The male made his choice when he didn't use a condom. Why should a pro choice woman give a damn what some anti abortionist thinks. If he were so concerned he would use a condom. She can always have an abortion because she has the choice and will use it. Half the women and half the men disagree with you on whether that is life or not so
what makes you think your opinion is more important than yours.
The male made his choice when he didn't use a condom. Why should a pro choice woman give a damn what some anti abortionist thinks.
Why should a woman who is pro choice use the pill?
Why should a woman who is pro choice ask you to wear a condom?
Why should a woman who is pro choice care that you think the fetus is important?
Why should a male who is anti choice expect a pro choice woman to care?
Why can' an anti choice male wear a condom?
Why should this anti choice male think the woman is anti choice as well?
The point is, if a fetus can live on its own outside its mother, then there's no definition by which it's not an existing "life" -- which is what you said the difference was. It may have a rougher chance at survival, but then, so do quite a few full-term, naturally-born babies.
And all life exhibits this, except in the few cases you mentioned. Does a fetus behave in such a way as to suggest it doesn't "desire" to live? If it doesn't, why would you not assume that it does?
It is, and it does, as much as any life which can't express an opinion on the subject.
I think your opinion on this is far from universal. Not to dredge up other threads, but I can't help but think that your own self-stated lack of a maternal instinct is very much at play here. I mean that only as an observation and not as judgment, 'coz after all, I have no desire to have kids, either.
I have no say in your health issues no. None and why would I think I should?
I have no say in your health issues no. None and why would I think I should?
When did I say you were?Why do you think I'm obligated to be concerned about a pro-choice woman's feelings?
So?We have all been fetuses.
Absolutely not. i am saying that if you are concerned about abortion you should use a condom don't expect her to care about you.You're saying I have the right to control women?
The duty is on you if you are anti choice. If you are pro choice than it's no ones duty. If she aborts the fetus it's obviously no sweat to you as you prove by all your responses you are pro choice or just don't care.Why is the duty of care on me?
Why is a woman who is pro choice obligated to protect you. That's as arrogant as I have heard.No, that would make me a victim of negligence.
I tend to agree with you.
As a woman is not only pro-choice but also childfree, I assume 100% of the responsibility for preventing pregnancy, to the extent of keeping my own stash of condoms, putting them on myself, and paying for 100% of any other contraceptive I may use. The reason is this.
Any man who gets involved with me knows before we ever had sex what my position is. He has no say in it, and I make that clear. He can choose at that point whether to have sex with me or not. Yes, he has to wear a condom, but that is for both of our benefits beyond just preventing pregnancy and I am assuming all responsibility for providing them and applying them. I don't care if he never buys the condoms for the entire duration of our relationship.
Because if that is how I'm going to operate, if I am going to assume 100% of the decision-making power for pregnancy without accepting any input, then I also assume 100% of the responsibility for my own reproductive choices. The man has zero burden to provide me with anything, ever, under any circumstances.
When we make a choice, we assume responsibility for that choice. And honestly, I think feminists who believe their choices are someone else's responsibility, even in part, are degrading the compitence of women.
No... I have to disagree with this on behalf of the children.
A complete upbringing requires a committed father figure. This is especially the case for boys.
This is nice of you, but nobody is competent to parent a child on one's own.
I could've swore I had heard at some point condoms had some other purpose that was as, if not more, important. Guess I must've been imagining that.
That statement is a bit off, since you're basically stating that pro-life men should never have sex without condoms, even though those men will undoubtedly be having families. Why do you seem to focus only on the men when it comes to pro-life men? There may be quite a few pro-life women as well.
Why shouldn't women, as well, take the necessary precautions? Men are taken out of the abortion issue, yet now you would say only men should protect themselves? If you state that abortions would decrease if 85% of men wore condoms. Logic dictates that abortions would decrease even more if women were as responsible as the men in using protection. Is it not enough to make contraceptives easier to obtain? Now only men have to be responsible, even though it take two to make a baby?
Why should a woman who is PRO CHOICE take precautions?
WOW....
Absolutely not. i am saying that if you are concerned about abortion you should use a condom don't expect her to care about you.
The duty is on you if you are anti choice.
If you are pro choice than it's no ones duty. If she aborts the fetus it's obviously no sweat to you as you prove by all your responses you are pro choice or just don't care.
Why is a woman who is pro choice obligated to protect you. That's as arrogant as I have heard.
