Michigan starting round 2 of the War on Women

[Dr. Zaus]

LOL wut??? Abortions are legal making people embarrassed to have one should not be.

hahahahhaha!

let's try that logic in other situations:

"getting drunk and passing out is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be".

"getting an STD from a prostitute in Reno is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

"making half-witted asinine statements that start with lul wut?? is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

I guess you're for that last one too though...

The point you were trying to make is correct, Ausm, but what you literally said is the height of absurdity/thought policing.

I will now accept your retraction and restatement.

 

[raildogg]

LOL. People are so energetic about allowing or denying abortion rather than finding out why women choose to do it. Are they irresponsible? Don't care about their bodies? Why?

The problem is not abortion. It is why people have it to begin with and why they want it. Same thing with guns.

The way I see it, if a woman wants an abortion, that is her choice. Go ahead and do it. But it is an indication of society and where we are headed.

It is interesting to see people say "It is her body, let her choose." Without any knowledge, it implies that this person has a lot of issues going on to even consider something like abortion. It appears that we are taking abortion too lightly. It has become too convenient. So sad. (All of this excludes cases of rape, of which I don't have anything to comment.)

 

[Thebobo]

hahahahhaha!

let's try that logic in other situations:

"getting drunk and passing out is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be".

"getting an STD from a prostitute in Reno is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

"making half-witted asinine statements that start with lul wut?? is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

I guess you're for that last one too though...

The point you were trying to make is correct, Ausm, but what you literally said is the height of absurdity/thought policing.

I will now accept your retraction and restatement.

Must be nice to be right all the time. or I have no clue what you said, not that it matters.

 

[herm0016]

good thing we are arguing about a bill that got shot down multiple times.

 

[nehalem256]

Again, nothing to do with the current situation. Did the man stick his penis into the woman at the sperm bank?

What is the real difference between getting pregnant from a one-night stand and getting pregnant from a sperm bank? In both cases there is no reason to expect that the father will stick around.

I can agree on this. If she has the baby and doesn't want it but the man does, he should get it. She should not be able to give his & her child away is he is willing to take it and wants it (assuming he is capable of taking care of it, etc. - i.e. not in prison).

I tend to agree on this. I don't agree with abortion reasons of "just because". I believe in their use for health (i.e. death) and incest or rape. I think if you (man and woman) have sex, then you both choose the consequences of having the child if the woman becomes pregnant.

It sounds like you think women should be expected to be responsible for their choice to have sex. This is completely the opposite of what liberals believe.

Are you for abortion now? Again, my response above applies. I don't think there should be casual abortion but as of right now, it's there.

If we live a society that accepts things like one-night stands then casual abortion is necessary.

If it's from a sperm bank, I agree. If he makes the choice to deposit it, then he chose to agree with the possible consequences (unless there is some sort of written agreement to help her have a baby that she could not get otherwise and even then, I don't know the legality of that since he would be placing his penis into her body).

Why is a man putting his penis into a woman constitute a legal binding contract? And in fact a one-sided "contract" that only puts obligations on the man.

In fact:

A contract is an agreement entered into voluntarily by two or more parties, each of whom intends to create one or more legal obligations between or among them. The elements of a contract are "offer" and "acceptance" by "competent persons" having legal capacity who exchange "consideration" to create "mutuality of obligation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract

Unless you are arguing that all women are prostitutes whenever they have sex it would seem that imposing the obligation of fatherhood on a man for having sex is not a valid contract. Note: This also implies that women don't like sex

 

[Engineer]

It sounds like you think women should be expected to be responsible for their choice to have sex. This is completely the opposite of what liberals believe.

Who said that I'm a liberal or conservative?

If we live a society that accepts things like one-night stands then casual abortion is necessary.

This is completely opposite of what conservatives believe.

Why is a man putting his penis into a woman constitute a legal binding contract? And in fact a one-sided "contract" that only puts obligations on the man.

That's just the way it is. Since you are the only one who doesn't like it, go ahead and try to find enough law makers to change it. Good luck. Oh, and you're saying that a woman who has a child has NO obligations? While she can give it up, if she keeps the child, she has plenty of obligations.

