Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As a practical matter, yes. When you give someone something, you are giving them control over that something.
I see... so the man is practically irrelevant past a certain point. It is a position I don't like, but one that makes the most sense. Logic wins again.
No, not irrelevant at all. Fathers are immensely important in a child's life. It's more a matter of "If you choose badly in distributing your genetic material, you are choosing to relegate yourself to a secondary and vulnerable position."
To put it another way, your child needs you very badly, and needs very badly for you to make good choices about his life. The first one he needs you to make well is the choice of his mother.
That is... one hell of a response. And something I can live with.
"the person with possession is the person with the decision-making power"
Hooo boy. That quite literally blew my mind. Wisdom of a sage.As a practical matter, yes. When you give someone something, you are giving them control over that something.
I see... so the man is practically irrelevant past a certain point. It is a position I don't like, but one that makes the most sense. Logic wins again.
No, not irrelevant at all. Fathers are immensely important in a child's life. It's more a matter of "If you choose badly in distributing your genetic material, you are choosing to relegate yourself to a secondary and vulnerable position."
To put it another way, your child needs you very badly, and needs very badly for you to make good choices about his life. The first one he needs you to make well is the choice of his mother.
That is... one hell of a response. And something I can live with.
Why, thank you. Life is hard and complicated, but the fact that reality is tough and a decision is tough should never make you think it's the wrong decision. Many times, that's how you know it's the right one.
"the person with possession is the person with the decision-making power"
Playing devils advocate here:
How do you reconcile that statement with your pro life stance? Knowing that she could ultimately decide to kill the child in the womb?
I have a ton of questions and I know you don't have time to go over them all. I am in the process of changing my views on the abortion issue right now. Pro life as I may be, I would say the woman has the right to choose, but that the very act of abortion itself is...
I don't know. Not anymore.
Hooo boy. That quite literally blew my mind. Wisdom of a sage.As a practical matter, yes. When you give someone something, you are giving them control over that something.
I see... so the man is practically irrelevant past a certain point. It is a position I don't like, but one that makes the most sense. Logic wins again.
No, not irrelevant at all. Fathers are immensely important in a child's life. It's more a matter of "If you choose badly in distributing your genetic material, you are choosing to relegate yourself to a secondary and vulnerable position."
To put it another way, your child needs you very badly, and needs very badly for you to make good choices about his life. The first one he needs you to make well is the choice of his mother.
That is... one hell of a response. And something I can live with.
Why, thank you. Life is hard and complicated, but the fact that reality is tough and a decision is tough should never make you think it's the wrong decision. Many times, that's how you know it's the right one.
So... what I have learned so far is:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Men have the right to choose wisely.
...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
So... what I have learned so far is:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Men have the right to choose wisely.
...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
If you're talking to me, then you're wrong, because you're still trying to apply "rights" to everything. Wrong language set, like using construction terminology in a medical file.
What you should learn is that everyone has choices, and for all of us, the time to make those choices is a lot earlier than when we're trying to make them. Anyone who's bitching about "being denied their choice" on this subject needs to recognize that they GOT their choice, and they wasted it by making it carelessly and badly, and what they're really asking for now is a do-over. The universe doesn't give mulligans.
That's about the size of it: a woman doesn't get to remake the decision to get pregnant once she's already pregnant. What she's really doing is deciding whether or not she wants to be the mother of a dead baby, or the mother of a live one. Because the "pregnant or not-pregnant" bell has already been rung, and you can't make it not-have-happened.
Likewise, as a practical matter, the time for a man to decide whether or not he's okay with a woman aborting his baby is BEFORE HE HAS SEX WITH THAT WOMAN, because - again, as a practical matter - there's not really anything he can do about it after she's already got the bun in the oven. Even if Roe v. Wade was overturned and every state in the nation passed laws banning abortion, how's he going to stop her from - for example - leaving the country to do it?
Trying to talk about this strictly in the language of "rights" is basically trying to pretend that lofty philosophical ponderings can somehow adjust the universe to fit human concepts of "fairness". Thomas Sowell calls it "the quest for cosmic justice". Problem is, the cosmos doesn't give a rat's ass about human justice.
EVERYONE needs to make their choices wisely, and the first step in doing that is recognizing WHEN those choices are, and that bleating about "rights" afterward is not going to give you the ability to unmake those choices. It's just making a second bad choice on top of the first one.
