CDZ Should Men Have “Abortion Rights”?

[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?

You’re dodging the issue... noted

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

 

[MarkDuffy]

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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

Consider a woman having an abortion is doing it for you. To remove your accountability. You should thank her.

Red herring. Any perceived benefit from her choice is irrelevant. It is the matter of having choice that is at issue.

You do realize, you lost this argument 4 pages ago

What were you thinking?

We have two parties in on the act & decision. Who breaks the tie?

I’ve lost nothing. It wasn’t a competition. It only became so for you; once you surmised that I was pro life. Still... a distraction nonetheless. There is no tie. Both parties are aware of the possible outcome, at the outset. One male. One female. Which, is which is a matter of chance, and biology. Both are known at the time of conception. From there it’s a zero sum game. Once a decision is made by either party to abdicate responsibility... by law; only one is given that option. That doesn’t stand up to the mantra of equality. And is actually discriminatory.

Let's try this a different way

Share with the class the "abdicate responsibility" that you speak of for both sides. Be sure you include the emotional pain and guilt the woman goes though knowing she has killed her living baby that lasts for a lifetime.

 

[playtime]

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?

You’re dodging the issue... noted

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

 

[Vastator]

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

Consider a woman having an abortion is doing it for you. To remove your accountability. You should thank her.

Red herring. Any perceived benefit from her choice is irrelevant. It is the matter of having choice that is at issue.

You do realize, you lost this argument 4 pages ago

What were you thinking?

We have two parties in on the act & decision. Who breaks the tie?

I’ve lost nothing. It wasn’t a competition. It only became so for you; once you surmised that I was pro life. Still... a distraction nonetheless. There is no tie. Both parties are aware of the possible outcome, at the outset. One male. One female. Which, is which is a matter of chance, and biology. Both are known at the time of conception. From there it’s a zero sum game. Once a decision is made by either party to abdicate responsibility... by law; only one is given that option. That doesn’t stand up to the mantra of equality. And is actually discriminatory.

Let's try this a different way

Share with the class the "abdicate responsibility" that you speak of for both sides. Be sure you include the emotional pain and guilt the woman goes though knowing she has killed a living baby.

I cannot speak for others. But rest assured; many proponents have openly proclaimed the unborn to be nothing more than a “ potential living baby”... But only they could truly answer your question. But back on topic; the roles of the sexes may differ due to biology, but our laws demand equal treatment, and opportunity. And that is what is being discussed here.

 

[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

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?

You’re dodging the issue... noted

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

 

[playtime]

You’re dodging the issue... noted

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

tsk tsk... you seem to be getting snippy. why would that be? are you realizing that your utopian world doesn't exist? & if you think right now, that females have equal rights... you are sorely mistaken. your whole OP is flawed right outa the gate.

 

[MarkDuffy]

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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father when the child is born

 

[Vastator]

You’re dodging the issue... noted

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

tsk tsk... you seem to be getting snippy. why would that be? are you realizing that your utopian world doesn't exist? & if you think right now, that females have equal rights... you are sorely mistaken. your whole OP is flawed right outa the gate.

Your saying so; doesn't make it so... You do realize that. Don't you?

 

[playtime]

dodging what? i've answered you & others on this thread. i've stated my position & will re-iterate that it is about the post born product being taken care of. & if the female decides to carry to term then she is bearing most the responsibility INCLUDING financial. so yep... the male gets to pay too.

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

tsk tsk... you seem to be getting snippy. why would that be? are you realizing that your utopian world doesn't exist? & if you think right now, that females have equal rights... you are sorely mistaken. your whole OP is flawed right outa the gate.

Your saying so; doesn't make it so... You do realize that. Don't you?

stay on topic please.

 

[Vastator]

“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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father.

No. Both parties should be afforded the same protection and opportunity under the law. Either way the pendulum swings. Do you think women should have a get out of pregnancy (instanced motherhood) free card?

 

[Vastator]

No. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with the “post born child”. If you wish to discuss such a thing; start a thread about it. But this thread, has a specific topic. Stay on it...

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

tsk tsk... you seem to be getting snippy. why would that be? are you realizing that your utopian world doesn't exist? & if you think right now, that females have equal rights... you are sorely mistaken. your whole OP is flawed right outa the gate.

Your saying so; doesn't make it so... You do realize that. Don't you?

stay on topic please.

Your trolling nets you nothing. Either youre for equality under the law; or you aren't. Which is it?

 

[Vastator]

“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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father when the child is born

The decisions in question; as they relate to the OP are made prior to the child being born.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Consider a woman having an abortion is doing it for you. To remove your accountability. You should thank her.

Red herring. Any perceived benefit from her choice is irrelevant. It is the matter of having choice that is at issue.

You do realize, you lost this argument 4 pages ago

What were you thinking?

