A woman's right?

[Maria]

Jillio's world:

Woman wants baby / Man doesnt: Man has to pay child support. Boo for men!
Woman doesn't want baby / Man does: Man is sad because of abortion. Boo for men!

lsfoster's world:

Woman wants baby / Man doesn't: Woman gets no $. Man is free. Boo for women!
Woman doesn't want baby / Man does: Man takes care of baby? Boo for women! (since they have to carry the baby to full term)

My conclusion: Jillio hates men and lsfoster hates women.


Interesting scenario: What if the man wanted the baby (woman doesn't), and asked her to keep it and he will take care of it, THEN he asks her for child support...?

Important : Communication in between the 2 and make it to work. Givin' a compromise to each other. Honesty is one thing to work it well.

 

[dreama]

To make it more fair, If woman wants the baby the man pays for the baby.
If the man wants the baby the woman has to carry the baby to terms.

If neither of them want the baby they can put the baby up for adoption.

That makes it fair for everybody.

 

[Maria]

To make it more fair, If woman wants the baby the man pays for the baby.
If the man wants the baby the woman has to carry the baby to terms.

If neither of them want the baby they can put the baby up for adoption.

That makes it fair for everybody.

I agree! Makes everyone more healthy and stay sane by choosin' the right thing without feelin' guilty. Be more responsibility also.

 

[webexplorer]

In a general, a parent has a highest salary, and then he/she has to pay a child support until the child support is stopped when the child turns 18 years old. It depends the law in your state. I am not exact sure about the relation between a Dead Beat Dad law and woman's right.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

To make it more fair, If woman wants the baby the man pays for the baby.

Yes, accord the law.

If the man wants the baby the woman has to carry the baby to terms.

No, the couple should solve together until agreement instead of do what the man wants. It's them who create a baby together.

If neither of them want the baby they can put the baby up for adoption.

If they don't want to keep the baby then is their own decision alone without us telling them what to do. I will respect their decision if they decide for an abortion or adoption because it's their choice, not ours.

That makes it fair for everybody.

No, it's their choice, not everyone.

 

[Aleser]

To make it more fair, If woman wants the baby the man pays for the baby.
If the man wants the baby the woman has to carry the baby to terms.

If neither of them want the baby they can put the baby up for adoption.

That makes it fair for everybody.

Say -what-? It's fair for a man to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body because he had sex with her?

A woman should be forced to go through an uncomfortable pregnancy, risking her work, her connections with family and friends, as well as her health (even a healthy pregnancy carried to term has a significantly higher rate of mortality than abortions!), and then the particular thrill of childbirth... because a man told her to?

Sorry, that's never going to be the world I'll live in.

Christ, what next, expecting a woman to get signed permission from her husband to use birth control? Cos, you know, he might not consent to his sperm being wasted like that. EACH AND EVERY EMISSION IS A POSSIBLE BABY! :roll:

 

[Byrdie714]

Say -what-? It's fair for a man to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body because he had sex with her?

A woman should be forced to go through an uncomfortable pregnancy, risking her work, her connections with family and friends, as well as her health (even a healthy pregnancy carried to term has a significantly higher rate of mortality than abortions!), and then the particular thrill of childbirth... because a man told her to?

Sorry, that's never going to be the world I'll live in.

Christ, what next, expecting a woman to get signed permission from her husband to use birth control? Cos, you know, he might not consent to his sperm being wasted like that. EACH AND EVERY EMISSION IS A POSSIBLE BABY! :roll:

Good point!

 

[jillio]

Jillio's world:

Woman wants baby / Man doesnt: Man has to pay child support. Boo for men!
Woman doesn't want baby / Man does: Man is sad because of abortion. Boo for men!
Totally distorted interpretation of my position. I would never have thought you would resort to intentional distortion to make your point. Shame on you.

lsfoster's world:

Woman wants baby / Man doesn't: Woman gets no $. Man is free. Boo for women!
Woman doesn't want baby / Man does: Man takes care of baby? Boo for women! (since they have to carry the baby to full term)

Again, a total distortion of the consequences of your position. Same as above applies.
My conclusion: Jillio hates men and lsfoster hates women.


As a result of the above distortions, your conclusion is fallicious and circular.
Interesting scenario: What if the man wanted the baby (woman doesn't), and asked her to keep it and he will take care of it, THEN he asks her for child support...?

Then he finds a surrogate that is willing to carry the child for him. And doesn't ask for child support. This sort of arrangement negates the need for legal action as required for child support.

 

[jillio]

To make it more fair, If woman wants the baby the man pays for the baby.
If the man wants the baby the woman has to carry the baby to terms.

If neither of them want the baby they can put the baby up for adoption.

That makes it fair for everybody.

No it doesn't. It makes the woman subject to male control over her body.

