True or False - If Men Got Pregnant There'd Be No Abortion Debate

[Dragonfly]

If Men Got Pregnant There'd Be No Abortion Debate

The laws would permanently be 100% choice.

True or false

 

[RabidAlpaca]

It doesn't matter if you're male, female, black, white, gay or straight. Killing a living human being out of convenience is wrong. If it would be legal, it shouldn't be.

 

[JayDubya]

About half of anti-abortion folks are women.

Ergo, this conceit is fail.

 

[rocket88]

It doesn't matter if you're male, female, black, white, gay or straight. Killing a living human being out of convenience is wrong. If it would be legal, it shouldn't be.

Regardless of "should," if men could get pregnant abortion would be in the Bill of Rights.

 

[JayDubya]

This entire concept is backhanded flamebait garbage. It's not new, mind you; you're not the first to use it... but it has always been backhanded flamebait garbage.


"Duhr - yuo jus hate teh weomenz!"

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Regardless of "should," if men could get pregnant abortion would be in the Bill of Rights.

Nope. If men could get pregnant, they would have traditionally been in the mothering/household role, and the wives would've been the hunter gatherers. The women would be in charge and they would oppose it for the same reason we do: It's inherently wrong to kill a human being out of convenience.

 

[Dragonfly]

Nope. If men could get pregnant, they would have traditionally been in the mothering/household role, and the wives would've been the hunter gatherers. The women would be in charge and they would oppose it for the same reason we do: It's inherently wrong to kill a human being out of convenience.

Where did I say anything about women not being able to get pregnant?

And women in charge......ha...I already did that thread a while back.

 

[lolabird]

It only took women 100 years to earn the right to vote.
How long will it take before they can oversee their own bodies?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Where did I say anything about women not being able to get pregnant?

And women in charge......ha...I already did that thread a while back.

Ok, I'm sorry you didn't express your ridiculous scenario well enough. It's kind of assumed that if men can have babies the other gender, women, can't. Unless in your f'd up world when two people have sex they both get pregnant.

And by the way, the "I already did that thread a while back." statement is a lazy cop-out to avoid having to address any actual points.

 

[Dragonfly]

About half of anti-abortion folks are women.

And how many of those "half" are of child bearing age, compared to how many are post-menopause?

 

[rocket88]

Nope. If men could get pregnant, they would have traditionally been in the mothering/household role, and the wives would've been the hunter gatherers. The women would be in charge and they would oppose it

I hadn't thought of it that way. But assuming everything else was the same, if the "dominant" gender could get pregnant, there would be no debate.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I hadn't thought of it that way. But assuming everything else was the same, if the "dominant" gender could get pregnant, there would be no debate.

That's because most people are only looking out for themselves. Just like it was pointed out earlier, post-menopausal women are more likely to be anti-abortion, because they can't get pregnant anymore. It's sad that some people would throw another human being under the bus because they didn't want responsibility.

 

[Dragonfly]

but assuming everything else was the same, if the "dominant" gender could get pregnant, there would be no debate.

Thank You.

 

[Dragonfly]

That's because most people are only looking out for themselves.

Precisely. And men being men.... they'd sure as hell not allow women to tell them what they can and can't do.

Only men can tell the opposite sex what's right and wrong. Not the other way around.

All one has to do is look at history to see that's the case.

 

[Your Star]

There would be choice, pretty clearly.

 

[JayDubya]

Precisely. And men being men.... they'd sure as hell not allow women to tell them what they can and can't do.

Only men can tell the opposite sex what's right and wrong. Not the other way around.

All one has to do is look at history to see that's the case.

Uh-huh.

So basically:

"Duhr - yuo jus hate teh weomenz!"

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Regardless of "should," if men could get pregnant abortion would be in the Bill of Rights.

yes, yes, and it's all about controlling women. Funny that people always try to reduce opposition to some evil savage, as opposed to simply addressing the issue of rights, when life begins, and how we balance two possible competing interests.

