What sort of man supports abortion?

[martybegan]

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

Logic. Logic. Think. Think. Unless she m akes the full choice for against abortion, she does not have the 'choice' to not carry the fetus in her body to term and give birth. She doesn't have the choice to endure all the things that go with it, including the possibility of death or a problem pregnancy where she is damaged internally. She doen't have the choice to deal with the emotional impact a pregnancy involves, which is a lifetime emotional impact whether she gives up the child or keeps it. She doesn't not usually have the choice to not be the primary caregiver for the next 20 years. There is no fairness in this scenaro.

there is total fairness, she is given the information in time to abort or keep the kid. Knowing this it's up to her to either go ahead with the kid or abort it and be done with it.

You were saying earlier the father should have an equal choice in whether or not there is an abortion.

I never said that, I said that if the man is given no choice, the woman shouldn't either, fair being fair.

I've said that the woman has the choice at all times, both if the man wants it, and if he doesn't want it. my argument is that if he says "no" with enough time for her to make her choice, then her choice becomes her choice, and if she wants the kid, she takes care of it herself.

 

[martybegan]

it takes two to tango. they both jumped off the roof, but she gets to decide if they open the parachute or SPLAT!

It's actually a perfect analogy.

No it isn't, because they don't go 'splat.' Getting pregnant is not the same thing as ending your life, as dying. It's not the end of something, it's the beginning of something. Also, your premise is that the result of the so called 'splat' is the same for both is completely erroneous. When you have a premise that is not logical, your entire analogy fails.

I was replying to Paintmyhouses's analogy. If you decide to take it literally, I suggest you study up on analogies and their concept and application.

Then his analogy was also fallacious. They don't both go splat; i.e., the result of birth control failure is not the same for both.

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Emotional impact of having to keep or give up the child? What about the impact when she gets older and realizes, "I killed it." Or are going to pretend that doesn't happen either?

We all have regrets, but most women don't regret their abortions. Here and there of course.

 

[Esmeralda]

That analogy might make sense if a man could also get pregnant, but he can't, so that's a false analogy.

it takes two to tango. they both jumped off the roof, but she gets to decide if they open the parachute or SPLAT!

It's actually a perfect analogy.

No it isn't, because they don't go 'splat.' Getting pregnant is not the same thing as ending your life, as dying. It's not the end of something, it's the beginning of something. Also, your premise is that the result of the so called 'splat' is the same for both is completely erroneous. When you have a premise that is not logical, your entire analogy fails.

Ah, your so close....You say getting pregnant is the beginning of something.
Would that something be life?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Based on what we are discussing, the choice of taking an embryo to term or ending the conception now, then it is the beginning of an issue. A miscarriage would be the end of something. God does it all the time himself. There are more miscarriages every year than abortions: He's the great abortionist. If you believe in god. Otherwise, nature is the true abortionist. Medically induced miscarriage, i.e, abortion, is doing what we do with medical science every day in thousands of other ways: helping it along, improving upon it, etc.

And an abortion would also be the end of something! But you said the beginning of something( life)...then realized you were about to paint yourself into a corner and are now dodging accordingly...
A miscarriage is the body naturally rejecting the fertilized egg. An abortion is not natural and is usually a health fetus rejected because "mama don't want no skretch marks". The fact that you try to connect a naturally occurring miscarriage with a abortion tells me you're not only a moron, but a fuckin moron.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Oh, no. Don't try to twist my words, only a freaking loser does that. I am and was referring to the issue of abortion in the consideration of having or not having a child. It is an issue whether or not to terminate the pregnancy. It is not the end of things until that decision is made. It's a decision. I was not referring to the beginning of life. Only a bozo would try to twist someone's words. Loser, loser, loser.

 

[Esmeralda]

w

No it isn't, because they don't go 'splat.' Getting pregnant is not the same thing as ending your life, as dying. It's not the end of something, it's the beginning of something. Also, your premise is that the result of the so called 'splat' is the same for both is completely erroneous. When you have a premise that is not logical, your entire analogy fails.

I was replying to Paintmyhouses's analogy. If you decide to take it literally, I suggest you study up on analogies and their concept and application.

Then his analogy was also fallacious. They don't both go splat; i.e., the result of birth control failure is not the same for both.

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wow. Do you think women get pregnant on purpose and then have abortions for fun?

 

[martybegan]

I was replying to Paintmyhouses's analogy. If you decide to take it literally, I suggest you study up on analogies and their concept and application.

Then his analogy was also fallacious. They don't both go splat; i.e., the result of birth control failure is not the same for both.

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Run that by the judge. lol

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

As soon as you can become pregnant, you will also have that choice. Until then, she has the final say.

That only works for a man wanting a kid and the woman not wanting a kid, and in that, I agree her choice is final. It does not apply when the opposite is true, and she is given the information well before she has to decide abort/not abort.

