Originally posted by TacDavey
This is a dangerous line of reasoning. You are saying that because the woman MIGHT blackmail the person later in life, that person has the right to force her to have an abortion? Until she actually DOES blackmail the man, you cannot punish her or the baby for the blackmail. If/When she blackmails the person, steps should be taken to punish her, and the child should be found a better home. You cannot punish someone for a crime they have yet to commit.No. He doesn't have to accept being a father. In that case, I don't think he should legally be forced to support the child. But that does NOT mean he has the right to force the abortion of the child.
Call me me crazy but if the woman is demented enough to illegally tamper with contraception then I think they have it within them to resort to blackmail or other such things in the future. It's a crime, and would have more far-reaching effects on the man's life than hers, especially if she avoids prosecution.
She gets what she wants (the baby, possible money from the man, even fame if the man is famous or successful) while the man has to suffer with issues of trusting women in the future, being followed/harrassed by the woman wanting him to acknowledge the child, being considered cold if he doesn't respond, being turned off having children which may affect relationships in the future, having no voice to get back at her because she'll play the wounded single mother and have the courts/media eating out of her hands etc. Just not having to support the child isn't the point; and if he can't prove she did it in court but it turns out she admits it in private he would then have no grounds not to pay.
I'm not saying the woman should be forced to abort based on an assumption, I'm saying when it's been definitely proven that she did it (whether rape or the tampering of contraceptives) the man who made the baby too and should have rights, should have the right to argue in a court for it to aborted.
Men get forcibly chemically castrated for a particular sexual crime and this is no different in my view. They are both sexual crimes, could even term them sexual assaults yet one gender gets something done to them to discourage them re-offending, but the other gets sympathy and understanding about their 'bodies'. Try and guess which one is which.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Call me me crazy but if the woman is demented enough to illegally tamper with contraception then I think they have it within them to resort to blackmail or other such things in the future. It's a crime, and would have more far-reaching effects on the man's life than hers, especially if she avoids prosecution.
That's you opinion, and as far as I know, not backed up by hard evidence. But even if it WAS the case that women who tamper with birth control, on average, tend to blackmail people (which I do not accept by the way), that still does not excuse punishing someone for a crime that you think they'll probably commit. If/When the mother decides to resort to blackmail, or any other form of extortion, you can punish her then in a just way. Forcing her to abort her child is not just, in any circumstance. Certainly not because he's worried that she MIGHT use the child poorly later in life. That is simply not a valid reason to allow such a thing.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
She gets what she wants (the baby, possible money from the man, even fame if the man is famous or successful) while the man has to suffer with issues of trusting women in the future, being followed/harrassed by the woman wanting him to acknowledge the child, being considered cold if he doesn't respond, being turned off having children which may affect relationships in the future, having no voice to get back at her because she'll play the wounded single mother and have the courts/media eating out of her hands etc. Just not having to support the child isn't the point; and if he can't prove she did it in court but it turns out she admits it in private he would then have no grounds not to pay.
Hold on, you are worried that his image in society, especially concerning women, would cause him stress if he allows the child to be born? And you think that if he forces a woman to have an abortion against her will, he will be seen as, what, the paragon of women's rights? In fact, I would argue that he would receive FAR more notice and harassment from forcing an abortion, ESPECIALLY from women.
Not that it matters considering that how people react to something does not, in any way, determine if it is just or not.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I'm not saying the woman should be forced to abort based on an assumption, I'm saying when it's been definitely proven that she did it (whether rape or the tampering of contraceptives) the man who made the baby too and should have rights, should have the right to argue in a court for it to aborted.
You basically just said the same thing. He should be allowed to attempt to force the woman to have an abortion against her will.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Men get forcibly chemically castrated for a particular sexual crime and this is no different in my view. They are both sexual crimes, could even term them sexual assaults yet one gender gets something done to them to discourage them re-offending, but the other gets sympathy and understanding about their 'bodies'. Try and guess which one is which.
This is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what happens to men, this isn't a "which sex has it worse off" topic. You cannot justify something because "they're doing it too..." It's called a "you too" fallacy.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Care to extrapolate?
You mean between capitol punishment and forced abortion? I think the main difference is that the subject lives through one experience and not the other. They live with all the emotional and psychological damage. That's almost like saying that if you believe in capitol punishment you should also believe rape is also an acceptable punishment for women who commit crimes.
