CDZ Should Men Have “Abortion Rights”?

[MarkDuffy]

The thread is about responsibility after the fact, not aborton.

MONEY

Quite possibly; but not necessarily. However the reason should be irrelevant. After all... Women aren’t made to declare a reason, before they receive an abortion.

Of course she gives a reason. She does not want a baby at this time!

Enter equal rights before the law...

He is not the pregnant one. He has no rights if the woman decides to throw the baby into the trash.

We outlawed slavery last century.

My Pro-Choice stand is pretty solid. If the baby is unwanted, kill it. Too many destroyed lives from unwanted babies.

And if YOU are unwanted?

If you have a point, spit it out. I have no time for trolls.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course she gives a reason. She does not want a baby at this time!

Enter equal rights before the law...

He is not the pregnant one. He has no rights if the woman decides to throw the baby into the trash.

As it legally stands, as of now; “yes”. That’s true. But that really isn’t the point. The point is; that as a 50% contributer to the pregnancy; the law allows a means for the woman to alleviate herself of the responsibility of having the child, and thus the care and support that such entails. The other 50% contributer needs to have a similar legal recourse. We do pride our system on “fairness” after all.

As soon as a man contributes to 50% of carrying a fetus to term in his body- and has 50% of the pain of childbirth- sure.

That’s a red herring. The responsibility of child rearing is at the very least 18 years.

Not a red herring- it is the reality you don't want to discuss.

You want a man to be either to:
a) control a woman's body or
b) be able to escape responsibility of the actions of placing his semen inside of a woman.

Don't have sex with women and you can absolutely prevent her from aborting your baby or from having to pay child support.

 

[MarkDuffy]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

 

[JoeMoma]

Enter equal rights before the law...

He is not the pregnant one. He has no rights if the woman decides to throw the baby into the trash.

As it legally stands, as of now; “yes”. That’s true. But that really isn’t the point. The point is; that as a 50% contributer to the pregnancy; the law allows a means for the woman to alleviate herself of the responsibility of having the child, and thus the care and support that such entails. The other 50% contributer needs to have a similar legal recourse. We do pride our system on “fairness” after all.

As soon as a man contributes to 50% of carrying a fetus to term in his body- and has 50% of the pain of childbirth- sure.

That’s a red herring. The responsibility of child rearing is at the very least 18 years.

Not a red herring- it is the reality you don't want to discuss.

You want a man to be either to:
a) control a woman's body or
b) be able to escape responsibility of the actions of placing his semen inside of a woman.

Don't have sex with women and you can absolutely prevent her from aborting your baby or from having to pay child support.

There it is. See post # 13.

 

[jon_berzerk]

keep your dick in your pants

if you dont want to have an unwanted child

 

[Vastator]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Not at all. It’s about seeing through to it’s logical conclusion true equality for men, and women under the law. Just like many have asked for.

 

[Vastator]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Nothing dishonest about it. My personal stance is irrelevant. It’s about equal protection, and opportunity under the law.

 

[JoeMoma]

keep your dick in your pants

if you dont want to have an unwanted child

If both men and women were to play by that rule....keep your privates in your pants.....if you don't want to have an unwanted child, there would be no need for abortions. Oh the irony!

 

[MarkDuffy]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Not at all. It’s about seeing through to it’s logical conclusion true equality for men, and women under the law. Just like many have asked for.

4 pages and I don't see your logical conclusion

Where is it?

 

[MarkDuffy]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Nothing dishonest about it. My personal stance is irrelevant. It’s about equal protection, and opportunity under the law.

My personal stance is irrelevant.

We will see how your next few posts go, won't we?

 

[Vastator]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Not at all. It’s about seeing through to it’s logical conclusion true equality for men, and women under the law. Just like many have asked for.

4 pages and I don't see your logical conclusion

Where is it?

It’s the first post.

 

[playtime]

Yes. They are 1/3 of the equation. The child would not exist without his contribution.

a couple squirts does not a vote or an equal voice make.

 

[playtime]

My advice to men who don't want to get stuck with paying for a kid they don't want is to not get a woman pregnant in the first place. That means no man should ever trust any woman to be in charge of birth control.

no woman should ever fall for ' but a rubber just doesn't feel as good' either. that way she doesn't have to decide what to do with her own uterus.