I like to keep things simple. Both man and woman have exactly equal responsibility in having a child and caring for it. I would love to see further measures to ensure that deadbeat men or women take responsibility for the life the are bringing into this world.
Ansd I agree with that 100% Furthermore, condoms can break. If all of the responsibility is put on the man and his condom breaks, well, oh snap. My sister uses this certain kind of birth control where they place some sort of thing into her arm. The name eludes me but it's effective birth control and she never has to worry. My utter dislike of abortion makes me a firm believer of easily accessible birth control; in a perfect world I'd like to see men and women who are responsible enough to abstain from sex before marriage, and use birth control effectively during marriage, as they wish.
I think the man, if he gets the woman pregnant, must assume/be forced to have the burden of caring for the child, whether it be child support, etc.
Sure there is, you just refuse to be open minded enough to accept that everyone doesn't view the world as you view it. You are too militant and arrogant in your belief that you refuse to even consider that it is reasonable, understandable, or true that someone may dare to have a different view point than you. You stated unequivocally in your other post, as if in your arrogance you believe yourself to be some kind of omnipotent being, that it is "not about the fetus". Many do, unquestionably, believe that the fetus is a human and as such its right to live is greater than the right of a woman to control her reproductive rights just as a 5 year olds right to live is greater than a woman's right to spend her money how she see's fit or take care of who she wants to take care of.
It is YOUR arrogance and militant attitude on this issue that leads your to your own unrealistic and egocentric view of what must be the singular view legitimate view point and belief structure an individual can have and thus provides the basis for your ridiculously narrow and inaccurate statement earlier.
No it doesn't. Lesbian couples are quite capable of raising well-adjusted children.
A single parent isn't ideal, but mine (my father) was extremely capable.
But also, what about adoption and abortion? You're assuming the only choice is to have a child and keep it.
It's irrelevant to my position. Because my position is that I will never bear a child. In essence, what I am assuming responsibility for is 100% of the cost of an abortion, in addition to all measures I use to prevent needing to have an abortion.
Well, I would stay it still exists on a continuum. What we consider to be "viable" is only "viable" because of heavy medical interference. In reality, an infant born before 7 months is very unlikely to survive without heavy medical intervention.
But I'm not arguing in favor of elective late-term abortion. I'm just pointing out that there IS a difference between the two, and even post-viability the difference a couple months makes is dramatic. The difference that 5 or 6 months makes is even more dramatic.
A late term fetus does display these qualities. An embryo or early fetus certainly doesn't.
No it isn't. The ZEF has nothing to do with the creation of its life. That life is forced into the world by the woman's body.
So? Does that release you from addressing it?
It may very well be at play - I wouldn't deny that for a minute. But, does the possibility exist that this makes me slightly more objective on the matter?
I have never argued against the welfare of children, have I? Clearly I am capable of recognizing children as people, even though I can't stand them. And in many of my positions, completely apart from the abortion debate, I look to science to help me understand an issue, just like I do in the abortion debate.
I would argue that my lack of maternal drive allows me to treat the abortion debate more fairly and similarly to how I treat other debates.
1. Women vote and have a say in government. There are slightly more women than men. Therefore to call the gov male dominated is questionable.
2. Not all women are pro-choice on abortion. Many are pro-life.
3. Not all men are against abortion.
To frame this question in this manner is to ignore many facts, most important among them that this is not a male dominating female issue, but an issue with proponents on both sides in fairly similar gender distributions.
Nobody has the right to enforce their beliefs on another person's body.
Then I want the transfats back in my KFC. And I want my fries cooked in beef tallow.
But that isn't simple at all. What's more, it's impractical and doesn't work. And what's more, you're assuming the only choice is having and keeping a child.
OK, but why do children have to endure nonideal circumstances?
(I really don't see why divorce should be legal either.)
Adoption isn't guaranteed, and abortion is what we're discussing.
No it is not up to them together to decide anything and they rarely do. In LTR's they may but for the most part that is not true. IF a male is anti choice he should find out if the woman is pro choice. If he is anti choice he should be aware that at least half of the women support choice. Both are not responsible at all.When a man and a woman have sex, it's up to them to decide together if they are going to use protection or not. You make it sound like the woman has no say in if a man wears a condom or not. If neither of them thinks about protection, it's BOTH of their faults and they are BOTH responsible for the consequences. Therefore, BOTH man and woman should make the decision is a baby is conceived.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?