Originally posted by TacDavey
That's you opinion, and as far as I know, not backed up by hard evidence. But even if it WAS the case that women who tamper with birth control, on average, tend to blackmail people (which I do not accept by the way), that still does not excuse punishing someone for a crime that you think they'll probably commit. If/When the mother decides to resort to blackmail, or any other form of extortion, you can punish her then in a just way. Forcing her to abort her child is not just, in any circumstance. Certainly not because he's worried that she MIGHT use the child poorly later in life. That is simply not a valid reason to allow such a thing.Hold on, you are worried that his image in society, especially concerning women, would cause him stress if he allows the child to be born? And you think that if he forces a woman to have an abortion against her will, he will be seen as, what, the paragon of women's rights? In fact, I would argue that he would receive FAR more notice and harassment from forcing an abortion, ESPECIALLY from women.
You basically just said the same thing. He should be allowed to attempt to force the woman to have an abortion against her will.
This is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter what happens to men, this isn't a "which sex has it worse off" topic. You cannot justify something because "they're doing it too..." It's called a "you too" fallacy.
1.Once again, this isn't about an assumed crime or a 'judge her before she does it' situation this is about a situation where she has been caught, bang to rights in a court of law doing this to a man. Only then. If you don't get it this time well I can't help you.
2.That's kind of my point, and you're missing the whole issue of the fact that when this woman is brought out into the public as a guilty, deceitful trickster she will get zero support from other women, you know, decent ones who don't tamper with contraceptives and just find an agreeable partner or go to a sperm bank. No man would ever sleep with her again either. The only support she'll get is from anti-abortionists and even then not much if she's a convict. It's all about image you see.
3. See number 1. Then see the sentence 'this is a situation where she has been caught, bang to rights in a court of law doing this to a man. Only then.' Please stop with this tunnel vision approach to reading my comments, like you did with the sperm donor tangent you grossly took out of context in my first post.
4. Aha, not relevant eh? Typical response when you don't have a comeback. It's a perfectly legitimate argument - a man has to undergo chemical castration when he commits sexual crimes but a woman can commit them and benefit with children but get away with it, very much so if she avoids prison which is most likely. Your comment ' It doesn't matter what happens to men' typifies my exact reasoning, a man's body is fair game to do things to but a woman's isn't. Why is that? Oh they are live givers and men have nothing to do with the process at all 🙄
The way you are going on TacDavey people must think I want forced hysterectomies.
Originally posted by TacDavey
You mean between capitol punishment and forced abortion? I think the main difference is that the subject lives through one experience and not the other. They live with all the emotional and psychological damage.
So the sheer terror of being strapped down to a table or into a chair knowing that someone's going kill you and end your existence forever is worse than an abortion where the person is going to go through a routine operation and live afterwards? And if she is guilty of raping or tricking a man into birth she should have no complaints.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
1.Once again, this isn't about an assumed crime or a 'judge her before she does it' situation this is about a situation where she has been caught, bang to rights in a court of law doing this to a man. Only then. If you don't get it this time well I can't help you.
I understand you. But you are saying that the child should be allowed to be aborted because it MIGHT be used later in life to harm the man, correct? The crime the woman has been caught doing is rape, not black mail. Your argument suggests that blackmail is a legitimate reason to allow forced abortion. The problem with your argument is that, as of her arrest, there hasn't been any blackmail yet. There has only been rape. Your entire reasoning behind forcing someone to have an abortion rests on the idea of that woman performing an action later in life that she may or may not ever commit.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
2.That's kind of my point, and you're missing the whole issue of the fact that when this woman is brought out into the public as a guilty, deceitful trickster she will get zero support from other women, you know, decent ones who don't tamper with contraceptives and just find an agreeable partner or go to a sperm bank. No man would ever sleep with her again either. The only support she'll get is from abortionists and even then not much if she's a convict. It's all about image you see.
This has nothing to do with what we were just talking about. You tried to make the claim that if the man allows the woman to have the child, there will be social backlash for the man because women will hound him and try to get him to take care of the child.
1.) This doesn't make forced abortions okay. Things aren't right or wrong based on how a group of people will react to them.
2.) The social backlash from a forced abortion would be far greater than that of allowing birth. Especially in the very group of people you tried to claim would be the main instigators.
Unless you were presupposing that in the birth example the public doesn't know about the deception and in the abortion example they do. Because if that's the case, couldn't the very same thing be said about the birth example?
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
3. See number 1. Then see the sentence 'this is a situation where she has been caught, bang to rights in a court of law doing this to a man. Only then.' Please stop with this tunnel vision approach to reading my comments, like you did with the sperm donor tangent you grossly took out of context in my first post.
You seem to be misunderstanding me. I fully accept that they know she raped him. You are trying to justify punishment for blackmail, or the potential for blackmail, which IS a crime she has yet to commit. The punishment for rape is jail time.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
4. Aha, not relevant eh? Typical response when you don't have a comeback. It's a perfectly legitimate argument - a man has to undergo chemical castration when he commits sexual crimes but a woman can commit them and benefit with children but get away with it, very much so if she avoids prison which is most likely. Your comment ' It doesn't matter what happens to men' typifies my exact reasoning, a man's body is fair game to do things to but a woman's isn't. Why is that? Oh they are live givers and men have nothing to with the process at all 🙄The way you are going on TacDavey people must think I want forced hysterectomies.
