Women have the right to control their own bodies.

[Beyond]

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You gotta open them legs first. Unless it is rape, they have the ultimate control. Sperm is cheap, eggs are precious.

That is hardly her point. Men can go beat off also.

No, her point as is standard for split tails is to play the modern...independent woman... until some complication arises then play the damsel.
Western women are complete dog shit.

A sperm, if allowed to continue in it’s natural environment will create a baby. You, jerking off in the bushes, are murdering millions of potential babies.

That's the dumbest goddamn defense of baby murder there is. Seriously

No. It is using exactly the same arguments you use to force women to carry an unwanted pregnancy.

Well maybe if they did the dumb asses would make smarter choices?
No....lol! Who am I kidding?
Women were chattel for thousands of years for a reason. When it comes to responsible, adult, critically planned choices...they are complete shit sticks.

The guy can always walk away.

Please, refute that.

The woman has first right of refusal. She is the receptacle that will carry the child. It is HER responsibility to act that way. Whore or responsible actor?

So men are cretins with no ability to control their actions? They're receptacles for sperm, for now at least. No doubt they won't always be required to carry sperm, then of course they won't be needed. However, for the moment they're sperm receptacles and are assumed to be responsible for their own actions. As I've said they can always be castrated if they feel that level of responsibiliy is beyond their abilities.

 

[ThisIsMe]

So wait, it's a two person situation when it comes to the responsibility of caring for the baby, but when it comes to extinguishing the life of that baby, the mother has the sole decision?

For better or worse, that's the way nature arranged it. Trust me, many women would be happy for men to bear that particular privilege. When men begin carrying babies, I'll be the first to defend their right to make the choice of whether or not to carry that pregnancy to full term.

A man's choice is who he chooses to have sex with, after the act, he no longer has the final say on what happens to a body he doesn't live in.

The father also has an emotional and practical say in what happens to that baby, because what is inside her womb has his DNA also.

If a man shares the responsibility of raising the child, then he also shares the decision of whether or not that child, or potential child lives.

Obviously, if the mother is at risk of death, then yes, that would put the decision in her hands, but in the case of a child that can be brought to term without risk, then he has as much say as she does.

No...he doesn't. Because ultimately, it is her body that will have to go through this...not his.

I disagree. Part of her pregnancy is because of him. If he is going to be responsible enough to commit himself to take care of the baby, then he has a say.

If the woman does not want to concede that say, then she needs to have the fortitude to abstain from sex, and simply say no.

No one can have a say over another's body. Only their own.

Yes, they can choose not to have sex until they are ready to be a parent

 

[karpenter]

Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

How Many Baby-Daddys Does She Already Have

 

[Dragonlady]

That is hardly her point. Men can go beat off also.

No, her point as is standard for split tails is to play the modern...independent woman... until some complication arises then play the damsel.
Western women are complete dog shit.

No. It is using exactly the same arguments you use to force women to carry an unwanted pregnancy.

Well maybe if they did the dumb asses would make smarter choices?
No....lol! Who am I kidding?
Women were chattel for thousands of years for a reason. When it comes to responsible, adult, critically planned choices...they are complete shit sticks.

The guy can always walk away.

Please, refute that.

She has all the risk.

She does but the "risk" is so infinitesimal that this line of argument is absurd.

She has a bigger chance of getting in a car wreck but the bitch still drives while pregnant does she not???

For one, she is not a bitch. For another...rare as it might seem, I know some one who did die in childbirth, leaving an infant and grieving father. I know many woman who had serious complications with blood pressure and pre eclampsis. It is stilla very dangerous time for women and you dont have tbe rigbt to force it on them. Technically a pregnancy can be implantef in a man, but it is very high risk. I dont see the men, who are demanding a woman carry anunwanted pregnancy lining up to offer their bodies...do you?

She IS a bitch as she has acted like a dog in heat. Disgusting whore is actually more accurate.

You're so bitter about women, why even involve yourself in thinking about their lives.

Because their bad decisions cost me money. Their bad decisions create fatherless homes which are breeding grounds for criminals.
You see, you as a female never consider the multiples of knock-on negatives that your whorish behavior may create.

Well you're clearly somebody's bad decision, because assholes like you are just ignorant jerks.

