Abortion: Why Men Don't Get A Say

[JBeukema]

What makes you think it has to be equal?

Then who says the man should equally be financially responsible for the child?

Are you beginning to see how this works. You can't have it both ways. PERIOD.

Both issues sit on firm legal ground already.

Segregation once sat on the most firm legal ground...

 

[JBeukema]

The woman isn't taking anything out of a mans wallet. His child is.

The woman doesn't have a say in how much he must pay. The court does.

Not if that child is aborted before it becomes a child (using YOUR logic, my idea of when it becomes a child is MUCH different than yours)

A woman right to choose what she does with her body is also THE LAW. She has the absolute right to choose to have an abortion or not, without interference from any quarter.

A man's right to his woman's body was also THE LAW.

The exact same appeal to the law was invoked when men raped their wives...

 

[dilloduck]

When a man can gestate a baby then he CAN say that too. As it is, only a woman can do that. It is her body and she has the right to choose what she is going out HER both though.

Then when a woman earns what is in a man's wallet, she should have a say in what comes out of it, not before.

The woman isn't taking anything out of a mans wallet. His child is.

The woman doesn't have a say in how much he must pay. The court does.

 

[syrenn]

and who is that fair to? How is that EQUAL?

They both had sex. The both made a baby. No one was raped. They are both responsible for it. That is equal.

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

So long as only a woman can gestate, so long as it is only her body that carries the baby, then that is her choice and hers alone.

It has nothing to do with "his" baby. It has everything to do with the sole control of your own body.

 

[dilloduck]

They both had sex. The both made a baby. No one was raped. They are both responsible for it. That is equal.

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

and naturally you would support giving males the right to do that.

 

[JBeukema]

=
It has nothing to do with "his" baby.

Except when you want his money....

 

[JBeukema]

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

soon as we chain an anchor to your leg, throw you in the ocean, and let you breathe...

 

[Paulie]

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

soon as we chain an anchor to your leg, throw you in the ocean, and let you breathe...

This type of thread really doesn't beg the opinions of men who have never had sex with a woman before, bro.

I'm just sayin.

 

[syrenn]

=
It has nothing to do with "his" baby.

Except when you want his money....

Try using the whole quote so that what i say is in context.

They both had sex. The both made a baby. No one was raped. They are both responsible for it. That is equal.

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

So long as only a woman can gestate, so long as it is only her body that carries the baby, then that is her choice and hers alone.

It has nothing to do with "his" baby. It has everything to do with the sole control of your own body.

 

[Madeline]

Back for more, dilloduck and JB? You two are a pair of slow learners, ain't ya?

Or is it just one boy and his sock puppet?

 

[Madeline]

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

soon as we chain an anchor to your leg, throw you in the ocean, and let you breathe...

Now I feel bad. I thought you saved all your murder threats just for me, JB.

 

[dilloduck]

=
It has nothing to do with "his" baby.

Except when you want his money....

Try using the whole quote so that what i say is in context.

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

So long as only a woman can gestate, so long as it is only her body that carries the baby, then that is her choice and hers alone.

It has nothing to do with "his" baby. It has everything to do with the sole control of your own body.

Women cannot gestate without the consent of a male. You should be honored.

 

[dilloduck]

Back for more, dilloduck and JB? You two are a pair of slow learners, ain't ya?

Or is it just one boy and his sock puppet?

You'd be amazed at how my popularity soars when I expose you as a fraud.

 

[syrenn]

 

[Madeline]

Back for more, dilloduck and JB? You two are a pair of slow learners, ain't ya?

Or is it just one boy and his sock puppet?

You'd be amazed at how my popularity soars when I expose you as a fraud.

I really do not want details of your love affair with JB, dilloduck.

 

[Madeline]

dilloduck wrote:

Women cannot gestate without the consent of a male. You should be honored.

"Consent to gestate"? Do we need this daily or hourly?

 

[dilloduck]

dilloduck wrote:

Women cannot gestate without the consent of a male. You should be honored.

"Consent to gestate"? Do we need this daily or hourly?

just once, hon. Surely you understand that you cannot get the consent to gestate from a toilet seat.

 

[Madeline]

dilloduck wrote:

Women cannot gestate without the consent of a male. You should be honored.

"Consent to gestate"? Do we need this daily or hourly?

just once, hon. Surely you understand that you cannot get the consent to gestate from a toilet seat.

WTF color is the sky in your world, dilloduck?

 

[JBeukema]

=
It has nothing to do with "his" baby.

Except when you want his money....

Try using the whole quote so that what i say is in context.

If it's his baby, too... why do you support her unilateral 'right' to kill his child?


Make up your mind.

Then Cesarean Section it out, insert it into a mans body and let him gestate it.

So long as only a woman can gestate, so long as it is only her body that carries the baby, then that is her choice and hers alone.

It has nothing to do with "his" baby. It has everything to do with the sole control of your own body.

It has nothing to do with 'his baby'... except when 'it's his baby' is your cry when you want his money.

 

[JBeukema]

Back for more, dilloduck and JB? You two are a pair of slow learners, ain't ya?

Or is it just one boy and his sock puppet?

Two people spew the same rhetoric and insists on using the same moronic blue text...