND the system treat them as if they have nothing of value except a wallet.)

Why you think it is appropriate to leave a man completely out of a decision that will affect him for his entire life is beyond me, but its not surprising.

Where did she say any of that? Seems your mysoginistic attitude is affecting your interpretation of things. No surprise there.

LOL - you are one major ass kisser.

I don't hate women. I hate people who use children as weapons. Be they male or female.

Me an ass kisser! Lol! That is funny! We sure know whose arse you are kissing CornHog.

And for someone who thinks it funny to piss over women to say he loves women...even funnier...in a distasteful way of course.

 

[ConHog]

Where did she say any of that? Seems your mysoginistic attitude is affecting your interpretation of things. No surprise there.

LOL - you are one major ass kisser.

I don't hate women. I hate people who use children as weapons. Be they male or female.

Me an ass kisser! Lol! That is funny! We sure know whose arse you are kissing CornHog.

And for someone who thinks it funny to piss over women to say he loves women...even funnier...in a distasteful way of course.

Nice try to deflect.


Moving back to the topic at hand.

I want to understand why some of you can't acknowledge that just leaving men completely out of the decision making process is absolutely going to cause some to simply abandon their responsibilities? I also wonder why some of you don't seem to care that men can care about a child to.

 

[Colin]

LOL - you are one major ass kisser.

I don't hate women. I hate people who use children as weapons. Be they male or female.

Me an ass kisser! Lol! That is funny! We sure know whose arse you are kissing CornHog.

And for someone who thinks it funny to piss over women to say he loves women...even funnier...in a distasteful way of course.

Nice try to deflect.


Moving back to the topic at hand.

I want to understand why some of you can't acknowledge that just leaving men completely out of the decision making process is absolutely going to cause some to simply abandon their responsibilities? I also wonder why some of you don't seem to care that men can care about a child to.

So answer the question. Where did she say any of that?

 

[ConHog]

Me an ass kisser! Lol! That is funny! We sure know whose arse you are kissing CornHog.

And for someone who thinks it funny to piss over women to say he loves women...even funnier...in a distasteful way of course.

Nice try to deflect.


Moving back to the topic at hand.

I want to understand why some of you can't acknowledge that just leaving men completely out of the decision making process is absolutely going to cause some to simply abandon their responsibilities? I also wonder why some of you don't seem to care that men can care about a child to.

So answer the question. Where did she say any of that?

I've had this debate with Syrenn several times, Her attitude is obvious. If you weren't so busy sucking up to her maybe you would notice that she actually finds you to be nothing but a contemptible animal who needs to be beaten down.

You accuse me of hating women, when it is in fact Syrenn who hates men. What other explanation is there for someone who says the things she says.

 

[Colin]

Nice try to deflect.


Moving back to the topic at hand.

I want to understand why some of you can't acknowledge that just leaving men completely out of the decision making process is absolutely going to cause some to simply abandon their responsibilities? I also wonder why some of you don't seem to care that men can care about a child to.

So answer the question. Where did she say any of that?

I've had this debate with Syrenn several times, Her attitude is obvious. If you weren't so busy sucking up to her maybe you would notice that she actually finds you to be nothing but a contemptible animal who needs to be beaten down.

You accuse me of hating women, when it is in fact Syrenn who hates men. What other explanation is there for someone who says the things she says.

Perhaps you should pay more attention to the contemptible things you say around here, you vile little man! And STILL unable to answer the question!

 

[Valerie]

Colin seems to be the only man here who can acknowledge that it is nature that has discriminated against men by only giving women the physicality to bear a child.

There is no denying that is precisely what naturally gives women the ultimate final say...Acknowledging that fact does not translate as if women think men should have no say whatsoever or men don't care or any of that other personal projection that has been going on for pages now in this thread...

 

[ConHog]

Colin seems to be the only man here who can acknowledge that it is nature that has discriminated against men by only giving women the physicality to bear a child.

There is no denying that is precisely what naturally gives women the ultimate final say...Acknowledging that fact does not translate as if women think men should have no say whatsoever or men don't care or any of that other personal projection that has been going on for pages now in this thread...

Actually, nature provided for it to take both a male and a female to produce a child, so perhaps NATURE meant for the decision to be made by both.............

Talk about cuckoo.

 

[Ravi]

Colin seems to be the only man here who can acknowledge that it is nature that has discriminated against men by only giving women the physicality to bear a child.

There is no denying that is precisely what naturally gives women the ultimate final say...Acknowledging that fact does not translate as if women think men should have no say whatsoever or men don't care or any of that other personal projection that has been going on for pages now in this thread...