More than half of the women who have abortions are married or in committed relationships, and have one or more children. The women you are labelling "bitch" and "whore" are poor working mothers who will be fired from their low wage jobs and lose their homes if they get pregnant, leaving themselves, their families, and the baby to be homeless, without health insurance coverage, and unable to provide for their existing families.

If these women don't have access to safe, cheap, legal abortions, their entire family will become a drain on your purse, you selfish waste of skin.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

That is hardly her point. Men can go beat off also.

No, her point as is standard for split tails is to play the modern...independent woman... until some complication arises then play the damsel.
Western women are complete dog shit.

No. It is using exactly the same arguments you use to force women to carry an unwanted pregnancy.

Well maybe if they did the dumb asses would make smarter choices?
No....lol! Who am I kidding?
Women were chattel for thousands of years for a reason. When it comes to responsible, adult, critically planned choices...they are complete shit sticks.

The guy can always walk away.

Please, refute that.

She has all the risk.

She does but the "risk" is so infinitesimal that this line of argument is absurd.

She has a bigger chance of getting in a car wreck but the bitch still drives while pregnant does she not???

For one, she is not a bitch. For another...rare as it might seem, I know some one who did die in childbirth, leaving an infant and grieving father. I know many woman who had serious complications with blood pressure and pre eclampsis. It is stilla very dangerous time for women and you dont have tbe rigbt to force it on them. Technically a pregnancy can be implantef in a man, but it is very high risk. I dont see the men, who are demanding a woman carry anunwanted pregnancy lining up to offer their bodies...do you?

She IS a bitch as she has acted like a dog in heat. Disgusting whore is actually more accurate.

OK bye bye

Snowflake...meeeellllltttiiiinnnngg

He's no snowflake. My comment was over the top but made out of frustration. Yours was just hate for hates sake.

 

[Beyond]

It's the woman's call given that it's her life and her health that is being put on the line.

So wait, it's a two person situation when it comes to the responsibility of caring for the baby, but when it comes to extinguishing the life of that baby, the mother has the sole decision?

For better or worse, that's the way nature arranged it. Trust me, many women would be happy for men to bear that particular privilege. When men begin carrying babies, I'll be the first to defend their right to make the choice of whether or not to carry that pregnancy to full term.

A man's choice is who he chooses to have sex with, after the act, he no longer has the final say on what happens to a body he doesn't live in.

The father also has an emotional and practical say in what happens to that baby, because what is inside her womb has his DNA also.

If a man shares the responsibility of raising the child, then he also shares the decision of whether or not that child, or potential child lives.

Obviously, if the mother is at risk of death, then yes, that would put the decision in her hands, but in the case of a child that can be brought to term without risk, then he has as much say as she does.

No...he doesn't. Because ultimately, it is her body that will have to go through this...not his.

I disagree. Part of her pregnancy is because of him. If he is going to be responsible enough to commit himself to take care of the baby, then he has a say.

If the woman does not want to concede that say, then she needs to have the fortitude to abstain from sex, and simply say no.

No less than a man needs to fortitude to abstain from sex until he he forms a relationship with a woman who has agreed to to carry a child to full term should she get pregnant. The man also has the responsibility to choose his partner accordingly.

However there are no circumstances in which a man's has the right to reserve the use of a woman's body to incubate his child against her will. Again, the man's choice is in where he deposits his sperm. Men are fully aware of this and must make their choices accordingly.

I'll say again, both men and women must make their choices according to the way nature has arranged the part each plays in the procreation of the species.

 

[Beyond]

She does but the "risk" is so infinitesimal that this line of argument is absurd.

She has a bigger chance of getting in a car wreck but the bitch still drives while pregnant does she not???

For one, she is not a bitch. For another...rare as it might seem, I know some one who did die in childbirth, leaving an infant and grieving father. I know many woman who had serious complications with blood pressure and pre eclampsis. It is stilla very dangerous time for women and you dont have tbe rigbt to force it on them. Technically a pregnancy can be implantef in a man, but it is very high risk. I dont see the men, who are demanding a woman carry anunwanted pregnancy lining up to offer their bodies...do you?

I hate to break it to you but they FORCED it on themselves when they willingly spread their legs without the proper precautions.

