Woman claiming to be a doctor says "Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy"

[Carl in Michigan]

"you ruined my birthday cake!"
"that wasn't a birthday cake!"

 

[Couchpotato]

True. Is con-sent to sex con-sent to obligated fatherhood?

Yes. Men never have a choice in the matter do they? No matter how liberal the state Ive yet to see a law that allows a father to force an abortion on a mother who doesn’t want one. Nor have I seen a law allowing a father to “opt out” and have zero responsibility for the child he helped conceive. Consent to sex especially unprotected sex is consent to the risk of becoming a parent. If you don’t understand that maybe you shouldn’t be having sex.

 

[Cougarbear]

This is the type of "science" the left LOVES.

Along with things like "you're not going to get Covid if you have these vaccines", "I can't define what a woman is because I'm not a biologist", and the classic "men can get pregnant".

LOL!

They don’t believe in personal responsibility.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Yes. Men never have a choice in the matter do they? No matter how liberal the state Ive yet to see a law that allows a father to force an abortion on a mother who doesn’t want one. Nor have I seen a law allowing a father to “opt out” and have zero responsibility for the child he helped conceive. Consent to sex especially unprotected sex is consent to the risk of becoming a parent. If you don’t understand that maybe you shouldn’t be having sex.

Males just bail.

 

[Couchpotato]

Males just bail.

But they are legally responsible correct? They can’t force a woman to get an abortion OR “opt out”? So there’s no “choice” for men.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Choices For Self Preservation In Closed Systems With Competition For Limited Resources "

* Higher Regard For Quality Of Life Determined Through Individualism Versus Authoritarian Collective Through Federal Or State *

Proving yet again that pro-abortion democrats have at best a total disregard for human life.

This moniker for abortion choice represents republicans with allegiance to a us republic founded on principles of individualism , from a credo of e pluribus unum .

A credo of e pluribus unum espouses independence as individualism , with equal protection of negative liberties among individuals .

A state is comprised of individuals , each of whom is a citizen , on whose behalf interests of a state lay .

A citizen and its constitutional protections are instantiated through a live birth requirement to be an individual .

By induction , from principles for equitable doctrine , a live birth is required for equal protection with a citizen .

Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments

" Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments " * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises * Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ? Does...

www.usmessageboard.com

* Requirements Principles Of Physical Law Versus Subjective Personal Volition *

The standard of law by which authority of a state may enforce public policy is the principle of non violence , which is not a standard of social behavior consistent with the principles of non aggression .

Non Aggression Principles For Other Races Towards Ones Own Race And Non Violence Principles For Within Ones Own Race

" Non Aggression Principles For Other Races Towards Ones Own Race And Non Violence Principles Within Ones Own Race " * Hypocrisy Or Not Hypocrisy ? * * Racist Or Not Racist ? *

www.usmessageboard.com

Does Non Violence Principles Correct Non Aggression Principles Lexicon ?

"Does Non Violence Principles Correct Non Aggression Principles Lexicon ? " * Definition Buy Explanation * Social systems include allowable limits of aggression ; thus , by definition , violence is illegitimate aggression . This is a call to correctly annotate an understanding for terms . A...

www.usmessageboard.com

* Natural Freedoms Versus Busy Body Banana Business *

An altruism of a subjective perspective is for its introspection to exist in perpetuity throughout eternity , while through multiplicity - nature does not require every instance of introspection to exist in perpetuity throughout eternity to satisfy the altruism .

An expectation by orthodoxy , to demand that a deontology be applied , to protect every instance of introspection , even where introspection does not exist , conflicts with natural law .

By principles of individualism for us republic , through informed consent , individual citizens are to determine the disposition of with cause abortion for themselves .

The abortion anti-choice trope remains focused on without cause abortion , with rave of rage that another is performing a ritual of procreation and , to relieve themselves of a primordial anxiety , a uniform fetish for collective dictates is embraced , as traitors to the principles of individualism for us republic .

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

It's amazing as to how many Neanderthal minded folks are on this Forum

Yes, pro-abort filth, you ARE a neanderthal.

 

[Kruska]

Yes, pro-abort filth, you ARE a neanderthal.

Where did I state that I am for abortion???? - you moronic Neanderthal

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Where did I state that I am for abortion???? - you moronic Neanderthal

Oh do shut up.