Yep...and it is always sad to see women that agree with this idiocy that people like Buttemia push. It is almost as if they feel guilt for being women.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Did you not read what I wrote? I mentioned adoption as well as stating that is also a bad rout to take. In a large number of cases, children in that state are not exactly the best cared for. There are FAR too many children in adoption already that are not wanted and cannot find a good home. None of this is ideal.

Hmm, I was not aware that there are too many children up for adoption (dometic) who are not wanted. Do you have any support for that?

How many kids go from foster home to foster home, abused, neglected, who get so fucked up by the time they are teens, that they commit suicide? I'm not saying this a majority, but I am saying that there definitely too many kids that don't have a proper home. It's not like a stork just magically delivered these unclaimed babies to the perfect home with the perfect family. These kids get bounced around.

So . . . what? We should just kill them all ourselves, to save them the time and effort of POSSIBLY doing it themselves? Jesus, what's your solution for all the teenagers from normal, everyday homes who kill themselves?

 

[Cecilie1200]

If imperfections in the foster/adoption system make adoption a 'poor choice', then all the bad parents in the world surely make keeping your baby a poor choice, too...

Or maybe some people just can't understand why anyone would not want to kill their baby.

Baby-haters like Sy and Mad should be granted their wish and sterilized so they never have to endure the torment of pregnancy or motherhood.

Sorry we can't do anything for the penis envy.

They just don't get it, or rather they don't care. As long as you have a system which gives all of one party all the power there are going to be members of the other party who simply say fuck it and refuse to take care of their obligations. Is is right on their part? OF course not, but it is reality. Many fathers simply look at the situation and realize they weren't consulted about the child, they probably won't have input into the raising of the child, and that they probably won't ever develop a bond with the child, so why should they have to help finance the child? That's a cold hard reality. IF on the other hand men were consulted, and given a say in the matter, that would stop that argument cold. Any sane sensible woman would of her own accord include the man in the decisions. Many women find themselves in these positions are neither sane nor reasonable.

Call me Ms. Silly, but maybe any sane, sensible woman would refrain from having sex with men she wouldn't want to share a child with?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Colin seems to be the only man here who can acknowledge that it is nature that has discriminated against men by only giving women the physicality to bear a child.

There is no denying that is precisely what naturally gives women the ultimate final say...Acknowledging that fact does not translate as if women think men should have no say whatsoever or men don't care or any of that other personal projection that has been going on for pages now in this thread...

Perhaps the women around here could then also acknowledge that it's not men "forcing" them to have children, making them into incubators, turning them into "second class citizens", or infringing on their "right to do as they choose with their bodies". It's nature doing it, by only giving women the physicality to bear a child. Possibly they might come to a point where they don't hate their offspring and their own anatomy for preventing them from pretending that they're men.

I'm sticking to my original position: people on both sides should stop fucking partners they wouldn't want to share a pregnancy and child with.

 

[ConHog]

If imperfections in the foster/adoption system make adoption a 'poor choice', then all the bad parents in the world surely make keeping your baby a poor choice, too...

Or maybe some people just can't understand why anyone would not want to kill their baby.

Baby-haters like Sy and Mad should be granted their wish and sterilized so they never have to endure the torment of pregnancy or motherhood.

Sorry we can't do anything for the penis envy.

They just don't get it, or rather they don't care. As long as you have a system which gives all of one party all the power there are going to be members of the other party who simply say fuck it and refuse to take care of their obligations. Is is right on their part? OF course not, but it is reality. Many fathers simply look at the situation and realize they weren't consulted about the child, they probably won't have input into the raising of the child, and that they probably won't ever develop a bond with the child, so why should they have to help finance the child? That's a cold hard reality. IF on the other hand men were consulted, and given a say in the matter, that would stop that argument cold. Any sane sensible woman would of her own accord include the man in the decisions. Many women find themselves in these positions are neither sane nor reasonable.

Call me Ms. Silly, but maybe any sane, sensible woman would refrain from having sex with men she wouldn't want to share a child with?

Well, that WOULD seem to be a solution, but obviously some of the women here want to be able to just sleep with whomever they choose with every option available of getting out of any unwanted pregnancy which might result while at the same time denying men not only the option of getting out of having a child they don't want, BUT the option of keeping the child should the woman not want it.

It's quite telling about how little they think of men.