You all want to claim that it's a womans body and she is the one risking her life but apparently she didn't think that "risk" was worthy of a fifty cent rubber or whatever.
If she is that careless why cry about the so called risks

Because even rubbers fail.

Get married and then have sex. Stop being whores. Problem solved. It is the woman who must control and hold the man to his promise. Instead they engage in their whorish behavior. YOU are the control. YOU have the womb. Stop blaming others for your weakness.

Because men are to weak to control themselves?

That appears to be the argument...

 

[MaryL]

And if people minded their own business we wouldn't be constantly dealing with a plethora of controversies both here and abroad. Why people simply can't just live and let live is beyond me. You talk about others controlling themselves better while you advocate for your control over other people.

Yes, people should mind their own business. The issue of forcing tax payers to participate in peoples' abortions should not even be on the table.

I agree with that as well.

Me too. If I want to commit infanticide, it's my right. You idiot males don't understand. Yep, its that simple...isn't it? This is only half of it...

 

[Beyond]

It's the woman's call given that it's her life and her health that is being put on the line.

So wait, it's a two person situation when it comes to the responsibility of caring for the baby, but when it comes to extinguishing the life of that baby, the mother has the sole decision?

For better or worse, that's the way nature arranged it. Trust me, many women would be happy for men to bear that particular privilege. When men begin carrying babies, I'll be the first to defend their right to make the choice of whether or not to carry that pregnancy to full term.

A man's choice is who he chooses to have sex with, after the act, he no longer has the final say on what happens to a body he doesn't live in.

The father also has an emotional and practical say in what happens to that baby, because what is inside her womb has his DNA also.

If a man shares the responsibility of raising the child, then he also shares the decision of whether or not that child, or potential child lives.

Obviously, if the mother is at risk of death, then yes, that would put the decision in her hands, but in the case of a child that can be brought to term without risk, then he has as much say as she does.

SOME, fathers have an emotional investment in a pregnancy, many don't. For those that DO have an emotional investment, I agree it's a tough situation to be in, but that's the way nature arranged things and both men and women have to cope with that. However, a man's choice is in who to have sex with and under what circumstances they risk creating a pregnancy. THAT's where they have their say. That does not give them right over another person's body.

Both men and women know what part they play in the event of a pregnancy, so each of them is reponsible for making decisions about their sexual habits accordingly.

If both consent to a sexual relation then both have a say in if that baby lives or not. The way you folks are addressing this would surely lead to a lot of marital problems, in the case of a father who is excited and ready to become a father and the woman who, despite his willingness and readiness, will deny him that chance.

Yes, I know there are a lot of deadbeat dads out there, I get that, but, the fact is, there is a life growing inside her, and if she doesnt want it, there are people out there who will adopt, and there are even people out there who, if the mother signs away her rights to the child, will fully pay for the pregnancy and all of the medical bills associated with it.

Life is what it is. When men take the health risks involved in carrying a child, it's their call on whether or not they carry a pregnancy to full term, until then it isn't their call. It's really quite simple.

 

[Beyond]

For better or worse, that's the way nature arranged it. Trust me, many women would be happy for men to bear that particular privilege. When men begin carrying babies, I'll be the first to defend their right to make the choice of whether or not to carry that pregnancy to full term.

A man's choice is who he chooses to have sex with, after the act, he no longer has the final say on what happens to a body he doesn't live in.

The father also has an emotional and practical say in what happens to that baby, because what is inside her womb has his DNA also.

If a man shares the responsibility of raising the child, then he also shares the decision of whether or not that child, or potential child lives.

Obviously, if the mother is at risk of death, then yes, that would put the decision in her hands, but in the case of a child that can be brought to term without risk, then he has as much say as she does.

No...he doesn't. Because ultimately, it is her body that will have to go through this...not his.

I disagree. Part of her pregnancy is because of him. If he is going to be responsible enough to commit himself to take care of the baby, then he has a say.

If the woman does not want to concede that say, then she needs to have the fortitude to abstain from sex, and simply say no.

No one can have a say over another's body. Only their own.

Yes, they can choose not to have sex until they are ready to be a parent

As can men.

