• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

strip her, control her, violate her everything...

cherith

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here we go again-men trying to control women and strip them of their Constitutional rights.

Abortion, vasectomy, tubal ligations

... why is government thinking they can tell women what to do?

The new Supreme Court nominee Alito wants women to notify their husbands before they have an abortion.

1. What if she is not pregnant for her...husband?
2.What if her husband died before she knew she was pregnant?
3. What if her husband is locked up in jail/prison after she finds out?

Will men be forced to notify their wives before they get a reversable vasectamy? "Of Course Not"

Next the Supreme Court is going to demand that women notify their husbands 48 hours before they menustrate each month.
 

WinterSun

Banned
Joined
Oct 29, 2005
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Private
If a woman is married, why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband? When they married they both entered an agreement where they have to understand one another, not do things behind each other's backs. It's also his child as well.
 

cherith

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If a woman is married, why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband? When they married they both entered an agreement where they have to understand one another, not do things behind each other's backs. It's also his child as well.
Hello WinterSun,

Any man who thinks he needs a bunch of Supreme Court Justices, Congresspeople, laws, etc... helping to tell him, what his wife, should and shouldn't be doing.. is not a man.

A real husband has his marriage sewed up and stiched so carfully with his love for his wife that there is nothing-not one thing his wife will not come to him on her own free will and discuss with him.

Making something so stupid as that a law, will do nothing to control a woman. Women will say they are not married, have a close male friend, brother or cousin sign papers at the clinic if it comes down to that. The only way a woman is going to tell her husnband anything-and I mean anythig, is if she wants to-of her own free will.

People have too much to lose in marriages, in such cases the woman will know exactly what to do and what not to do.
 
Last edited:

ngdawg

conliberaservatarianist
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
24
Location
trackside
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
cherith said:
Here we go again-men trying to control women and strip them of their Constitutional rights.

Abortion, vasectomy, tubal ligations

... why is government thinking they can tell women what to do?

The new Supreme Court nominee Alito wants women to notify their husbands before they have an abortion.

1. What if she is not pregnant for her...husband?
2.What if her husband died before she knew she was pregnant?
3. What if her husband is locked up in jail/prison after she finds out?

Will men be forced to notify their wives before they get a reversable vasectamy? "Of Course Not"

Next the Supreme Court is going to demand that women notify their husbands 48 hours before they menustrate each month.
:lamo My husband (and everyone around me) knows a week before now!!!

Many lawsuits brought on by men who fathered children and demanded their rights to the fetus' fate have passed through courts, but unless the child was actually born, I don't think one single case ever favored the malefactor. It's just not possible. Any man without a medical condition otherwise can father a child-sperm banks prove that. If the woman has to go behind her husband's back, there's more than reproductive issues at stake.
 

steen

Lie Detector
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
4,081
Reaction score
0
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
WinterSun said:
If a woman is married, why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband?
"Infant" is a developmental stage beginning after birth. No infants are aborted.

And why should she be required to notify him about anything? Does he have a say in what happens to her body? Can he deny her access to safe, legal medical procedures? Does he own her body?
When they married they both entered an agreement where they have to understand one another, not do things behind each other's backs. It's also his child as well.
There is no "child" until birth. That aside, spouses can do a lot of stuff without notifying their partners. Do you have to tell your wife/husband when you have a hair cut? When you buy anything? When you write a check? Why not spousal notification on everything? After all, if they can't do anything behind each other's back, shouldn't they be required to disclose EVERYTHING and ANYTHING before doing it?
 

FISHX

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
212
Reaction score
0
Location
uk
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Men have every right to know if their baby/fetus is going to be terminated after all if the woman wanted to keep the baby but hubby doesn,t the csa would stil have him up in court to maintain that child.
 

purplezen

New member
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
FISHX said:
Men have every right to know if their baby/fetus is going to be terminated after all if the woman wanted to keep the baby but hubby doesn,t the csa would stil have him up in court to maintain that child.
Certainly no constitutional right.

I don't think men should have a right to know. Fatherhood is a priviledge bestowed upon a man by the mother and the mother determines the fathers involvement if any. Of course this merely my opinion, but with such controversial moral issues I think there is room for alot of opinion.

I know this is a hardcore statement and am willing to see how it doesn't make absolute sense all the time, but in the case of the unborn child, I think the mother has holds all control here.
 
Last edited:

FutureIncoming

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
5,623
Reaction score
605
Location
Land of the Freedom-Stealers, because also Home of
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Let's look at some of the possibilities. Looks like there are only four.
1. Both adults of a married couple want offspring.
2. Neither adult wants offspring.
3. The male wants offspring while the female doesn't.
4. The female wants offspring while the male doesn't.