 

[Si modo]

They just don't get it, or rather they don't care. As long as you have a system which gives all of one party all the power there are going to be members of the other party who simply say fuck it and refuse to take care of their obligations. Is is right on their part? OF course not, but it is reality. Many fathers simply look at the situation and realize they weren't consulted about the child, they probably won't have input into the raising of the child, and that they probably won't ever develop a bond with the child, so why should they have to help finance the child? That's a cold hard reality. IF on the other hand men were consulted, and given a say in the matter, that would stop that argument cold. Any sane sensible woman would of her own accord include the man in the decisions. Many women find themselves in these positions are neither sane nor reasonable.

Call me Ms. Silly, but maybe any sane, sensible woman would refrain from having sex with men she wouldn't want to share a child with?

Well, that WOULD seem to be a solution, but obviously some of the women here want to be able to just sleep with whomever they choose with every option available of getting out of any unwanted pregnancy which might result ....

Yup. So true and so fair. Equal rights should know no gender.

.... while at the same time denying men not only the option of getting out of having a child they don't want, ....

Agreed. That's not fair, either.

.... BUT the option of keeping the child should the woman not want it. ....

Well, if the woman does not want her body used for gestation, the man is SOL on that front. The woman is the only one of the two who conceived who can provide gestation, so that is totally the woman's choice. Her body, her choice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They just don't get it, or rather they don't care. As long as you have a system which gives all of one party all the power there are going to be members of the other party who simply say fuck it and refuse to take care of their obligations. Is is right on their part? OF course not, but it is reality. Many fathers simply look at the situation and realize they weren't consulted about the child, they probably won't have input into the raising of the child, and that they probably won't ever develop a bond with the child, so why should they have to help finance the child? That's a cold hard reality. IF on the other hand men were consulted, and given a say in the matter, that would stop that argument cold. Any sane sensible woman would of her own accord include the man in the decisions. Many women find themselves in these positions are neither sane nor reasonable.

Call me Ms. Silly, but maybe any sane, sensible woman would refrain from having sex with men she wouldn't want to share a child with?

Well, that WOULD seem to be a solution, but obviously some of the women here want to be able to just sleep with whomever they choose with every option available of getting out of any unwanted pregnancy which might result while at the same time denying men not only the option of getting out of having a child they don't want, BUT the option of keeping the child should the woman not want it.

It's quite telling about how little they think of men.

Well, as Ann Coulter says, "Give me liberty or give me freedom to have sex with men I don't particularly like!" isn't much of a rallying cry.

The fact remains that the basic inequity and unfairness that they want the law to address via unfettered abortion is in nature and biology themselves, not society or the law or people's attitudes. The only true solution is for both men and women to make better choices with the reality they're given.

 

[ConHog]

Call me Ms. Silly, but maybe any sane, sensible woman would refrain from having sex with men she wouldn't want to share a child with?

Well, that WOULD seem to be a solution, but obviously some of the women here want to be able to just sleep with whomever they choose with every option available of getting out of any unwanted pregnancy which might result ....

Yup. So true and so fair. Equal rights should know no gender.

.... while at the same time denying men not only the option of getting out of having a child they don't want, ....

Agreed. That's not fair, either.

.... BUT the option of keeping the child should the woman not want it. ....

Well, if the woman does not want her body used for gestation, the man is SOL on that front. The woman is the only one of the two who conceived who can provide gestation, so that is totally the woman's choice. Her body, her choice.

The only reason I bring up men not having the option to keep a baby the woman doesn't want is to point out that IS an option a woman has. Under current law a man can beg and plead all he wants but if the woman wants to keep his child, he's going to be a father against his wishes. I don't know that I think a woman should be required to carry the baby to term should the man want it, BUT it truly isn't as if doing so would ruin a woman's life; and how often is that going to be the case anyway?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, that WOULD seem to be a solution, but obviously some of the women here want to be able to just sleep with whomever they choose with every option available of getting out of any unwanted pregnancy which might result ....

Yup. So true and so fair. Equal rights should know no gender.
Agreed. That's not fair, either.

.... BUT the option of keeping the child should the woman not want it. ....

Well, if the woman does not want her body used for gestation, the man is SOL on that front. The woman is the only one of the two who conceived who can provide gestation, so that is totally the woman's choice. Her body, her choice.

The only reason I bring up men not having the option to keep a baby the woman doesn't want is to point out that IS an option a woman has. Under current law a man can beg and plead all he wants but if the woman wants to keep his child, he's going to be a father against his wishes. I don't know that I think a woman should be required to carry the baby to term should the man want it, BUT it truly isn't as if doing so would ruin a woman's life; and how often is that going to be the case anyway?