People are ****ing morons

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

There would be choice, pretty clearly.

there is choice now.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And how many of those "half" are of child bearing age, compared to how many are post-menopause?

lol, how is that even relevent

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I hadn't thought of it that way. But assuming everything else was the same, if the "dominant" gender could get pregnant, there would be no debate.

that is a rather huge assumption that seems to ignore the very nature of the debate and why it concerns people

 

[shlunka]

It doesn't matter if you're male, female, black, white, gay or straight. Killing a living human being out of convenience is wrong. If it would be legal, it shouldn't be.

Define convenience. Sadam was an inconvenience, so he was killed. False equivalence, fractally yes, but not from the basic premise of "killing a living human being out of convenience is wrong.". Also must define human being, subjective. I.E, biological? Conscious? Societal? It's terribly ambiguous. Biologically a developing fetus is a human being to DNA extents, however, it's not consciously nor societally a human being. Rephrase statement to "Killing a fetus without justifiable inconveniencing is wrong." But what is justifiable inconveniencing? Can the parents support the child that results? What's the probability of poverty? Does the child have any debilitating defects? Too much ambiguity to say that depriving a developing individual of conscious life is inherently wrong "unless from a strictly Darwinian perspective of reproduction". Something is not inherently immoral, morals are subjective, morals are ambiguous, and as long as human life has various amounts of quality one cannot say that depriving an individual of a possibly painful existence is immoral.

 

[WCH]

It only took women 100 years to earn the right to vote.
How long will it take before they can oversee their own bodies?

If men knew that all you wanted was the ability to kill your offspring, you still wouldn't have the right to vote.

 

[WCH]

And how many of those "half" are of child bearing age, compared to how many are post-menopause?

Now you gonna hate on old people??

 

[jamesrage]

About half of anti-abortion folks are women.

Ergo, this conceit is fail.

This is correct.Abortionists just love to try to spread the lie that only or mostly men are pro-life.

More Americans

A year ago, Gallup found more women calling themselves pro-choice than pro-life, by 50% to 43%, while men were more closely divided: 49% pro-choice, 46% pro-life. Now, because of heightened pro-life sentiment among both groups, women as well as men are more likely to be pro-life.

Men and women have been evenly divided on the issue in previous years; however, this is the first time in nine years of Gallup Values surveys that significantly more men and women are pro-life than pro-choice.

CNN Poll: 62% Want All or Most Abortions Made Illegal | LifeNews.com
Breaking down those numbers further, Gallup finds that pro-life view as seen across the board — with 60 percent of women and 61 percent of men saying they want all or almost all abortions illegal. Women actually take a stronger pro-life view than men with 24 percent of American women wanting all abortions made illegal and 36 percent wanting almost all illegal, compared with 19 percent of men who want to ban all abortions and 42 percent of men who want to prohibit almost all.

 

[WCH]

This is correct.Abortionists just love to try to spread the lie that only or mostly men are pro-life.

More Americans

A year ago, Gallup found more women calling themselves pro-choice than pro-life, by 50% to 43%, while men were more closely divided: 49% pro-choice, 46% pro-life. Now, because of heightened pro-life sentiment among both groups, women as well as men are more likely to be pro-life.

Men and women have been evenly divided on the issue in previous years; however, this is the first time in nine years of Gallup Values surveys that significantly more men and women are pro-life than pro-choice.

CNN Poll: 62% Want All or Most Abortions Made Illegal | LifeNews.com
Breaking down those numbers further, Gallup finds that pro-life view as seen across the board — with 60 percent of women and 61 percent of men saying they want all or almost all abortions illegal. Women actually take a stronger pro-life view than men with 24 percent of American women wanting all abortions made illegal and 36 percent wanting almost all illegal, compared with 19 percent of men who want to ban all abortions and 42 percent of men who want to prohibit almost all.

I'd like to throw in "How many men or women think it's OK to screw around on the spouses?"

I would be willing bet those who did would be more than likely pro-choice.