(Yes, I know there are variants, such as in Case 1 where the adults do not want offspring NOW, but do later. But each variant of a given Case can probably be declared equivalent to one of the other Cases -- in the variant just described, Case 2 would apply NOW, but not later.)

Case 1 offends nobody, unless perhaps the couple is too poor to be able to afford offspring without imposing upon others.
Case 2 offends the anti-abortionists, IF they find a need to enforce their power of choice over mindless biology.
Cases 3 & 4 really should be resolved before marriage occurs. Consequences deriving from the conflict are absolutely ancient and classic. I know of one modern Case 3 where the female consented to be the "brood mare" of the male if given an automobile. The story I was told is that she eventually acquired 4 cars that way. I do not know if this was a pre-nuptual arrangement. If it was, FINE. If the female presented her conditions after marriage, then likely even other females might say she was in the wrong, for not communicating something of such significance prior to the marriage.
Case 4 is special in that the female has the power to get her way regardless of what the male wants. This also is a matter of great significance. One of the ironic things about human relationships is that humans usually have to work AWAY from the relationship, to earn enough to survive. When either works more than the other (or when non-work-hours don't overlap), the relationship is strained. Consider the case when an extra mouth-to-feed is added. MORE work away from the relationship is required (likely by the male, since the female usually does most child-rearing), to earn enough for three instead of two to survive! COMBINE Case 4 with the extra work, and no wonder so many marriages collapse! Leaving the disgruntled male with child-support, of course. My advice to any guy who seeks Case 2 (until READY for Case 1) -- but encounters Case 4 -- is this: Do a Ben Franklin, and find a grateful older female who CAN'T saddle you with kids.

:)

Once upon a time I imagined a cultural scheme in which young adults were EXPECTED to seek out significantly-older partners. Here are some ARBITRARY age-ranges, just to present the notion clearly:
1-20: Growth and general learning
20-40: Partner up with the 40-60 group. According to studies, young males and older females are near peak sex drive. Meanwhile, older males have the financial security to offer younger females, who in turn are at the best age for having healthy offspring.
40-60: RePartner with the 20-40 group, as described. The older females will generally not want any more offspring, while the younger males need the chance to acquire financial security. ALSO they can be properly trained in the Right Ways to Treat Females. Meanwhile, older males can apply what they learned, gently, to the younger females. Diminishing sex drive and TIME for relationship helps ease the child-rearing burden, and the presence of a solid father-figure is considered to be a Good Thing, also.
60+: RePartner with another of this group. This is only logical, if you are either sex and have reached 60, while your partner has reached 40 and is ready to repartner with a 20-year-old.

Every culture finds the customs of other cultures strange. As long as they WORK, it shouldn't be possible to say that one culture is superior to another. This one, I think, is workable...PROVIDED humans can be a little less possessive of their partners, than is often the case these days. If possible, such anti-selfishness training should be part of the 1-20 learning environment.

:)
 

Cloud9

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
101
Reaction score
0
Political Leaning
Private
WinterSun said:
If a woman is married, why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband? When they married they both entered an agreement where they have to understand one another, not do things behind each other's backs. It's also his child as well.
Who's to say? Maybe she was impregnated by someone other than her husband... maybe they'll notify her lover....
 

purplezen

New member
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Originally Posted by WinterSun
If a woman is married, why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband? When they married they both entered an agreement where they have to understand one another, not do things behind each other's backs. It's also his child as well.
Why should she go and abort the infant without telling her husband?

Its all circumstantial, there could be many reasons. If you are suggesting that is ought to MANDATORY for the father to be notified, then I disagree.

The real father's involvement is determined by the mother. Human history shows us that the woman decides the involvement of the genetic father or the adopted father in the case of cheating.

Have humans stooped so low that couples can no longer communicate and resort to backdoor tactics?
 

liberal1

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The most important fundamental right of anyone, is the ability to choose. True, if a woman doesn't notify her spouse that she is having an abortion, this probably isn't a stable relationship. But to be forced by law to notify of an abortion, that's just violating the rights of a woman.
 

Old and wise

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cherith said:
Here we go again-men trying to control women and strip them of their Constitutional rights.

Abortion, vasectomy, tubal ligations

... why is government thinking they can tell women what to do?

The new Supreme Court nominee Alito wants women to notify their husbands before they have an abortion.

1. What if she is not pregnant for her...husband?
2.What if her husband died before she knew she was pregnant?
3. What if her husband is locked up in jail/prison after she finds out?

Will men be forced to notify their wives before they get a reversable vasectamy? "Of Course Not"

Next the Supreme Court is going to demand that women notify their husbands 48 hours before they menustrate each month.
Women having a vasectomy? That's a new one to me. I'd like to see how that is done.:rofl
 
Top Bottom