I'm not saying I think this should be the case, but I've always wondered why these "staunch defenders of freedom" who will parrot "her body, her choice" at the drop of a hat never seem interested in the reciprocal freedom: "his wallet, his choice". They're horrified at the idea of a man being able to "force" a woman to have a child she doesn't want and be "enslaved" for eighteen years by the child's existence, but they're totally indifferent to a woman being able to "force" a man to have a child he doesn't want and be "enslaved" for eighteen years by the child's existence.

But they love to use the phrase "equal rights". Curious.

 

[ConHog]

Yup. So true and so fair. Equal rights should know no gender.
Agreed. That's not fair, either.

Well, if the woman does not want her body used for gestation, the man is SOL on that front. The woman is the only one of the two who conceived who can provide gestation, so that is totally the woman's choice. Her body, her choice.

The only reason I bring up men not having the option to keep a baby the woman doesn't want is to point out that IS an option a woman has. Under current law a man can beg and plead all he wants but if the woman wants to keep his child, he's going to be a father against his wishes. I don't know that I think a woman should be required to carry the baby to term should the man want it, BUT it truly isn't as if doing so would ruin a woman's life; and how often is that going to be the case anyway?

I'm not saying I think this should be the case, but I've always wondered why these "staunch defenders of freedom" who will parrot "her body, her choice" at the drop of a hat never seem interested in the reciprocal freedom: "his wallet, his choice". They're horrified at the idea of a man being able to "force" a woman to have a child she doesn't want and be "enslaved" for eighteen years by the child's existence, but they're totally indifferent to a woman being able to "force" a man to have a child he doesn't want and be "enslaved" for eighteen years by the child's existence.

But they love to use the phrase "equal rights". Curious.

Exactly so, the ONLY reasonable explanation is that they just don't care what a man thinks or feels. PERIOD

 

[JBeukema]

If a baby inside a woman is solely her "property" with a man having no right to have any input into the decision making then what changes if the woman decides to keep the baby and wants child support? At what point do you say "Okay now the man has ownership to?"

Speaking of hypocrites.

So women take the blame for having the baby and poor men have to pay child support. And women take the blame for having an abortion for taking men's choices away and its not fair to them.

No one is claiming that a baby inside of a woman's body is solely her "property". A woman's body is solely her property, and if she chooses not to carry a child that is her choice.

And if she chooses to, that's her choice, too.


Ergo, it's on her to be responsibility for the results of her decision, whichever it might be.

 

[JBeukema]

Nice try to deflect.


Moving back to the topic at hand.

I want to understand why some of you can't acknowledge that just leaving men completely out of the decision making process is absolutely going to cause some to simply abandon their responsibilities? I also wonder why some of you don't seem to care that men can care about a child to.

So answer the question. Where did she say any of that?

I've had this debate with Syrenn several times, Her attitude is obvious. If you weren't so busy sucking up to her maybe you would notice that she actually finds you to be nothing but a contemptible animal who needs to be beaten down.

You accuse me of hating women, when it is in fact Syrenn who hates men. What other explanation is there for someone who says the things she says.

Sy hates that she's a woman. She loathes the fact that sex involves penetration and demonizes men for the nature of the act. She loathes the fact that women carry children, can't grasp that not all women hate their children, and hates babies because they're an evil parasite infesting her and causing stretch marks. The only reason she can imagine for not killing a baby is to use it to as a means to control, dominate, and punish a the man who penetrated her.


In short: Sy = JD_2B

We're just waiting for her to claim her dog got her pregnant; then we'll have clone of the 'What should Abortion Laws Be?' thread. All the bullshit she's been posting was debunked over there. It's standard feminazi rhetoric.

 

[ConHog]

If a baby inside a woman is solely her "property" with a man having no right to have any input into the decision making then what changes if the woman decides to keep the baby and wants child support? At what point do you say "Okay now the man has ownership to?"

Speaking of hypocrites.

So women take the blame for having the baby and poor men have to pay child support. And women take the blame for having an abortion for taking men's choices away and its not fair to them.

No one is claiming that a baby inside of a woman's body is solely her "property". A woman's body is solely her property, and if she chooses not to carry a child that is her choice.

And if she chooses to, that's her choice, too.


Ergo, it's on her to be responsibility for the results of her decision, whichever it might be.

NO NO NO, women like Syrenn want to have their cake and eat it to. Keeping the child or not is MY choice, but raising that baby that is OUR responsibility, seems to be the battle cry.