New Abortion law, about ultra-sounds...

Originally posted by LethalFemme
I'd actually like to hear your opinion.

the problem i have with it is when she just doesnt want it. she should have thought about that before she got pregnant.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
ok, since you asked, femmey. if a woman gets pregnant, and she decides not to have the baby just because she doesnt want it, she should be denied. now, if, by giving birth, her life will be in danger, that should be an exception to the rule. also if the fetus is deformed, and the baby will be born deformed and/or handicapped (ie: a blind crack baby), this COULD be an exception also. in either of the latter scenarios, there are dangers and/or difficulties. also, if a woman is impregnated because of rape, she should be allowed to have an abortion.

the problem i have with it is when she just doesnt want it. she should have thought about that before she got pregnant.

Your argument is flawed, why should one be able to pick and choose what type of child is acceptable for them? It should either be banned all together or allowed under what circumstances the mother wishes, in my opinion it should be the latter.

What about the fathers... don't they have a say? It's not like the woman got pregnant by herself, it's half genetically his too. Unless she went to a sperm-bank, got inseminated and then decided to have an abortion; while not impossible, it would be a highly improbable scenario.

Originally posted by Robtard
What about the fathers... don't they have a say? It's not like the woman got pregnant by herself, it's half genetically his too. Unless she went to a sperm-bank, got inseminated and then decided to have an abortion; while not impossible, it would be a highly improbable scenario.

A good point but unfortunately it seems to be the case in much abortions that the father has deserted the mother. Though in relationships I agree that the father should have just as much of a say as the mother.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
ok, since you asked, femmey. if a woman gets pregnant, and she decides not to have the baby just because she doesnt want it, she should be denied. now, if, by giving birth, her life will be in danger, that should be an exception to the rule. also if the fetus is deformed, and the baby will be born deformed and/or handicapped (ie: a blind crack baby), this COULD be an exception also. in either of the latter scenarios, there are dangers and/or difficulties. also, if a woman is impregnated because of rape, she should be allowed to have an abortion.

the problem i have with it is when she just doesnt want it. she should have thought about that before she got pregnant.

Did it ever occur to you that she didn't plan to get pregnant? That it happened despite using protection? She made moves to make sure it didn't happen and through no fault of her own, it did. What then?

Also, it's ridiculously hypocritical of you to say a woman can discard a foetus if it's handicapped, then to say she can't do it if she doesn't want it. Considering she might not want it if it's handicapped, but not so much that it couldn't live comfortably.

Originally posted by Robtard
What about the fathers... don't they have a say? It's not like the woman got pregnant by herself, it's half genetically his too. Unless she went to a sperm-bank, got inseminated and then decided to have an abortion; while not impossible, it would be a highly improbable scenario.

What about them? Whilst I agree that they are the only other party that would have any right to influence, think about it for a second.

If a woman said "Let's try for a baby." then changed her mind, I'd say that's messed up for the father. If they have sex, it's not planned but she gets pregnant anyway and he just decides it'd be nice to follow through, then he shouldn't have a say. It's not that kind of choice.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

What about them? Whilst I agree that they are the only other party that would have any right to influence, think about it for a second.

If a woman said "Let's try for a baby." then changed her mind, I'd say that's messed up for the father. If they have sex, it's not planned but she gets pregnant anyway and he just decides it'd be nice to follow through, then he shouldn't have a say. It's not that kind of choice.

-AC

Because you say so? The father is 1/2 of that fetus/parasite/goo and anything else that's been thrown around here, so why doesn't he logically have a say? She allowed him to have sex with her.

Reverse the scenario... If they just had sex and she gets accidentally pregnant and she decides to keep the child while the father would prefer an abortion, the father is then legally responsible to provide for the child. Therefore, he should have legal rights to the fetus.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because you say so?

Why do you assume everything I say, I put across as factual? I'm giving my opinion.

Originally posted by Robtard
The father is 1/2 of that fetus/parasite/goo and anything else that's been thrown around here, so why doesn't he logically have a say? She allowed him to have sex with her.

Yeah, I see lots of men walking around for 9 months with a baby in their womb, then enduring childbirth.

Because we all know that a man doesn't just put it in, blow his load and leave the rest to the woman.

Read what I said again. If they BOTH took precautions against pregnancy that failed, and he just decided "Oh let's keep it!", then that's bs.