Unless you are arguing that all women are prostitutes whenever they have sex it would seem that imposing the obligation of fatherhood on a man for having sex is not a valid contract. Note: This also implies that women don't like sex

No, they are not prostitutes. The men have a choice and if they choose to stick it in and provide half of the DNA for the child, they have the obligation to pay half of the child and that's the way it should be. Again, if a man doesn't want the consequences, he can choose to not have sex or have a vasectomy to avoid the problems to begin with. Our society has deemed that a contract has been entered when having sex and, until changed, that's the way it is and yes, the man is a FATHER if the child is born.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Must be nice to be right all the time. or I have no clue what you said, not that it matters.

...not that it matters...

 

[nehalem256]

This is completely opposite of what conservatives believe.

A conservative would believe one-night stands are wrong.

That's just the way it is. Since you are the only one who doesn't like it, go ahead and try to find enough law makers to change it. Good luck.

Which is another way of saying you cannot refute what I say

Oh, and you're saying that a woman who has a child has NO obligations? While she can give it up, if she keeps the child, she has plenty of obligations.

I am saying that carrying a child around for 9 months implies a lot more responsibility than 15 min of rubbing you penis in someone.

If she doesnt want to be obligated to the child get an abortion. Problem solved.

No, they are not prostitutes. The men have a choice and if they choose to stick it in and provide half of the DNA for the child, they have the obligation to pay half of the child and that's the way it should be. Again, if a man doesn't want the consequences, he can choose to not have sex or have a vasectomy to avoid the problems to begin with. Our society has deemed that a contract has been entered when having sex and, until changed, that's the way it is and yes, the man is a FATHER if the child is born.

The only way a contract can be said to have been entered is if the woman is giving the man sex in exchange for his money(in the form of child support). Otherwise it is by definition not a contract. And a woman who gets money in exchange for sex is called a...?

Society has no issue with spermbanks. So the fact that it is his DNA is not at issue. The only thing at issue is that the man got to stick in a woman. It appears that what society wants to is punish the man for having sex.

So why is it okay to punish men for having sex, but not okay to punish women for having sex?

 

[shadow9d9]

LOL. People are so energetic about allowing or denying abortion rather than finding out why women choose to do it. Are they irresponsible? Don't care about their bodies? Why?

The problem is not abortion. It is why people have it to begin with and why they want it. Same thing with guns.

The way I see it, if a woman wants an abortion, that is her choice. Go ahead and do it. But it is an indication of society and where we are headed.

It is interesting to see people say "It is her body, let her choose." Without any knowledge, it implies that this person has a lot of issues going on to even consider something like abortion. It appears that we are taking abortion too lightly. It has become too convenient. So sad. (All of this excludes cases of rape, of which I don't have anything to comment.)

We are headed in the direction of having more control over our future.

 

[Ausm]

hahahahhaha!

let's try that logic in other situations:

"getting drunk and passing out is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be".

"getting an STD from a prostitute in Reno is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

"making half-witted asinine statements that start with lul wut?? is legal; making people embarrassed to do so should not be."

I guess you're for that last one too though...

The point you were trying to make is correct, Ausm, but what you literally said is the height of absurdity/thought policing.

I will now accept your retraction and restatement.

Crack kills Bro...... Roe Vs Wade get over it....

 

[nehalem256]

We are headed in the direction of having more control over our future.

You mean unless you are a man. In which case women will have control over your future.

 

[fskimospy]

You mean unless you are a man. In which case women will have control over your future.

No, we are headed in a direction of each person having control of their own body. Relatedly, when a child enters the world both people responsible for its creation are obligated to care for it.

Equality for all, it's a great thing.

Btw, observe my complete lack of surprise that nehalem is crapping his pants in another thread about women. He has some serious issues with them.

 

[nehalem256]

No, we are headed in a direction of each person having control of their own body.

Being forced to work WITH YOUR BODY to support other people's choices is not what I would call having control of your own body.

Relatedly, when a child enters the world both people responsible for its creation are obligated to care for it.

The man and woman bear joint responsibility* for the creation of the fetus. Only the woman is responsible for the creation of the child.

You do understand the difference between a fetus and child?

*even this is arguable. Conception occurs in the woman's body. If a man makes a gift of his seed to a woman what she does with it is up to her.

 

[fskimospy]

Being forced to work WITH YOUR BODY to support other people's choices is not what I would call having control of your own body.

