What sort of man supports abortion?

[Esmeralda]

keep your pants over your vagina, and you won't have to worry about the consequences. Don't leave birth control up to the man. Get your tubes tied or abstain. It's simple.

You don't even see the simple logic in what I am saying, stupid. Let me put it to you simply:

Women already take main responsibility for birth control:that's why I say men should take equal care, which, 99% of the time, they don't.

Women are the ones who also must bear the responsibility of what happens if the birth control fails: 99% of the time, men don't.

Are you naturally stupid or do you work at it?

Actually in my relationship I'm responsible for the birth control.

and the question isn't about mechanics or who does what, and it isn't about forcing a woman to do anything, its about both parties having choices before and after conception.

or are you saying women require special protection by the government in this case?

This has nothing to do with my intellect, and all about your side not really being for "equality".

Also go **** yourself for being a condescending ****.

I only condescend because you are worthy of condescension. When the birth control fails, and you conceive, in your womb, and must decide to carry the child to term, and then when it is born, you take the vast majority of the responsibiity for raising it, when your life from the time you are 20 to 40 is forcused almost solely on the welfare of the child, putting your own desires second, then, and only then, things will be equal, only then.

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

 

[martybegan]

Actually in my relationship I'm responsible for the birth control.

and the question isn't about mechanics or who does what, and it isn't about forcing a woman to do anything, its about both parties having choices before and after conception.

or are you saying women require special protection by the government in this case?

This has nothing to do with my intellect, and all about your side not really being for "equality".

Also go **** yourself for being a condescending ****.

I only condescend because you are worthy of condescension. When the birth control fails, and you conceive, in your womb, and must decide to carry the child to term, and then when it is born, you take the vast majority of the responsibiity for raising it, when your life from the time you are 20 to 40 is forcused almost solely on the welfare of the child, putting your own desires second, then, and only then, things will be equal, only then.

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

Because that's the chance he took when he knocked her up.

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

 

[martybegan]

keep your pants over your vagina, and you won't have to worry about the consequences. Don't leave birth control up to the man. Get your tubes tied or abstain. It's simple.

You don't even see the simple logic in what I am saying, stupid. Let me put it to you simply:

Women already take main responsibility for birth control:that's why I say men should take equal care, which, 99% of the time, they don't.

Women are the ones who also must bear the responsibility of what happens if the birth control fails: 99% of the time, men don't.

Are you naturally stupid or do you work at it?

Actually in my relationship I'm responsible for the birth control.

and the question isn't about mechanics or who does what, and it isn't about forcing a woman to do anything, its about both parties having choices before and after conception.

or are you saying women require special protection by the government in this case?

This has nothing to do with my intellect, and all about your side not really being for "equality".

Also go **** yourself for being a condescending ****.

I only condescend because you are worthy of condescension. When the birth control fails, and you conceive, in your womb, and must decide to carry the child to term, and then when it is born, you take the vast majority of the responsibiity for raising it, when your life from the time you are 20 to 40 is forcused almost solely on the welfare of the child, putting your own desires second, then, and only then, things will be equal, only then.

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

The fact you ask this question just defies logic. Because it your sperm. If you hadn't kept it to yourself, then there would be no issue. That's why I say get a vasectomy. You just aren't following the point, probably because it would be necessary for you to think outside your tunnel vision.

Well it's her egg, and if she just kept her legs together, it wouldn't be an issue.

And again, It's not about me, it's about the concept of fairness and equality, and your side saying the woman can't be equal, government HAS to help her force a guy to support a kid he doesn't want.

 

[martybegan]

You don't even see the simple logic in what I am saying, stupid. Let me put it to you simply:

Women already take main responsibility for birth control:that's why I say men should take equal care, which, 99% of the time, they don't.

Women are the ones who also must bear the responsibility of what happens if the birth control fails: 99% of the time, men don't.

Are you naturally stupid or do you work at it?

Actually in my relationship I'm responsible for the birth control.

and the question isn't about mechanics or who does what, and it isn't about forcing a woman to do anything, its about both parties having choices before and after conception.

or are you saying women require special protection by the government in this case?

This has nothing to do with my intellect, and all about your side not really being for "equality".

Also go **** yourself for being a condescending ****.

I only condescend because you are worthy of condescension. When the birth control fails, and you conceive, in your womb, and must decide to carry the child to term, and then when it is born, you take the vast majority of the responsibiity for raising it, when your life from the time you are 20 to 40 is forcused almost solely on the welfare of the child, putting your own desires second, then, and only then, things will be equal, only then.

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

again, not trying to force a woman to carry a kid she doesn't want, just pointing out that if things were truly equal, men would have the same choice, as long as they give their answer in time for the woman to make hers.

 

[Carla_Danger]

I only condescend because you are worthy of condescension. When the birth control fails, and you conceive, in your womb, and must decide to carry the child to term, and then when it is born, you take the vast majority of the responsibiity for raising it, when your life from the time you are 20 to 40 is forcused almost solely on the welfare of the child, putting your own desires second, then, and only then, things will be equal, only then.

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

Because that's the chance he took when he knocked her up.

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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

 

[martybegan]

but if the man tells the woman he doesn't want a kid, and she has time to abort if she so chooses, why should he still be responsible if it is her "choice" to keep it after that?

Because that's the chance he took when he knocked her up.

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Because that's the chance he took when he knocked her up.

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

Then you're not very bright.

 

[martybegan]

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

Then you're not very bright.

i'll put my IQ up against yours any day of the week.

You just refuse to look at it from a purely clinical perspective, free of emotion.