Originally posted by Robtard
Reverse the scenario... If they just had sex and she gets accidentally pregnant and she decides to keep the child while the father would prefer an abortion, the father is then legally responsible to provide for the child. Therefore, he should have legal rights to the fetus.

Precisely. That's not fair on the man either, hence why I said the father's, if anyone other than the mother, should have a say in some scenarios, but there are many to consider.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Did it ever occur to you that she didn't plan to get pregnant? That it happened despite using protection? She made moves to make sure it didn't happen and through no fault of her own, it did. What then?

Also, it's ridiculously hypocritical of you to say a woman can discard a foetus if it's handicapped, then to say she can't do it if she doesn't want it. Considering she might not want it if it's handicapped, but not so much that it couldn't live comfortably.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why do you assume everything I say, I put across as factual? I'm giving my opinion.

Yeah, I see lots of men walking around for 9 months with a baby in their womb, then enduring childbirth.

Because we all know that a man doesn't just put it in, blow his load and leave the rest to the woman.

Read what I said again. If they BOTH took precautions against pregnancy that failed, and he just decided "Oh let's keep it!", then that's bs.

Precisely. That's not fair on the man either, hence why I said the father's, if anyone other than the mother, should have a say in some scenarios, but there are many to consider.

-AC

You missed the point... Obviously it's your opinion, hence I said give me a "logical" reason why the father shouldn't have a say as fact.

Well, that's just how biology works... Should men be criticized because their physically incapable of carrying a child.

Regardless, it's still 1/2 his.

There's millions of scenarios and obviously it would be foolish to make a law corresponding to each. The way I see it, if the man is legally responsible for the child after birth, then the man should have 1/2 the rights to the fetus.

so....split it down the middle?

Originally posted by Robtard
You missed the point... Obviously it's your opinion, hence I said give me a "logical" reason why the father shouldn't have a say as fact.

Why would I want to give you a reason as to why he shouldn't have a say as fact if it's my opinion? Partial one at that?

Originally posted by Robtard
Well, that's just how biology works... Should men be criticized because their physically incapable of carrying a child.

Thought so.

Originally posted by Robtard
Regardless, it's still 1/2 his.

With less than half the work. So that counts against, not for.

Originally posted by Robtard
The way I see it, if the man is legally responsible for the child after birth, then the man should have 1/2 the rights to the fetus.

Depends on the circumstances of the pregnancy, to me anyway.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why would I want to give you a reason as to why he shouldn't have a say as fact if it's my opinion? Partial one at that?

Thought so.

With less than half the work. So that counts against, not for.

Depends on the circumstances of the pregnancy, to me anyway.

-AC

It's your opinion, I get that. If you can't or just don't want to give me a logical reason why a man shouldn't have a say, just say so.

Thought so? It's a fact that men cannot carry a child.

Again, women are the ones to carry children, it's a fact that cannot be changed.

In the small of it, yes... But there are so many scenario's that a law for each cannot be made.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's your opinion, I get that. If you can't or just don't want to give me a logical reason why a man shouldn't have a say, just say so.

I clearly did this previously. Reading posts helps. You'd be surprised how easier it is to correspond post-reading posts.

Originally posted by Robtard
Thought so? It's a fact that men cannot carry a child.

My part about the man having little to do with it besides shooting a wad inside her was a response to you saying "Well, she allowed him to have sex.". If you're gonna claim it as half his, use a better argument. A woman does much more, she deserves a greater say.

Originally posted by Robtard
Again, women are the ones to carry children, it's a fact that cannot be changed.

So why does the man automatically get considered equal?

Originally posted by Robtard
In the small of it, yes... But there are so many scenario's that a law for each cannot be made.

So it'd be best not to make one blanket law wouldn't it?

-AC

a woman having to go through labor certainly entitles her to a greater say.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
a woman having to go through labor certainly entitles her to a greater say.

My checkbook says otherwise 😐

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I clearly did this previously. Reading posts helps. You'd be surprised how easier it is to correspond post-reading posts.

My part about the man having little to do with it besides shooting a wad inside her was a response to you saying "Well, she allowed him to have sex.". If you're gonna claim it as half his, use a better argument. A woman does much more, she deserves a greater say.

So why does the man automatically get considered equal?

So it'd be best not to make one blanket law wouldn't it?

-AC

There's the Alpha Centauri... Resorting to little limp-wristed jabs. Oh well, you gotta be you I guess.