We have two parties in on the act & decision. Who breaks the tie?

I’ve lost nothing. It wasn’t a competition. It only became so for you; once you surmised that I was pro life. Still... a distraction nonetheless. There is no tie. Both parties are aware of the possible outcome, at the outset. One male. One female. Which, is which is a matter of chance, and biology. Both are known at the time of conception. From there it’s a zero sum game. Once a decision is made by either party to abdicate responsibility... by law; only one is given that option. That doesn’t stand up to the mantra of equality. And is actually discriminatory.

Let's try this a different way

Share with the class the "abdicate responsibility" that you speak of for both sides. Be sure you include the emotional pain and guilt the woman goes though knowing she has killed a living baby.

I cannot speak for others. But rest assured; many proponents have openly proclaimed the unborn to be nothing more than a “ potential living baby”... But only they could truly answer your question.

Unlucky YOU, you are dealing with ME and I am an evolutionary biologist.

But back on topic; the roles of the sexes may differ due to biology, but our laws demand equal treatment, and opportunity. And that is what is being discussed here.

You have failed to answer the question. We all know why.

 

[Vastator]

Red herring. Any perceived benefit from her choice is irrelevant. It is the matter of having choice that is at issue.

You do realize, you lost this argument 4 pages ago

What were you thinking?

We have two parties in on the act & decision. Who breaks the tie?

I’ve lost nothing. It wasn’t a competition. It only became so for you; once you surmised that I was pro life. Still... a distraction nonetheless. There is no tie. Both parties are aware of the possible outcome, at the outset. One male. One female. Which, is which is a matter of chance, and biology. Both are known at the time of conception. From there it’s a zero sum game. Once a decision is made by either party to abdicate responsibility... by law; only one is given that option. That doesn’t stand up to the mantra of equality. And is actually discriminatory.

Let's try this a different way

Share with the class the "abdicate responsibility" that you speak of for both sides. Be sure you include the emotional pain and guilt the woman goes though knowing she has killed a living baby.

I cannot speak for others. But rest assured; many proponents have openly proclaimed the unborn to be nothing more than a “ potential living baby”... But only they could truly answer your question.

Unlucky YOU, you are dealing with ME and I am an evolutionary biologist.

But back on topic; the roles of the sexes may differ due to biology, but our laws demand equal treatment, and opportunity. And that is what is being discussed here.

You have failed to answer the question. We all know why.

Your claimed method of employment, is as irrelevant as the nature of my fortune.
And yes. We know why. Its called staying on topic not allowing thread drift.

 

[MarkDuffy]

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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father.

No.

Yes

Both parties should be afforded the same protection and opportunity under the law.

You called it a zero sum game. You refused to answer the question who breaks the tie. You refused to tell the class what "abdicate responsibility" was for both sides.

Either way the pendulum swings. Do you think women should have a get out of pregnancy (instanced motherhood) free card?

The woman never gets outta jail free.

 

[MarkDuffy]

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.

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father when the child is born

The decisions in question; as they relate to the OP are made prior to the child being born.

You should just surrender now. "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." was your post, correct?

Parse that for me and make it believable this time.

 

[Vastator]

It isn’t about pro life. It about equal opportunity to dodge accountability under the law. No one claimed it was pretty. But our society is about equality.

if the child is born , then the question of equality is moot. then it is ALL about the child.

Yes but that’s a topic well beyond the scope of this OP.

FAIL

Do you need your OP repeated?

You want a get outta jail free card for the father when the child is born

The decisions in question; as they relate to the OP are made prior to the child being born.

You should just surrender now. "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." was your post, correct?

Parse that for me and make it believable this time.

It's clearly stated I'm the OP.

 

[playtime]

m'k. so then answer me this...

what would the male be absolved of all responsibility for?

The same thing the woman is... responsibility for that child. From then on... It really isn’t a difficult concept.

tsk tsk... you seem to be getting snippy. why would that be? are you realizing that your utopian world doesn't exist? & if you think right now, that females have equal rights... you are sorely mistaken. your whole OP is flawed right outa the gate.

Your saying so; doesn't make it so... You do realize that. Don't you?

stay on topic please.

Your trolling nets you nothing. Either youre for equality under the law; or you aren't. Which is it?

i am far from being a troll. i have answered you the same way & have been consistent. i am absolutely for equal rights

. but you have a faulty starting line. you know you do, but that isn't stopping you from trying to make a point that has no real merit because of it's faulty premise.

 

[Vastator]

The premise is equality. You're for it. Or your against it.

 

[playtime]

the male has zero responsibility to pay 1/2 for the procedure involving tissue mass. however, the game changes once that moment goes forward because it's not about her or him but whatever 'it' turns into.

cue the whatever faulty counterpoint the OP is still trying to make