Actually, I'm not saying it because I don't have a come back. That IS my comeback. The fact of the matter is your argument in this case is fallacious. Here is a link describing the very fallacy you are committing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
You are saying that forced abortion is okay because forced castration is being done. But the two are completely separate issues. One is not right or wrong based off the other. Forced castration is right or it's wrong all on it's own. And forced abortion is right or it's wrong all on it's own.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
So the sheer terror of being strapped down to a table or into a chair knowing that someone's going kill you and end your existence forever is worse than an abortion where the person is going to go through a routine operation and live afterwards? And if she is guilty of raping or tricking a man into birth she should have no complaints.
One person has to live the rest of their life with the psychological and emotion damage done to them. Again, if you are comparing capitol punishment to forced abortions, can't you also make the comparison between capitol punishment and rape? The two are simply not the same thing.
That argument doesn't make any sense. Tons of women get abortions all the time and don't suffer "psychological and emotional damage".
If it was deliberated by way of a psych evaluation that sentencing the woman to a life time of prison would cause her massive psychological trauma, would you suddenly be in favor of not giving her a life sentence? As, your entire hinges upon the act being "against her will", hence the comparison to rape. Well what if she doesn't to go to jail at all? Suddenly, forcing her to go to jail is the same as raping her.
Originally posted by TacDavey
I understand you. But you are saying that the child should be allowed to be aborted because it MIGHT be used later in life to harm the man, correct? The crime the woman has been caught doing is rape, not black mail. Your argument suggests that blackmail is a legitimate reason to allow forced abortion. The problem with your argument is that, as of her arrest, there hasn't been any blackmail yet. There has only been rape. Your entire reasoning behind forcing someone to have an abortion rests on the idea of that woman performing an action later in life that she may or may not ever commit.You seem to be misunderstanding me. I fully accept that they know she raped him. You are trying to justify punishment for blackmail, or the potential for blackmail, which IS a crime she has yet to commit. The punishment for rape is jail time.
You keep mentioning blackmail. Why? Again, you are ignoring the main part and focusing on a side issue I brought up as an additional point only.
I never said I wanted forced abortions for the blackmail but only for a child she has gotten by rape or a child she has gotten by tampering with contraceptives and/or omitting the fact she's gone off birth control when it's completely understood that the man doesn't want any children and SHE SEEMS happy to go along with it, but then flips out, gets broody and doesn't involve the man in her immoral solution.
Originally posted by TacDavey
You mean between capitol punishment and forced abortion? I think the main difference is that the subject lives through one experience and not the other. They live with all the emotional and psychological damage. That's almost like saying that if you believe in capitol punishment you should also believe rape is also an acceptable punishment for women who commit crimes.
I would rather live with emotional and psychological damage than not live at all, to be honest. I can't think of forcing a woman to get an abortion as being "worse" than killing someone, honestly. Both are operations being performed on someone against their will, as Blax said.
Your "punishing women by rape" analogy is frankly faulty, the punishment by rape would serve no purpose, it would just be an act of cruelty as a punishment, rather than removing someone from society like prison or, more permanently, the death penalty do. In this case, Lord Shadow Z's argument is that a woman who has performed a sexual crime and "illegally" gotten herself pregnant, so he proposes an abortion because of the negative far-reaching effects it could have on the male victim's life.
While I am not entirely sure I agree with the notion that the woman should be forced to get an abortion, I felt like being an ******* and responding to this post of your's anyway, because I disagreed with your rationale in your replies.
Originally posted by TacDavey
One person has to live the rest of their life with the psychological and emotion damage done to them.
What about the psychological, emotional and physical damage done to a man who is forcibly chemically castrated. Oh, that's right, he deserved it for his sexual crime he committed, oh wait...
Have you never heard the term 'abortion used as a form of birth control'? Women who use abortions as contraceptive measures when they keep getting pregnant over and over again.Yeah, immense psychological and emotional damage.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That argument doesn't make any sense. Tons of women get abortions all the time and don't suffer "psychological and emotional damage".
Likely because they get them willingly. That isn't to say every woman who is forced to have an abortion would suffer psychological or emotional problems, but there is a very real possibility. Especially if the woman is emotionally attached to the child.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
If it was deliberated by way of a psych evaluation that sentencing the woman to a life time of prison would cause her massive psychological trauma, would you suddenly be in favor of not giving her a life sentence? As, your entire hinges upon the act being "against her will", hence the comparison to rape. Well what if she doesn't to go to jail at all? Suddenly, forcing her to go to jail is the same as raping her.