So, how many different baby mommas have you impregnatrd?Keep it in your pants. Don’t want to be part of an abortion, don’t impregnate a woman. Some chicks you fucked might have already had abortions and you’d never know about it. Shows how little you care.Without the male spermatezoa, all of the females of our species wouldn't have a choice to make. No sperm, no fertilized egg, no pregnancy, no choice to make. No us.
No offense, but speaking on behalf of all the men in the world, we seem to be the catalyst for that choice, IE, we are just as critical to human procreation as the woman is.
Therefore, I contend, men have an equal say in the reproductive process and the decision whether or not the fully healthy woman he inseminated should have an abortion.
Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?
The entire "pro choice" argument is misandrous (sexist toward men). That's the bottom line. That's my opinion. If you don't like it, comment or put me on your ignore list. I'm a free thinker, not a conformist.
If you follow me solely because you assume I agree with you politically, you are no more of a kindred spirit to me than the vacuum of space is to the prospects of life.
That's it, that's all.
So... what I have learned so far is:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Men have the right to choose wisely.
...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
If you're talking to me, then you're wrong, because you're still trying to apply "rights" to everything. Wrong language set, like using construction terminology in a medical file.
What you should learn is that everyone has choices, and for all of us, the time to make those choices is a lot earlier than when we're trying to make them. Anyone who's bitching about "being denied their choice" on this subject needs to recognize that they GOT their choice, and they wasted it by making it carelessly and badly, and what they're really asking for now is a do-over. The universe doesn't give mulligans.
That's about the size of it: a woman doesn't get to remake the decision to get pregnant once she's already pregnant. What she's really doing is deciding whether or not she wants to be the mother of a dead baby, or the mother of a live one. Because the "pregnant or not-pregnant" bell has already been rung, and you can't make it not-have-happened.
Likewise, as a practical matter, the time for a man to decide whether or not he's okay with a woman aborting his baby is BEFORE HE HAS SEX WITH THAT WOMAN, because - again, as a practical matter - there's not really anything he can do about it after she's already got the bun in the oven. Even if Roe v. Wade was overturned and every state in the nation passed laws banning abortion, how's he going to stop her from - for example - leaving the country to do it?
Trying to talk about this strictly in the language of "rights" is basically trying to pretend that lofty philosophical ponderings can somehow adjust the universe to fit human concepts of "fairness". Thomas Sowell calls it "the quest for cosmic justice". Problem is, the cosmos doesn't give a rat's ass about human justice.
EVERYONE needs to make their choices wisely, and the first step in doing that is recognizing WHEN those choices are, and that bleating about "rights" afterward is not going to give you the ability to unmake those choices. It's just making a second bad choice on top of the first one.
This was quite edifying.
It's more a matter of critical judgement and timing, then.
Or, quite simply put, common sense.
Decisions regarding procreation cannot be undone. The wrong decisions on both sides can (or will) lead to a traumatic experience.
I think I understand.
To my knowledge, zero. But they may have had abortions or even a kid. I don’t know or care.So, how many different baby mommas have you impregnatrd?Keep it in your pants. Don’t want to be part of an abortion, don’t impregnate a woman. Some chicks you fucked might have already had abortions and you’d never know about it. Shows how little you care.Without the male spermatezoa, all of the females of our species wouldn't have a choice to make. No sperm, no fertilized egg, no pregnancy, no choice to make. No us.
No offense, but speaking on behalf of all the men in the world, we seem to be the catalyst for that choice, IE, we are just as critical to human procreation as the woman is.
Therefore, I contend, men have an equal say in the reproductive process and the decision whether or not the fully healthy woman he inseminated should have an abortion.
Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?
The entire "pro choice" argument is misandrous (sexist toward men). That's the bottom line. That's my opinion. If you don't like it, comment or put me on your ignore list. I'm a free thinker, not a conformist.
If you follow me solely because you assume I agree with you politically, you are no more of a kindred spirit to me than the vacuum of space is to the prospects of life.
That's it, that's all.
You don't know or care.To my knowledge, zero. But they may have had abortions or even a kid. I don’t know or care.So, how many different baby mommas have you impregnatrd?Keep it in your pants. Don’t want to be part of an abortion, don’t impregnate a woman. Some chicks you fucked might have already had abortions and you’d never know about it. Shows how little you care.Without the male spermatezoa, all of the females of our species wouldn't have a choice to make. No sperm, no fertilized egg, no pregnancy, no choice to make. No us.
No offense, but speaking on behalf of all the men in the world, we seem to be the catalyst for that choice, IE, we are just as critical to human procreation as the woman is.