 

[karpenter]

The man also has the responsibility to choose his partner accordingly

Well, That IS The General Plan

But Until Then,
If They're Just Giving It Away....

 

[Beyond]

The man also has the responsibility to choose his partner accordingly

Well, That IS The General Plan

But Until Then,
If They're Just Giving It Away....

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

 

[karpenter]

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

I've Spent A Lifetime
Knockin' Away Gals Clamoring At My Door
But Occasionally
You Just Got To Give Them Some Sympathy

I Don't Always Have A Rick James Tape
To Throw Out The Window

 

[Anathema]

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

Not that I advocate casual sex, but aside from that what do list modern women have to offer a Man I s relationship these days? They don’t com, clean or do the laundry.

 

[Beyond]

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

Not that I advocate casual sex, but aside from that what do list modern women have to offer a Man I s relationship these days? They don’t com, clean or do the laundry.

I would ask what do modern men have to offer a woman apart from the chance to be a slave to another persons wishes?

 

[dblack]

I would ask what do modern men have to offer a woman apart from the chance to be a slave to another persons wishes?

You say that like it's a bad thing!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

Not that I advocate casual sex, but aside from that what do list modern women have to offer a Man I s relationship these days? They don’t com, clean or do the laundry.

I would ask what do modern men have to offer a woman apart from the chance to be a slave to another persons wishes?

We swing the hammer as well as we do the kickstand. Who else is going to hang your artwork level

 

[Beyond]

Exactly, if men stop giving it away, they won't have to worry about women aborting their DNA.

Not that I advocate casual sex, but aside from that what do list modern women have to offer a Man I s relationship these days? They don’t com, clean or do the laundry.

I would ask what do modern men have to offer a woman apart from the chance to be a slave to another persons wishes?

We swing the hammer as well as we do the kickstand. Who else is going to hang your artwork level

Me

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

And when they don't. There's a constitutionally protected right to alternatives, dope.

 

[ThisIsMe]

So wait, it's a two person situation when it comes to the responsibility of caring for the baby, but when it comes to extinguishing the life of that baby, the mother has the sole decision?

For better or worse, that's the way nature arranged it. Trust me, many women would be happy for men to bear that particular privilege. When men begin carrying babies, I'll be the first to defend their right to make the choice of whether or not to carry that pregnancy to full term.

A man's choice is who he chooses to have sex with, after the act, he no longer has the final say on what happens to a body he doesn't live in.

The father also has an emotional and practical say in what happens to that baby, because what is inside her womb has his DNA also.

If a man shares the responsibility of raising the child, then he also shares the decision of whether or not that child, or potential child lives.

Obviously, if the mother is at risk of death, then yes, that would put the decision in her hands, but in the case of a child that can be brought to term without risk, then he has as much say as she does.

No...he doesn't. Because ultimately, it is her body that will have to go through this...not his.

I disagree. Part of her pregnancy is because of him. If he is going to be responsible enough to commit himself to take care of the baby, then he has a say.

If the woman does not want to concede that say, then she needs to have the fortitude to abstain from sex, and simply say no.

No less than a man needs to fortitude to abstain from sex until he he forms a relationship with a woman who has agreed to to carry a child to full term should she get pregnant. The man also has the responsibility to choose his partner accordingly.

However there are no circumstances in which a man's has the right to reserve the use of a woman's body to incubate his child against her will. Again, the man's choice is in where he deposits his sperm. Men are fully aware of this and must make their choices accordingly.

I'll say again, both men and women must make their choices according to the way nature has arranged the part each plays in the procreation of the species.

You make it sound as if the woman is an unwilling participant in the sexual encounter. Fact is, unless its rape, she bears the same culpability as he does. The man is not simply the sperm donor. This talk of, the man's say stops at the encounter is wrong.

Yes, he can choose not to participate, but so can she. If they both agree, then the resulting pregnancy is half his. She does not own that child simply because it is in her body. They both consented, and the father has as much say to have that child born as she does. What you are saying is, if she gets pregnant, she has the sole discretion to deny him his child.

Sorry, but if she participates in the act, she must bear part of the responsibility. If she doesnt want the child, she can release custody to the father or put it up for adoption if neither want it. Creating life is not something one can take for granted and throw it away on a whim.