It doesn't matter if a man wants the child or not, he still owes that child support if the child is born....both parents owe that child support.

Your argument is ridiculous.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then his analogy was also fallacious. They don't both go splat; i.e., the result of birth control failure is not the same for both.

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

What part of you can't carry a fetus inside you don't you get? Exactly who told you that life was supposed to be fair?

 

[Esmeralda]

Then his analogy was also fallacious. They don't both go splat; i.e., the result of birth control failure is not the same for both.

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

Oh, I see, you've turned this thread topic into your own personal rant. Okay. You are okay with abortion as long as you are the one who makes the choice, which means you want control over the woman's body.

Go back to what I said before: do not have sex unless there is no chance of you getting anyone pregnant because you don't now and will never have the chance to say whether or not a woman chooses abortion: it's her body, her choice. Just like she can't dictate to you to have a vascetomy. But if you don't, and get a woman pregnant, you suffer the consequences, which includes not having the choice to prevent her from having an abortion.

And don't say a woman getting her tubes tied is equal to a vasectomy: it isn't. It's far more serious and complicated and a far more invasive procedure on her body. She can continue to have internal problems because of it for the rest of her life. It is not an in office procedure and you go home the same day. Read about it: you are not in touch with reality.

 

[Carla_Danger]

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

Oh, I see, you've turned this thread topic into your own personal rant. Okay. You are okay with abortion as long as you are the one who makes there choice, which means you want control over the woman's body. Go back to what I said before: do not have sex unless there is no chance of you getting anyone pregnant because you don't now and will never have the chance to say whether or not a woman chooses abortion: it's her body, her choice. Just like she can't dictate to you to have a vascetomy. But if you don't, and get a woman pregnant, you suffer the consequences, which includes not having the choice to prevent her from having an abortion.

I suspect that the main reason most women get abortions is because the father is a whiny little bitch like marty, who she'd have to fight over for child support. lol

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

Oh, I see, you've turned this thread topic into your own personal rant. Okay. You are okay with abortion as long as you are the one who makes there choice, which means you want control over the woman's body. Go back to what I said before: do not have sex unless there is no chance of you getting anyone pregnant because you don't now and will never have the chance to say whether or not a woman chooses abortion: it's her body, her choice. Just like she can't dictate to you to have a vascetomy. But if you don't, and get a woman pregnant, you suffer the consequences, which includes not having the choice to prevent her from having an abortion.

I suspect that the main reason most women get abortions is because the father is a whiny little bitch like marty, who she'd have to fight over for child support. lol

Meaning her regret will be not the abortion, but dropping her panties for a pussy...

 

[paulitician]

It's not a man issue. It's a woman issue. And Government cannot and should not force women to have unwanted children. Period, end of story.

 

[koshergrl]

Child support is just that....it's for the child, you boob. The mother and the father are both equally responsible in supporting a child. If a man has custody of that child, he can sue the mother for child support.

If the mother is truly an empowered woman, she should be able to handle it herself if the father want's nothing to do with it, or she can abort it.

Run that by the judge. lol

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

There is no "fair" when it comes to nature. And reality. Fairness doesn't dictate dick.

The truth of the matter..neither one has the right to terminate a life...whether it's growing inside them or not...based on nothing more than their desire to get out of the responsibility of the next nine months.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If the mother is truly an empowered woman, she should be able to handle it herself if the father want's nothing to do with it, or she can abort it.

Run that by the judge. lol

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

There is no "fair" when it comes to nature. And reality. Fairness doesn't dictate dick.

The truth of the matter..neither one has the right to terminate a life...whether it's growing inside them or not...based on nothing more than their desire to get out of the responsibility of the next nine months.

Well, you got the first part right. 50% is damn good in your case.

 

[martybegan]

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

As soon as you can become pregnant, you will also have that choice. Until then, she has the final say.

That only works for a man wanting a kid and the woman not wanting a kid, and in that, I agree her choice is final. It does not apply when the opposite is true, and she is given the information well before she has to decide abort/not abort.

It doesn't matter if a man wants the child or not, he still owes that child support if the child is born....both parents owe that child support.

Your argument is ridiculous.

My argument is the only one that makes logical sense if you want true equality between men and women.

 

[martybegan]

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

Oh, I see, you've turned this thread topic into your own personal rant. Okay. You are okay with abortion as long as you are the one who makes there choice, which means you want control over the woman's body. Go back to what I said before: do not have sex unless there is no chance of you getting anyone pregnant because you don't now and will never have the chance to say whether or not a woman chooses abortion: it's her body, her choice. Just like she can't dictate to you to have a vascetomy. But if you don't, and get a woman pregnant, you suffer the consequences, which includes not having the choice to prevent her from having an abortion.

I suspect that the main reason most women get abortions is because the father is a whiny little bitch like marty, who she'd have to fight over for child support. lol

Nice personal attack, you pustular twat.