Therefore, I contend, men have an equal say in the reproductive process and the decision whether or not the fully healthy woman he inseminated should have an abortion.
Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?
The entire "pro choice" argument is misandrous (sexist toward men). That's the bottom line. That's my opinion. If you don't like it, comment or put me on your ignore list. I'm a free thinker, not a conformist.
If you follow me solely because you assume I agree with you politically, you are no more of a kindred spirit to me than the vacuum of space is to the prospects of life.
That's it, that's all.
So... what I have learned so far is:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Men have the right to choose wisely.
...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
If you're talking to me, then you're wrong, because you're still trying to apply "rights" to everything. Wrong language set, like using construction terminology in a medical file.
What you should learn is that everyone has choices, and for all of us, the time to make those choices is a lot earlier than when we're trying to make them. Anyone who's bitching about "being denied their choice" on this subject needs to recognize that they GOT their choice, and they wasted it by making it carelessly and badly, and what they're really asking for now is a do-over. The universe doesn't give mulligans.
That's about the size of it: a woman doesn't get to remake the decision to get pregnant once she's already pregnant. What she's really doing is deciding whether or not she wants to be the mother of a dead baby, or the mother of a live one. Because the "pregnant or not-pregnant" bell has already been rung, and you can't make it not-have-happened.
Likewise, as a practical matter, the time for a man to decide whether or not he's okay with a woman aborting his baby is BEFORE HE HAS SEX WITH THAT WOMAN, because - again, as a practical matter - there's not really anything he can do about it after she's already got the bun in the oven. Even if Roe v. Wade was overturned and every state in the nation passed laws banning abortion, how's he going to stop her from - for example - leaving the country to do it?
Trying to talk about this strictly in the language of "rights" is basically trying to pretend that lofty philosophical ponderings can somehow adjust the universe to fit human concepts of "fairness". Thomas Sowell calls it "the quest for cosmic justice". Problem is, the cosmos doesn't give a rat's ass about human justice.
EVERYONE needs to make their choices wisely, and the first step in doing that is recognizing WHEN those choices are, and that bleating about "rights" afterward is not going to give you the ability to unmake those choices. It's just making a second bad choice on top of the first one.
This was quite edifying.
It's more a matter of critical judgement and timing, then.
Or, quite simply put, common sense.
Decisions regarding procreation cannot be undone. The wrong decisions on both sides can (or will) lead to a traumatic experience.
I think I understand.
That's about the gist of it.
So... what I have learned so far is:
1) Women have the right to choose.
2) Men have the right to choose wisely.
...
Correct me if I'm wrong.
If you're talking to me, then you're wrong, because you're still trying to apply "rights" to everything. Wrong language set, like using construction terminology in a medical file.
What you should learn is that everyone has choices, and for all of us, the time to make those choices is a lot earlier than when we're trying to make them. Anyone who's bitching about "being denied their choice" on this subject needs to recognize that they GOT their choice, and they wasted it by making it carelessly and badly, and what they're really asking for now is a do-over. The universe doesn't give mulligans.
That's about the size of it: a woman doesn't get to remake the decision to get pregnant once she's already pregnant. What she's really doing is deciding whether or not she wants to be the mother of a dead baby, or the mother of a live one. Because the "pregnant or not-pregnant" bell has already been rung, and you can't make it not-have-happened.
Likewise, as a practical matter, the time for a man to decide whether or not he's okay with a woman aborting his baby is BEFORE HE HAS SEX WITH THAT WOMAN, because - again, as a practical matter - there's not really anything he can do about it after she's already got the bun in the oven. Even if Roe v. Wade was overturned and every state in the nation passed laws banning abortion, how's he going to stop her from - for example - leaving the country to do it?
Trying to talk about this strictly in the language of "rights" is basically trying to pretend that lofty philosophical ponderings can somehow adjust the universe to fit human concepts of "fairness". Thomas Sowell calls it "the quest for cosmic justice". Problem is, the cosmos doesn't give a rat's ass about human justice.
EVERYONE needs to make their choices wisely, and the first step in doing that is recognizing WHEN those choices are, and that bleating about "rights" afterward is not going to give you the ability to unmake those choices. It's just making a second bad choice on top of the first one.
This was quite edifying.
It's more a matter of critical judgement and timing, then.
Or, quite simply put, common sense.
Decisions regarding procreation cannot be undone. The wrong decisions on both sides can (or will) lead to a traumatic experience.
I think I understand.
That's about the gist of it.
Now... if only debates like this could happen all around politics more often.
Fantastical, I know. One can dream can't they?
