The Cellar - Men Abortion and Choice

Page 3 of 32

Last »

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Relationships (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=34)

- - Men Abortion and Choice (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=15013)

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 372550)

So, any woman who's old enough and with the mental capacity to understand that sex can and does lead to pregnancy, even if protection is used, loses the final say over whether she has to carry any baby to term? Simply because she chose to have sex with a man, he gets to make decisions about what she does with her body?

Damn, man and you call Britain fascist. You want to allow men the right to dictate what a woman does with her body? Force her to undergo a process which often carries enormous health risks, even in these modern times. Oh great so, as long as the man's willing to raise the baby with no input from her, she loses the right to refuse to undergo 9 months of pregnancy and the labour that follows.

I would never want to live in a country with a law like that.

But it's ok to let a woman kill his child without his consent even though she CHOSE to get pregnant... I see.
It is not about her body it is about their fetus.

DanaC

08-08-2007 05:03 PM

Ain't his child til it exits her body.

Her body. Hers. If you have some solution that doesn't involve forcing a woman to engage in 9 months of potential medical complications and a painful and potentially dangerous labour, I'm all ears.

And I know you have this idea that she shouldn't have taken the risk of getting pregnant if she wasn't willing to endure all that that entails...but frankly, if you are so damn protective of your sperm and whatever arises from it, you should be more careful who you put it in. Don't deposit sperm into a woman who doesn't appreciate its value:P

yesman065

08-08-2007 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 372928)

Ain't his child til it exits her body.

Really?

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:12 PM

Quote:

I have a question for everyone.
Would you consider forcing a women to give birth to an unwanted baby torture and why or why not?

It would not be torture, again, because she knew that sex could lead to pregnancy and she would not be the only one involved.

Ali, yes, a surrogate would be a great option if one could be found and the transfer could be done safely.

To me the whole thing is so selfish, I want to have sex and then if I get pregnant I will not take the other party into consideration because if what I want is what I want, fuck-em.
Now I think I may be changing my opinion on men who don't take part in the kids life after they are born... if the child is so FULLY the womans she can kill it without so much as a nod to the man it is not his in ANY way EVER... might as well just move on.
You don't get to have it both ways.

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesman065 (Post 372931)

Really?

Sure, she made it all by herself.

DanaC

08-08-2007 05:28 PM

Quote:

To me the whole thing is so selfish, I want to have sex and then if I get pregnant I will not take the other party into consideration because if what I want is what I want, fuck-em.

To me the whole thing is so selfish, I want to have sex and then if she gets pregnant, I will not take her into consideration because if what I want her to do, is what I want her to do, fuck-her.

You both take a risk when you have sex. You are not risking something that could potentially kill or seriously endanger your life. If every woman who has sex, does so knowing that she risks getting pregnant and you believe that automatically subjugates her physical rights over her body to those of his rights to the child, why not agitate for abortion to be illegal if the father objects? When you've finished dictating to people of my gender what we can and cannot do with the insides of our bodies, give me a nice long lecture about how I live in Fascist Europe.

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:37 PM

I have not said that abortion should not be legal.
I simply stated if a man wanted to take full custody of the child he should be able to do so.
The other side of your rant is that you are saying it is ok for you to kill a man's child without his consent.

Ibby	08-08-2007 05:39 PM

Dude, rkzenrage, a man has NO, repeat NO right or legal authority to say what a woman does with HER, repeat HER body and things inside it. That doesn't mean you can't ask her to keep it, can't beg and plead and even demand... but she absolutely does NOT have to listen to you.

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:41 PM

What was the point of that statement of the obvious?

DanaC

08-08-2007 05:49 PM

Quote:

I simply stated if a man wanted to take full custody of the child he should be able to do so.

Of course he should, if she is willing to carry it to term for him.

Quote:

The other side of your rant is that you are saying it is ok for you to kill a man's child without his consent.

Okay. My honest opinion here rk, and I have a feeling this isn't likely to be a popular one: up until that baby leaves the mothers body, it is not a baby it is a feotus. A feotus is, to me, a potential baby. When it is born it is a baby in the world, experiencing life and is no longer existing within its mother's body. At that point the baby has its own, human rights, separate from the mother. At that point, it is as much his child as hers.

Prior to that...if it exists inside my body, if it is a part of me, it is mine.

DanaC

08-08-2007 05:52 PM

Quote:

That doesn't mean you can't ask her to keep it, can't beg and plead and even demand... but she absolutely does NOT have to listen to you.

Absolutely. I would imagine many women seeking abortions take into account their man's feelings on it when they're making their decision. It's not an easy thing to have to decide.

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 372954)

Of course he should, if she is willing to carry it to term for him.

Okay. My honest opinion here rk, and I have a feeling this isn't likely to be a popular one: up until that baby leaves the mothers body, it is not a baby it is a feotus. A feotus is, to me, a potential baby. When it is born it is a baby in the world, experiencing life and is no longer existing within its mother's body. At that point the baby has its own, human rights, separate from the mother. At that point, it is as much his child as hers.

Prior to that...if it exists inside my body, if it is a part of me, it is mine.

I strongly disagree.

DanaC

08-08-2007 05:59 PM

*nods* I know you do. I think this is not one of those issues you and I are going to find common ground on :P

Cicero

08-08-2007 06:05 PM

If you spit in my coke can it's still not your coke. We can share it- but it's really up to me whether I decide to dump it out or not.

rkzenrage

08-08-2007 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 372960)

*nods* I know you do. I think this is not one of those issues you and I are going to find common ground on :P

I know, just a discussion and not aimed at anyone in particular.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Page 3 of 32

Last »

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page