Last time I checked, it takes two to have a baby (artificial withstanding). Yes, she bears the larger burden of carrying the child, but that is not the mans fault or her fault her. It's just the way life is.

Because it is his fetus/child too, and when born; he is legally bound to it.

What's the other option? Hundreds or thousands of laws where each party has to prove how much they wanted or didn't want to have a child when they engaged in sex, an activity known to possibly lead to pregnancy. There's one law to legally bind a man to a child, so one law giving a man rights to the fetus sounds just about right.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's the Alpha Centauri... Resorting to little limp-wristed jabs. Oh well, you gotta be you I guess.

I'm not "resorting" to anything. I clearly did what you asked before, you not having notice suggests you didn't read the post, or didn't read it clearly, so I suggested doing so.

Originally posted by Robtard
Last time I checked, it takes two to have a baby (artificial withstanding). Yes, she bears the larger burden of carrying the child, but that is not the mans fault or her fault her. It's just the way life is.

Exactly, so let's not give the man some elevated sense of entitlement just because he release sperm into her.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because it is his fetus/child too, and when born; he is legally bound to it.

If born. IF born.

Originally posted by Robtard
What's the other option? Hundreds or thousands of laws where each party has to prove how much they wanted or didn't want to have a child when they engaged in sex, an activity known to possibly lead to pregnancy. There's one law to legally bind a man to a child, so one law giving a man rights to the fetus sounds just about right.

There are many scenarios that favour the man's argument, but there are just as many, if not more, that favour the woman. Some of which I've previously stated.

It's all well and good for a man to accidentally get a woman pregnant after they both took precautions (Implying neither of them wanted pregnancy.), then decide he wants it, but that's a bit unfair to the woman isn't it? Yet according to you, he now has a right to overrule her. In THAT scenario, it's wrong, in my opinion. Well, I think it's pretty cut and dry there.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm not "resorting" to anything. I clearly did what you asked before, you not having notice suggests you didn't read the post, or didn't read it clearly, so I suggested doing so.

Exactly, so let's not give the man some elevated sense of entitlement just because he release sperm into her.

If born. IF born.

There are many scenarios that favour the man's argument, but there are just as many, if not more, that favour the woman. Some of which I've previously stated.

It's all well and good for a man to accidentally get a woman pregnant after they both took precautions (Implying neither of them wanted pregnancy.), then decide he wants it, but that's a bit unfair to the woman isn't it? Yet according to you, he now has a right to overrule her. In THAT scenario, it's wrong, in my opinion. Well, I think it's pretty cut and dry there.-AC

Okay.

He releases sperm into her under her permission; were not talking rape here.

That's a lame argument. As noted, if she decides to keep it against his wishes, he has to legally bear the burden or face the consequences.

Most scenarios favor the womens argument because of shit laws. As noted, the way it is now, she can do whatever she likes against his wishes and he's legally bound to oblige. B.S. for the man. Now, if they want to make a law where the man can forfeit his rights to the fetus where he is not legally bound after birth, then he should have no say on the abortion aspect.

Originally posted by Robtard
He releases sperm into her under her permission; were not talking rape here.

What are you on about? Why do you keep saying things that have nothing to do with anything? Yes, I'm aware of the man's part in intercourse, my point is, nature made women the primary focus of it, so let's not change that by giving men a definitive, overall sense of equality because they shot a load.

Originally posted by Robtard
That's a lame argument. As noted, if she decides to keep it against his wishes, he has to legally bear the burden or face the consequences.

For crying out loud...

Yes, I know. As we said before, that's one scenario that works in favour of the man having some say. My one was a scenario that works AGAINST the man having say. All proving that a blanket law of the man definitely having say isn't fair on the woman, and whilst the opposite wouldn't really be fair on the man EITHER, it would receive more support as woman have a bigger part.

Originally posted by Robtard
Most scenarios favor the womens argument because of shit laws. As noted, the way it is now, she can do whatever she likes against his wishes and he's legally bound to oblige. B.S. for the man.

It's unfair either way, as said above, but the woman has a bigger part in child creation than the man, so she'll always get more backing. I agree with what you edited on.

A man should be able to say "It's an accidental conception, she wants it, I don't, so therefore I wish to forfeit my rights to support it.", but that's not going to happen. Either way, one side gets shafted.

-AC

A.C. why do they both you give the aame argument everytime it's funny you bother even if in this you're right.

-Sly