 

[jillio]

Say -what-? It's fair for a man to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body because he had sex with her?

A woman should be forced to go through an uncomfortable pregnancy, risking her work, her connections with family and friends, as well as her health (even a healthy pregnancy carried to term has a significantly higher rate of mortality than abortions!), and then the particular thrill of childbirth... because a man told her to?

Sorry, that's never going to be the world I'll live in.

Christ, what next, expecting a woman to get signed permission from her husband to use birth control? Cos, you know, he might not consent to his sperm being wasted like that. EACH AND EVERY EMISSION IS A POSSIBLE BABY! :roll:

Bingo!

 

[dreama]

Say -what-? It's fair for a man to dictate to a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body because he had sex with her?

A woman should be forced to go through an uncomfortable pregnancy, risking her work, her connections with family and friends, as well as her health (even a healthy pregnancy carried to term has a significantly higher rate of mortality than abortions!), and then the particular thrill of childbirth... because a man told her to?

Sorry, that's never going to be the world I'll live in.

Christ, what next, expecting a woman to get signed permission from her husband to use birth control? Cos, you know, he might not consent to his sperm being wasted like that. EACH AND EVERY EMISSION IS A POSSIBLE BABY! :roll:

You are missing the point. It's NOT her body. Once the baby develops a form it has it's own body. So no she has no moral right to do what she wants with somebody elses body.

 

[Daredevel7]

Then he finds a surrogate that is willing to carry the child for him. And doesn't ask for child support. This sort of arrangement negates the need for legal action as required for child support.

Hehe, don't take my post seriously. My "point" was that you're a man hater and lsfoster is a woman hater which is ironic itself!!!

Abortion/child support is too dependent on the situation and relationship between the man and woman and their needs to generalize it anyway.

 

[Byrdie714]

You are missing the point. It's NOT her body. Once the baby develops a form it has it's own body. So no she has no moral right to do what she wants with somebody elses body.

It isn't born yet and therefore is considred a parasite feeding off the host.

(Gee---didn't we have this discussion before?! :roll: )

 

[shel90]

Read the posts...If the men want the same rights as women, then I guess they would need to come up with a way for them to get pregnant and we can discuss what's fair and what's not fair.

 

[lsfoster]

I'm not a woman hater at all. (In fact, I sure do love me some women. ). And I'll say it again, I've never been arguing that a man should be able to make a woman keep a baby. I do think it's strange that you all keep bringing up the fact that the laws can't be fair because "biologically" the situation is different for the man and the woman. Exactly. "Biologically" the woman should have to deal with a pregnancy if she chooses to risk getting pregnant. You say that "biology" is the reason that the man can't remove himself from the baby's life, since he's not carrying it, but I think that to give a woman extra choices at that time, she should be held even more responsible for the baby, not less. A man choosing he doesn't want to be involved with the baby has no effect on that baby's life. The same choice that we've given women takes away the baby's life. The argument that you should be making is this "If women want the same rights as men (in terms of not having direct consequences), then I guess we would need to come up with a way for them not to get pregnant, and we can discuss what's fair and what's not fair". (Shel90, you just happened to be the latest person to post the same argument). The point is, you've already happily thrown the "natural" and "biological" arguments out the window by deciding that women don't have to deal with the consequences, and then you've added extra consequences to men.

Also, I'll say it again, just in case people missed it, I simply do not believe abortions are right after the first 20 or so weeks. If you look at the numbers, a huge majority of people abort before then. At that point, once can make a pretty good argument about the viability of the baby. Past that, especially partial birth abortions are just abhorrent.

So let's conclude: I'm not saying a man should be able to decide for a woman, and I'm not saying that "every sperm is a possible baby and should be protected". Trying to make my arguments seem ridiculous by greatly exaggerating them serves no point except making me type all this out again.

 

[Byrdie714]

It's a parasite. Period.

 

[lsfoster]

The baby is? I mean, fine, you can make that argument, but we are no less parasites to the earth in general. But do you actually know what a partial birth abortion is?

 

[Byrdie714]

The baby is? I mean, fine, you can make that argument, but we are no less parasites to the earth in general. But do you actually know what a partial birth abortion is?

Actually yes I do.

Most women that have partial birth abortions after 20 weeks usually have a valid reasoning to have the fetus aborted.

 

[lsfoster]

And most people who commit murder believe they have valid reasons for that also. Unless there is a serious health risk to the mother, I just don't think there's a valid reason for having a partial birth abortion.

 

[Byrdie714]

And most people who commit murder believe they have valid reasons for that also. Unless there is a serious health risk to the mother, I just don't think there's a valid reason for having a partial birth abortion.

When I made my comment--most of the women that I knew that had the abortion were survivors of incest, and rape.

When that is factor in--I don't doubt their justification in wanting the procedure.