I'm certainly not discussing anything you say in this post, that's for sure.
You take it to far as is usually the case when debating pretenders to the anti choice movement. If you are in a relationship and you both want children of course you wouldn't use a condom. If you are not in that sort of relationship you should always use one. If you really do care about abortions. Why should a woman who is PRO CHOICE take precautions? She will just have an abortion. I am pretty sure most women who are anti choice do something to prevent pregnancy.
I also want the right to not wear my seat belt.
I'm just relieved to find out that the only reason to wear a condom is whether or not you want a baby popping out 9 months later.
That takes a load off my mind. 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.
Go ahead ladies...and men too...if you don't want kids and don't care about abortions **** all you want san's condoms. That's the smart thing to do.
Do MEN have a Right to CONTROL Women's Health and Reproductive Systems?
1. Yes?
2. No?
3. Under Certain Circumstances (Briefly list what circumstance(s))
4. Does a male dominated government have the right to legislate controls over women's health issues and reproduction?
5. Does a male dominated religion have the right, through its teachings and doctrine, to have to control over women's health issues and reproduction ?
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.
Look at it this way. If I were a heterosexual anti choice woman, I would be on birth control and demand the male wear a condom. If I were that same woman but pro choice why do I care? I can always have an abortion so would you not say an anti choice male should wear a condom in that case. If he did he would have a 90% or better chance of preventing pregnancy. That just makes sense.
Half or better in the US are pro choice. So why should the other half simply bend to the whim of the anti choice people?
So what facet of women's health are you concerned about, vaginal discharge? What their cycle is? What please share with the class if it's not abortion?
Yet it will survive for at least a time, so it does have an existence apart from the woman's body is not a mere clump of cells. It's an "existing life." It seems to me a "continuum" is just a way to dehumanize it -- it's a life or it isn't; there aren't degrees.
If you want to put those kinds of degrees in, then how is someone who has very little awareness a "life"? Or anyone else who can't survive without intervention, such as any newborn?
A fetus starts moving and interacting with its environment within three months, usually less. How "late" did you have in mind?
Insofar as it's true (the "woman's body" can't spontaneously do it, of course) that's true of any born person.
No, I don't think it makes you more neutral or dispassionate; it's just a different point of view from most.
Well, we can play your game if you wish. Who exactly are you to vote on anything that affects men? :roll:
But I understand. You're a partisan, and I can accept that.
What you need to understand is that not everyone shares your beliefs. Not every woman views the unborn child as a lump of cells. Not every person lacks a conscience regarding the importance of life.
Not everyone believes that the life developing inside of you has absolutely no right and can be ripped apart at any given moment. The issue is indeed about the unborn child; you cannot ignore reality and continue going about, sitting on your biscuit, assuming to be taken seriously. You must acknowledge that there is discussion on the existence of a seperate life that has the right to live. To ignore that reality is to ignore the fact that many other people have totally different perspectives. Imo, both man and woman should use birth control. Actually, I'd rather people had the responsibility and maturity to not have sex without the means to pay for the consequences. It takes two to make a baby, and just because the baby develops in her body, that doesn't erase the fact that the man was also a part of its creation. Both should take precautions, instead of placing all of the responsibility on just one sex.
You're also saying that not wearing a condom makes you pro-choice. Wow. I suppose liking the rainbow makes one gay. :roll:
I have stated repeatedly that half of the people don't agree with me. So I am not sure where you get the idea that I think everyone does share my view. Why should a woman who is pro choice take precautions?
So she doesn't make a baby. Derp.
So you don't make a baby.
Because when you choose to have sex with someone unprotected, then you're choosing to possibly make a baby together. That baby will belong to you and him. It's his decision too what happens when his baby.
Who says they don't?
Okay, I'm tired of answering these stupid questions. All of them are common sense answers to any clear-thinking, caring human.
Because you can't force ideal circumstances.
Forcing a dysfunctional couple to stay together is not going to result in a happy family. Sometimes single parenthood is a better option. It certainly was in my case. My life improved dramatically after my parents split up.
True. But my point was, that you only mentioned the option of having and keeping a child. There are other options. And the point I was making is that if I am going to tell a man that he has no input at all in my choice, right from the get-go of the relationship, then I assume responsibility for my choice. He can do as he will.
It doesn't HAVE to be that way. I think every couple should have this conversation. Maybe she IS willing to accept input. Maybe she isn't, but expects the man to help her. The man, at that point, can choose whether or not that is something he can accept. This is something every couple should discuss before they ever have sex.
No man I have ever been with can ever tell me he didn't know my position. He can never complain that he didn't know I didn't want children, or that I would abort. He can also be safe in the knowledge I will never expect a dime from him. And I can be safe in the knowledge that he accepts my positions, respects my humanity, and won't try to coerce me. Because I will never date a man who doesn't support my choice. That conversation is as much for my benefit as it is for his.
With some other woman, maybe he can be safe in the knowledge that she won't abort, and that she would want him as part of a child's life. And she can be safe in the knowledge that he will never try to coerce her to abort, and that he will take an interest in a child's life. Again, it benefits both of them.
Whatever that conversation consists of, it should be had before anyone every puts their Tab A in anyone's Slot B.