 

[Esmeralda]

Because that's the chance he took when he knocked her up.

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

 

[Esmeralda]

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

Then you're not very bright.

i'll put my IQ up against yours any day of the week.

You just refuse to look at it from a purely clinical perspective, free of emotion.

OMG that's so ironic. You think you are using logic and you are so not. Too funny.

I think it's time to give up on this bozo; he is never going to get it.

 

[Carla_Danger]

So your idea of equality would be to push someone like koshergrl into a forced abortion with the threat of not paying child support if she decides to keep and raise the child? LOL! Good luck with that.

You know, women live longer than men. I'm against that. I think men and women should be able to live as long as the other, however, I have no control over that, just as I have no control over a woman being the only gender who can carry a baby to term.

Or keep it and provide for it herself. The whole idea of the sexual revolution was "liberation". Why is it now that one side of the equation has to run to government for protections?

And your second paragraph has not relation to the discussion at hand, which is legal equality when it comes to choices before and after conception with regards to wanting a child or not.

Run it by the judge!

If a woman decides to keep and raise a baby, both parents are financially responsible. There is no going around that fact.

While the fetus is in a woman's body, she has the final say to continue the pregnancy or end it. There is no going around that.

You're going to have to argue with mother nature on the other issues.

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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.

Lots of women do handle it themselves with no child support, or very little, and only when the courts are able to hunt him down.

That is not fair to the child when both parents owe that child support.

 

[martybegan]

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

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.

 

[Carla_Danger]

So your idea of equality would be to push someone like koshergrl into a forced abortion with the threat of not paying child support if she decides to keep and raise the child? LOL! Good luck with that.

You know, women live longer than men. I'm against that. I think men and women should be able to live as long as the other, however, I have no control over that, just as I have no control over a woman being the only gender who can carry a baby to term.

Or keep it and provide for it herself. The whole idea of the sexual revolution was "liberation". Why is it now that one side of the equation has to run to government for protections?

And your second paragraph has not relation to the discussion at hand, which is legal equality when it comes to choices before and after conception with regards to wanting a child or not.

Run it by the judge!

If a woman decides to keep and raise a baby, both parents are financially responsible. There is no going around that fact.

While the fetus is in a woman's body, she has the final say to continue the pregnancy or end it. There is no going around that.

You're going to have to argue with mother nature on the other issues.

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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

 

[martybegan]

Or keep it and provide for it herself. The whole idea of the sexual revolution was "liberation". Why is it now that one side of the equation has to run to government for protections?

And your second paragraph has not relation to the discussion at hand, which is legal equality when it comes to choices before and after conception with regards to wanting a child or not.

Run it by the judge!

If a woman decides to keep and raise a baby, both parents are financially responsible. There is no going around that fact.

While the fetus is in a woman's body, she has the final say to continue the pregnancy or end it. There is no going around that.

You're going to have to argue with mother nature on the other issues.

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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.

Lots of women do handle it themselves with no child support, or very little, and only when the courts are able to hunt him down.

That is not fair to the child when both parents owe that child support.

It's not about fairness to the child, it's about choice. Being aborted surely isn't fair to the child.

 

[Esmeralda]

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

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.

LOL You are just too funny. You are so ridiculous.

 

[martybegan]

Or keep it and provide for it herself. The whole idea of the sexual revolution was "liberation". Why is it now that one side of the equation has to run to government for protections?

And your second paragraph has not relation to the discussion at hand, which is legal equality when it comes to choices before and after conception with regards to wanting a child or not.

Run it by the judge!

If a woman decides to keep and raise a baby, both parents are financially responsible. There is no going around that fact.

While the fetus is in a woman's body, she has the final say to continue the pregnancy or end it. There is no going around that.

You're going to have to argue with mother nature on the other issues.

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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.

 

[Esmeralda]

Run it by the judge!

If a woman decides to keep and raise a baby, both parents are financially responsible. There is no going around that fact.

While the fetus is in a woman's body, she has the final say to continue the pregnancy or end it. There is no going around that.

You're going to have to argue with mother nature on the other issues.

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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.

Lots of women do handle it themselves with no child support, or very little, and only when the courts are able to hunt him down.

That is not fair to the child when both parents owe that child support.

It's not about fairness to the child, it's about choice. Being aborted surely isn't fair to the child.

There is no child. You want to be logical then understand there is no child: it is an undeveloped fetus.

 

[martybegan]

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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.

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.

LOL You are just too funny. You are so ridiculous.

Running out of answers?

 

[Hancock]

Then she should be held by the same "chance"

In fairness, either both have to be stuck with it, or both can get out of it.

Not exactly sure where you got this idea of "fairness" from? It's a bit like saying it's unfair that when you jump off a tall building gravity hurts you when you land...

Actually it's like both the man and the woman jumping off together but only the woman controls the parachute they share.

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

 

[martybegan]

The only reason both parents are responsible when the man doesn't want the kid is because evidently women need more protection than men when it comes to the law, and more insulation from their own choices. If one wants to argue equality, one is confronted by the fact above.

A woman can have the final say on termination, but forcing the man to accept her choice by government fiat is antiquated, and assumes women need additional help from the government with regards to their choices.

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.

Lots of women do handle it themselves with no child support, or very little, and only when the courts are able to hunt him down.

That is not fair to the child when both parents owe that child support.

It's not about fairness to the child, it's about choice. Being aborted surely isn't fair to the child.

There is no child. You want to be logical than understand there is no child: it is an undeveloped fetus.

Nice mental exercise there to justify killing something off, but it's not going to fly.