 

[MarkDuffy]

I think I know what Vastator is beating around the bush about. First he created this thread dishonestly, so I did a search and came up with this

People's pro abortion stance is little more than a thinly veiled fraud. On one hand; if they wish to kill the baby by having an abortion, they say it wasn't a person.
Then some thug comes along and shoots a pregnant woman in the stomach, then they want to charge them with a double homicide...

So... Like most "serious" issues with lefties; it is merely their feelings in a given moment that shape the reality they live in. Including what determines, what a person is, or isnt, and when...

So I know know where he stands. This should have been mentioned in the OP.

Back to topic

In order to remove responsibility for the man, the woman will need additional help. The reason the laws go after the man is cuz usually the man is in better financial condition and the Anti-Mom conservatives hate welfare. Back in the day, the man could support an entire faimly, now it really takes two.

Methinks this is really a thread about welfare

Am I right, Vastator?

Not at all. It’s about seeing through to it’s logical conclusion true equality for men, and women under the law. Just like many have asked for.

4 pages and I don't see your logical conclusion

Where is it?

It’s the first post.

Not gonna cut it, not by a long shot.

Mine is a solution, yours is not. Especially since you are Anti-Mom and a posterboy for why I use that term. You don't give a damn about the Mom when she decides to keep the baby.

You can have your pitiful way if you agree to welfare

 

[playtime]

Should Men Have “Abortion Rights”?

Of course! To do any less is pure sexism against the male. It is just as much the guy's baby as hers, and when she consents to getting pregnant, she agrees to share the baby equally. If the guy doesn't want that baby, he has as much right to the abortion as she has; when she agreed to have a baby through copulation, she gave up all claims to sole ownership of the fetus.

ummmm did you know women have sex other than to consent to a pregnancy? no, really---- that's true!

 

[playtime]

I support the right of pregnant men to abort their pregnancy

While funny; the point of the thread; is to question whether men also should have a right, to absolve themselves of responsibility regarding a pregnancy.

I've had this discussion before with other's. I find it ironic that many of the same people that strongly defend a woman's right to abort for any reason will say that men need to keep their pants on if they don't want to be responsible for raising a child. In other words, the many of same arguments that pro-lifers use against a woman's "right" to abortion, they use against the men.

there has to be a final decision & that is the one who carries to term

or not.

 

[playtime]

Since women have the legal right to dodge the responsibility of an unwanted pregnancy; shouldn’t men be given that same legal consideration? Whereby if a woman claims to have been impregnated by a man; that man should have the right to file a claim in court absolving him of responsibility for that mass of tissue, from that moment forward.

If yes; hit agree. If not; but the woman should still have the right to an abortion; explain why...

GO!!!

Single No Married Yes
Single women have not joined into a legally binding agreement, marriage. Married women have and as part of a legal union the man should have a say (save medical reasons) in the course of action.

a say...absolutely. but if he wants to give up his rights- & he would have to...then that's already on the books.

 

[playtime]

A man gets married, he has no rights at all. It is part of the vows.

Clarify your point.

The purpose of marriage is to have babies.

oh please say you are kidding....

 

[MarkDuffy]

I support the right of pregnant men to abort their pregnancy

While funny; the point of the thread; is to question whether men also should have a right, to absolve themselves of responsibility regarding a pregnancy.

I've had this discussion before with other's. I find it ironic that many of the same people that strongly defend a woman's right to abort for any reason will say that men need to keep their pants on if they don't want to be responsible for raising a child. In other words, the many of same arguments that pro-lifers use against a woman's "right" to abortion, they use against the men.

there has to be a final decision & that is the one who carries to term

or not.

I'm all for equal voting. The woman breaks all ties.

 

[playtime]

I probably posted too soon. I know of a case where the woman talked the guy into marriage. Daily threw the pills into the toilet, got pregnant. As soon as the baby was born, off to the lawyer for divorce and support. All in exactly 9+ months.

“My body, my choice” should apply equally for men. It is after all his “body” that will have to work to support her, and the child. Whether she sticks around, or not.

the child- if born is innocent in all of this. why do you want to force women to bear children where there would be the possibility of poverty? so much for 'pro-lifers'... it's always talk the talk.

& besides ---this isn't like earlier times when alimony was a long term thing.