 

[martybegan]

If the mother is truly an empowered woman, she should be able to handle it herself if the father want's nothing to do with it, or she can abort it.

Run that by the judge. lol

appeal to authority. nice logical fallacy there.

It doesn't answer WHY he should be forced to pay, if he indicates his choice in time for the woman to have her choice.

Because a father shares equal responsibility in raising that child. The father can indicate his choice, but does not have the final say because it's not his body.

You--My argument is over the inherent disconnect between women screaming for control of their bodies and then turning around and saying men don't have the same control.

But he didn't want it in the first place. If SHE doesn't want it, she has an out. Fairness dictates he gets one as well. Fairness also dictates HE has to make up his mind in time so SHE can have a choice as well.

There is no "fair" when it comes to nature. And reality. Fairness doesn't dictate dick.

The truth of the matter..neither one has the right to terminate a life...whether it's growing inside them or not...based on nothing more than their desire to get out of the responsibility of the next nine months.

if neither had the choice, that would be fine, but in an equal society both need to have the choice for it to truly be equal.

 

[martybegan]

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

Oh, I see, you've turned this thread topic into your own personal rant. Okay. You are okay with abortion as long as you are the one who makes the choice, which means you want control over the woman's body.

Go back to what I said before: do not have sex unless there is no chance of you getting anyone pregnant because you don't now and will never have the chance to say whether or not a woman chooses abortion: it's her body, her choice. Just like she can't dictate to you to have a vascetomy. But if you don't, and get a woman pregnant, you suffer the consequences, which includes not having the choice to prevent her from having an abortion.

And don't say a woman getting her tubes tied is equal to a vasectomy: it isn't. It's far more serious and complicated and a far more invasive procedure on her body. She can continue to have internal problems because of it for the rest of her life. It is not an in office procedure and you go home the same day. Read about it: you are not in touch with reality.

Then the woman should be told to not have sex unless there is no chance of getting pregnant if she doesn't want one.

And the choice would not be to prevent an abortion, but to either have her get one, or not support any kid resulting from HER CHOICE.

The woman already has a legal out, abortion, they only thing I'm saying is fairness and equality demands the man having the same choice, which has no actual impact on the woman's (i.e she has to have time to make the choice, knowing his choice).

 

[martybegan]

It's not about birth control failure, it's about being able to choose to pull the cord, or not.

You are so completely illogical. The need for abortion is based on the lack of or the failure of birth control. Jeeze.

Which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

The failure of birth control is irrelevant to a discussion of abortion? You didn't really say that? It is the only reason for the issue of abortion. Wow. Just Wos.

it's irrelevant to the discussion of choice for both parties, vs. choice for just one party.

What part of you can't carry a fetus inside you don't you get? Exactly who told you that life was supposed to be fair?

It's supposed to be at least equal, or are you saying women need special protection from the government above and beyond what man needs?

 

[BluePhantom]

That doesn't answer the question.

It sure did answer the question. No one can force a woman to give birth against her will. Why is that so hard to get through your thick skull?

Again, that isn't the question. The question is if a woman can decide not to have a kid post conception, why is the supposed father precluded from the same choice? Of course this choice has to be made in time for the woman to have an abortion, or not have one.

As I've already stated, at least 10 times on this thread, I'm sure most women keep in mind where their partner stands on the issue, but the final say belongs to the woman because she's the one who has to carry to term, or not carry. If the decision is to keep and raise a child, then BOTH parents owe that child support.

Again, how is that "equal"?

If she wants to carry to term, and the man wants no part of it, why, if his intent is known, should he be responsible against his will?

Are you saying women need special protection from the government?

It's equal because a male would be treated with the same respect to privacy if the situation were reversed. Holy Mother of Gawd.


Before birth, however, the issue takes on a very different cast. It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty than on the father's. The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman. Cf. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U. S., at 281. The Court has held that "when the wife and the husband disagree on this decision, the view of only one of the two marriage partners can prevail. Inasmuch as it is the woman who physically bears the child and who is the more directly and immediately affected by the pregnancy, as between the two, the balance weighs in her favor." Danforth, supra, at 71. This conclusion rests upon the basic nature of marriage and the nature of our Constitution: "


Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

I know why you can't get this through your head. Your dunce cap is lined with tin foil huh? No one is making a legal argument. Frankly, legal arguments are irrelevant. Law change, the constitution changes, and interpretations of the constitution change. Plessy v. Ferguson constitutionally upheld separate but equal. The Dred Scott decision constitutionally established that blacks were not American citizens. Those laws and decisions changed because someone said "you know what? This is bullshit" and the SCOTUS said "you're right...it IS bullshit".

We are discussing a hypothetical question about basic fairness and equality and you keep bringing up legal decisions and empty rhetoric. You don't speak to the point. You avoid the speaking to the point and re-emphasize your gynocentric, misandric position while claiming you favor equal rights.