It was your choice, just as it was hers. Now you have responsibility for the results, same as the woman. At all times both partners have equal control over their bodies and equal responsibility for the results. Like I said, equality for all.

man and woman bear joint responsibility* for the creation of the fetus. Only the woman is responsible for the creation of the child.

You do understand the difference between a fetus and child?

*even this is arguable. Conception occurs in the woman's body. If a man makes a gift of his seed to a woman what she does with it is up to her.

Lol wut

 

[Oldgamer]

They're back!! I guess the GOP in Michigan didn't get the rebranding memo.

The return of trans-vaginal ultrasounds!!



Republicans killing their chances for a future on the national scene.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...ransvaginal-ultrasound-bill-article-1.1257778

What scares the hell out of me about this, women may be far less willing to have sex with men, if they are having to jump through hoops to get birth control, or know they have to go through this shit if they accidentally get pregnant. It's hard enough for someone like me to get laid as it... LMAO

Just think of all the unsuspecting "Daddys" this might cause, and uh oh, child support payments.

 

[nehalem256]

It was your choice, just as it was hers. Now you have responsibility for the results, same as the woman. At all times both partners have equal control over their bodies and equal responsibility for the results. Like I said, equality for all.

This is a blatant lie. Only a man is forced by the state to perform deeds based on having sex.

Women are free to opt out of responsibility by

(1) Having abortion
(2) Safe Haven laws.

 

[nehalem256]

What scares the hell out of me about this, women may be far less willing to have sex with men, if they are having to jump through hoops to get birth control, or know they have to go through this shit if they accidentally get pregnant. It's hard enough for someone like me to get laid as it... LMAO

Just think of all the unsuspecting "Daddys" this might cause, and uh oh, child support payments.

What hoops are you talking about?

 

[Ausm]

This is a blatant lie. Only a man is forced by the state to perform deeds based on having sex.

Women are free to opt out of responsibility by

(1) Having abortion
(2) Safe Haven laws.

You seem to feel that abortion is a form of Contraception?

 

[Oldgamer]

What hoops are you talking about?

Are you serious???

 

[nehalem256]

You seem to feel that abortion is a form of Contraception?

On the most technical level it does prevent births doesn't it?

Given that society has apparently decided there is no real moral issue with it why should women not use in situations where a birth obviously does not make sense?

 

[nehalem256]

Are you serious???

Absolutely I am. You can walk into any Walmart with a prescription* and get BC pills for less than $10/month or choose from an assortment of condoms. Hoops not found.

*In fact Republican Bobby Jindal suggested making BC pills available OTC, but feminists had a bit of a fit because then *gasp* they might have to pay for it.

 

[shadow9d9]

You mean unless you are a man. In which case women will have control over your future.

In a relationship, both people make the decision together.

 

[Oldgamer]

Absolutely I am. You can walk into any Walmart with a prescription* and get BC pills for less than $10/month or choose from an assortment of condoms. Hoops not found.

*In fact Republican Bobby Jindal suggested making BC pills available OTC, but feminists had a bit of a fit because then *gasp* they might have to pay for it.

Well that is assuming women have insurance and access to birth control. However, my loose comment is more towards the fact that opponents against birth control and the push by a number of tea party republicans to try and restrict access is what I was pointing towards.

We seem to forget the poor in this mix too. Since so many PP clinics have been regulated to death, and quite a number have been shut down, that leaves poor women having to "jump through hoops" trying to find someone to prescribe, or get free birth control.

It may be only 10 dollars for someone who has insurance but for someone who is poor, works a minimum wage job with no benefits is shit out of luck. So then the cost is a major factor.

There are a lot of hoops now that do exist, primarily for the uninsured and poor, so they may have access but it may be limited by factors, but if the "crazy, teapukes" have their way "they will find ways to shut that down".

 

[Incorruptible]

Absolutely I am. You can walk into any Walmart with a prescription* and get BC pills for less than $10/month or choose from an assortment of condoms. Hoops not found.

*In fact Republican Bobby Jindal suggested making BC pills available OTC, but feminists had a bit of a fit because then *gasp* they might have to pay for it.

This is an excellent idea, it would be easier for them to get and the taxpayer doesn't have to pay for it.

 

[Ausm]

On the most technical level it does prevent births doesn't it?

Given that society has apparently decided there is no real moral issue with it why should women not use in situations where a birth obviously does not make sense?

What moral issue makes you believe that you have the right to control a Woman's decisions with her own body?