Not at all. My comparison isn't the fact that it is "against her will". In fact, the comparison to rape was meant to show the invalidity of the argument. That's my point. Capitol Punishment isn't the same as rape. At all. The same way Capitol Punishment isn't the same as forced abortions.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
You keep mentioning blackmail. Why? Again, you are ignoring the main part and focusing on a side issue I brought up as an additional point only.
Because that is your reasoning behind advocating forced abortions, is it not? The child might come back to cause the man harm later in life, either through blackmail or whatever. Is that not the reason behind aborting the child? My point still stands, I was just using blackmail to avoid listing everything.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I never said I wanted forced abortions for the blackmail but only for a child she has gotten by rape or a child she has gotten by tampering with contraceptives and/or omitting the fact she's gone off birth control when it's completely understood that the man doesn't want any children and SHE SEEMS happy to go along with it, but then flips out, gets broody and doesn't involve the man in her immoral solution.
The man doesn't have to have any children. I already said he shouldn't be legally required to care for the child. Since we've already determined that the man not wanting to care for a child does not require abortion, the only other reason you have brought up is the chance that the child will come back to haunt him later in life.
Just so we're clear before we go on...
The reasons why a man should get to force an abortion:
1.) The man should not have to care for a child.
This has already been discussed. The man doesn't have to care for the child unless he wants to. Otherwise, he has no legal responsibility to care for it in any way. No need for abortion even being an option in this case.
2.) The woman might blackmail him later in life.
This isn't a certainty by any means. As I have said, you cannot punish someone for something they have yet to commit. And the child certainly shouldn't suffer for something someone else might possible do. Forced abortion should not be allowed for this reason either.
3.) The man might get heckled by women demanding he care for the child.
This one just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. For one thing, you cannot force an abortion on someone because someone else is giving you a hard time. It's completely unjust to punish someone because someone else entirely is acting inappropriately. Furthermore, I would say that there would be a far greater backlash from the female community if he forced an woman to get an abortion against her will. Women don't like that. So, forced abortion cannot be allowed for this reason either.
These are the reasons you have provided as I understand them. Feel free to provide any I may have missed, but so far none of them justifies forced abortions.
Originally posted by NemeBro
I would rather live with emotional and psychological damage than not live at all, to be honest. I can't think of forcing a woman to get an abortion as being "worse" than killing someone, honestly. Both are operations being performed on someone against their will, as Blax said.
I don't think psychological damage is worse than killing someone either. The point wasn't to show that forced abortions are worse than capitol punishment, but that forced abortions and capitol punishment are two different things. The only thing about them that is the same is that the process is done against the person's will, which, as the rape example was suppose to point out, does not mean they are the same thing at all. Rape and capitol punishment, as well as forced abortions, are done against the person's will. But they are not the same at all, are they?
Originally posted by NemeBro
Your "punishing women by rape" analogy is frankly faulty, the punishment by rape would serve no purpose, it would just be an act of cruelty as a punishment, rather than removing someone from society like prison or, more permanently, the death penalty do. In this case, Lord Shadow Z's argument is that a woman who has performed a sexual crime and "illegally" gotten herself pregnant, so he proposes an abortion because of the negative far-reaching effects it could have on the male victim's life.
The rape example was meant to show that capitol punishment is different from forced abortions since blax suggested that if you believe in capitol punishment you cannot be against forced abortions. The rape analogy was not meant to combat any of Lord Shadow Z's arguments.
Originally posted by NemeBro
While I am not entirely sure I agree with the notion that the woman should be forced to get an abortion, I felt like being an ******* and responding to this post of your's anyway, because I disagreed with your rationale in your replies.
That's a common misconception. In reality, everyone actually agrees with me deep down, they just don't fully realize it yet. 😖hifty:
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
What about the psychological, emotional and physical damage done to a man who is forcibly chemically castrated. Oh, that's right, he deserved it for his sexual crime he committed, oh wait...
You are still committing the you too fallacy. Ignoring the fact that I called you out on this fallacy will not change the fact that it is, in fact, a fallacious argument. Forced chemical castration is a separate issue, and the simple fact that it is being done does not, in any way, show that forced abortions are acceptable. Thus, it has absolutely no place in this debate at any point. Period.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Have you never heard the term 'abortion used as a form of birth control'? Women who use abortions as contraceptive measures when they keep getting pregnant over and over again.Yeah, immense psychological and emotional damage.
That's like saying that because women have sex regularly, there should be no psychological damage in raping them. Is that what you're saying?
Again this is all only about the hypothetical given so few even though that rape with female perpetrators is within the limits of the possible.
Just getting man on woman rape recognised as a crime was a victory for civilisation and even that could be lost 😬 Civilisation takes centuries to build and can be overturned so easily.