I will ask just one question from this. If a woman is pro choice and will have an abortion as she thinks the fetus is just a lump of cells why would she use the pill? You are presuming that everyone believes that the fetus has some special meaning. If she's pro choice she doesn't care if she has to get an abortion and very well may not take the pill.
So she won't have to go to all the trouble of going to the doctor and getting her baby sucked out of her womb? So she won't get into a legal mess when the father of the baby wants to keep the child? Because she might be a good person that doesn't want to cause pain to her partner by killing his child when she knows he wouldn't want that? :shrug:
Of course the man should know who he's possibly making a baby with and the consequences of such. Of course a man should wear a condom if he doesn't want to make a baby. It's very simple to use protection. Why would a pro-abortion woman NOT take that simple precaution so she won't have to go to all the trouble of going to the doctor, paying her copays, going through the "surgery", missing work and possibly hurting her partner in the process? It would be stupid to not use protection all the time if you don't want a baby. It's simple, it's cheap and it's responsible.
...so the only circumstances which matter are those which can be forced?
Might makes right?
What happened to people getting to know each other better before getting married?
Yes, I understood your point, but I'm thinking about potential children, not you or your partner.
That child, if realized, is entitled to committed parents.
People should be having conversations this extensive before getting married.
Then I want the transfats back in my KFC. And I want my fries cooked in beef tallow.
I also want the right to not wear my seat belt.
Or not to carry health insurance.
If the woman is pro choice and was so stupid as to not think of STD's it is not her worry over a fetus. That's not how she sees it. So for the man's sake if he is anti choice he should certainly do all he can she may believe that her option for birth control is an abortion. Silly as that may seem but it can certainly happen.Yes, you're right if the man chose to not wear a condom. However, the woman also chose when she didn't insist on a condom. If you make a baby, it's up to BOTH of you to make the decision what you want to do. You BOTH chose to not put the condom on.
So yeah, now government is telling me what medical procedures and medications I am and am not allowed to use because I am a woman. Your damned right I'm still singing the same tune... get the **** away from my body. It's none of the government's damned business.
Originally Posted by katiegrrl0
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.
Really? Anyone who would choose not to abort their own child is an "anti-abortionist"?
Your refusal to be serious shows that you know little and care less about the issue. When you have something to offer in a serious fashion I may response.I'd suggest asking Middleground, she's stated a bunch in the Rush thread how there's reasons to take birth control other than to protect from pregnancy.
Perhaps the pro-choice woman has bad acne?
Perhaps the pro-choice women is personally against abortion but feels that the government should not be mandating it?
Perhaps the pro-choice women would rather be on the pill and avoid pregnancy because she believes the entire abortive process could potentially be somewhat disturbing mentally.
She's cautious about STD's?
The various reasons I just stated above?
She's allergic to semen?
She doesn't like the feeling of it inside her and dripping after the fact?
Because she perhaps actually has emotional feelings towards the individual she's having sex with and thus cares about their thoughts and views as well?
Because perhaps she believes that while its a woman's body and ultimately her choice, the fetus growing inside of her is made of two peoples DNA...not just hers...and she recognizes the other individual may like some input?
He believes the woman who is having sex with him actually has an emotional attachment to him and cares what he says?
He believes that the woman who he is having sex with actually holds respect for him and his opinions even when they're separate than her own?
I don't know pro-fetus killer (if we're going to use asinine arrogant based militant terminology rather than intellectually honest and fair ones, may as well be consistent no? You pick the game you want to play), perhaps a situation occurred where he stupidly just didn't think of it, or made an extremely poor decision due to a variety of factors from his own inability to control his lustful emotions to seduction on the part of the female?
But yes, a pro-life person absolutely could wear a condom. However this is irrelevant to the argument of many pro-life people as it assumes they only want unborn children to be protected when conceived from couplings of at least one pro-life person.
Perhaps she told him she was?
Perhaps various things she stated made him believe that?
Perhaps he ignorantly just assumed?
Its funny...in a few seconds I was able to think of multiple answers to every one of your questions but you seemed to ask them as if you had this strong belief there was no, or only one, correct answer. It couldn't possibly be that you are so arrogantly sure of your position on this being absolute gospel that no one could dare possibly think opposite of your without being of inferior intelligence, bigoted, or just plain wrong.
What are you talking about?
You're the one saying unhappy couples shouldn't be allowed to divorce. I'm in favor of letting them do what they think is best.
Things change. People change.
Also, if you happen to believe abortion is wrong, and decide to have and keep a child instead, then you are pretty much stuck with whatever you've got, aren't you?
Yes. And those parents can be quite literally anyone, biological or otherwise.
People should be having those conversations any time they are considering having sex.
I said that because you spend a lot of time telling men what they should and shouldn't do.. all while saying that men shouldn't have a say in what women do.
I don't believe you shouldn't have a say, i'm just borrowing your argument and using it against you.
i'm in a rather wonderful marriage where our reproductive health concerns have been addressed together...to think, a man and a woman being able to discuss and address health concerns together.. why it's magic!...it helps neither one of us are militant sexists.
It changes when you have a body inside of your own.
Just curious, katie....are you also an advocate of after-birth abortions?
If a male who is against abortion does not do all he can to protect against unwanted pregnancy he by his omission is supporting pro choice.
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?