You literally just claimed that killing your kids to avoid responsibility would be "responsible."

 

[Woodznutz]

Con-sent to sex is con-sent to obligated fatherhood and child support.

That's the chance you take, but that's not how it works in the real world. In my day girls went off to hide their shame and gave the baby up for adoption. Even today there is a demand for adoptable babies so that option is still there. That said, abortion is here to stay regardless of the Dobbs decision.

 

[Woodznutz]

So every-time you or a man rides his women - both say, oh baby,oh baby,oh baby - well it's actually meant towards each other and not - get pregnant, get pregnant, get pregnant.

Therefore if a contraceptive doesn't work - it was still only about sex, and not about wanting a baby - but the responsibility in regards to an unwanted mother and fatherhood now comes in. And some religious Christian nut, isn't even allowed to use a contraceptive - so theoretically these people only are allowed to have intercourse in order to multiply.

That's a Catholic thing (or was).

 

[Woodznutz]

And again you are wrong. They consent towards having sex via intercourse - that's all.
Educated people - obviously not you, discuss about an unwanted or wanted pregnancy BEFORE they hump around.

I always left it up to the girl. Many times I was told by her, "I can't right now". In high school we were all having sex, protected and unprotected, and a pregnancy was unheard of. The girls had tight control of their 'cycle' and therefore when they would have sex. It was after high school, when the girls were out on their own that they began to turn up pregnant.

 

[Woodznutz]

When I get into my car I never consent to an accident, but that's the risks -- and RESPONSIBILITY of engaging in an activity

It's not consent. It's the chance you both take. And if a pregnancy happens there are options other than parenthood.

 

[Kruska]

I always left it up to the girl. Many times I was told by her, "I can't right now". In high school we were all having sex, protected and unprotected, and a pregnancy was unheard of. The girls had tight control of their 'cycle' and therefore when they would have sex. It was after high school, when the girls were out on their own that they began to turn up pregnant.

Me too - but never ever did one of those girls consent towards wanting to get pregnant, all they did was to consent towards sex - otherwise it would constitute RAPE.
I was however aware that having sex might result in a pregnancy - for which I was ALWAYS willing to face the responsibility.

So again a women consenting towards sex - does NOT include a general consent towards getting pregnant.

 

[Couchpotato]

Me too - but never ever did one of those girls consent towards wanting to get pregnant, all they did was to consent towards sex - otherwise it would constitute RAPE.
I was however aware that having sex might result in a pregnancy - for which I was ALWAYS willing to face the responsibility.

So again a women consenting towards sex - does NOT include a general consent towards getting pregnant.

Wait. A woman who consents to sex isnt consenting to the resulting pregnancy and if she gets pregnant it's rape?

If you consent to sex you consent to the risk of getting pregnant. That's just a biological fact. If all it took was a woman not consenting to get pregnant to not get pregnant we'd have no need of contraception or abortion.

 

[Couchpotato]

It's not consent. It's the chance you both take. And if a pregnancy happens there are options other than parenthood.

Yes it is. You're consenting to the consequences of your actions. If I go sky diving and the parachute doesn't open, I can't just scream I didn't consent to this, and it goes away. It's not like pregnancy isnt a known result of sex.

 

[bodecea]

But not motherhood? Got it, you're a sexist piece of shit.

Con-sent to sex is con-sent to obligated fatherhood and child support.

You seem to have a problem with male parental responsibility.

 

[bodecea]

Wait. A woman who consents to sex isnt consenting to the resulting pregnancy and if she gets pregnant it's rape?

If you consent to sex you consent to the risk of getting pregnant. That's just a biological fact. If all it took was a woman not consenting to get pregnant to not get pregnant we'd have no need of contraception or abortion.

And Con-sent to sex is con-sent to obligated fatherhood and child support.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Con-sent to sex is con-sent to obligated fatherhood and child support.

You seem to have a problem with male parental responsibility.

Right, but not motherhood.

Got it. You’re a sexist piece of shit.

 

[Couchpotato]

And Con-sent to sex is con-sent to obligated fatherhood and child support.

Yeah I said as much in the response to your other post. It's consent to the risk of that for sure.

BTW do you think you're being clever with the Con-sent thing? FYI you're not.