Women are "Hosts" lets slip OK Rep

[Grooveriding]

It's their body. It may be the cliche phrase, but you need to show some respect for other people's individual freedom.

It doesn't matter if you inseminated her, if the way your preacher interprets your fake skyman stories tells you it's wrong or if you desperately care about the completed birthed human the fetus will develop into. If you don't think it's fair, well that's life. It's happening inside their body and it ends there. They can do whatever they like whether you want them to or not. No one is going to tell me what I can and can't do with my body, they expect the same respect.

This whole argument, yet another veiled grab at other people's liberties, is just another way to try and stop abortion. I expect Americans will be stuck having to fend off these theocratic grabs at freedom for at least the next four years now. People are welcome to feel as aggrieved as they like, it's still too damn bad. Your sense of perceived fairness to the father is just that, a perception. If it's inside their body, it's their business if they choose to have an abortion. If that's not fair to the father, and there is mass agreement in the injustice of it to the father, it still changes nothing.

 

[interchange]

I think you're equivocating what "hurt" means. You are not physically injured nor have your rights been violated.

Those examples of being hurt are equivocating? Damn. I don't think that's me being a psychiatrist here overvaluing the emotional context of things. These are seriously difficult things to process emotionally.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The very same reasons that protect a woman from being forced to have an abortion against her will also protect her right to choose to terminate her pregnancy. That's all that really needs to be said, but consistency is a foreign concept to the anti-choice idiots.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Those examples of being hurt are equivocating? Damn. I don't think that's me being a psychiatrist here overvaluing the emotional context of things. These are seriously difficult things to process emotionally.

Tough titty. You don't get to deny someone their fundamental rights just because not doing so would hurt your precious little feelers.

 

[interchange]

Tough titty. You don't get to deny someone their fundamental rights just because not doing so would hurt your precious little feelers.

Did you miss the part where I said I'm pro choice?

Do you think that respecting opposing viewpoints weakens your own?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Did you miss the part where I said I'm pro choice?

The point is that nobody is "hurt" in a way that makes any difference with the pro-choice position.

Do you think that respecting opposing viewpoints weakens your own?

No, but I do not respect irrational viewpoints.

 

[interchange]

The point is that nobody is "hurt" in a way that makes any difference with the pro-choice position.

You and I seem to be at a fundamental disagreement about the nature of humanity that I don't see us resolving. There doesn't seem to be any benefit in arguing further.

 

[1prophet]

When men can get pregnant and go through all the hormonal changes that women do...as well as give birth, then they will might get that right.

Let's not forget the accompanying physical health risks of pregnancy and giving birth.

Boo hoo your goddamn feelings were hurt. The woman has to deal with that shit AND the physical component.

All very good points, and the very reason men including those who call themselves women can never relate to what a real biological women has to go through in life and should stop pretending that they do.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You and I seem to be at a fundamental disagreement about the nature of humanity that I don't see us resolving. There doesn't seem to be any benefit in arguing further.

No we have a fundamental disagreement about the logical implications of statements. You made a categorical statement and supported it with a hypothetically personal anecdote. Lern 2 logic.

 

[interchange]

No we have a fundamental disagreement about the logical implications of statements. You made a categorical statement and supported it with a hypothetically personal anecdote. Lern 2 logic.

This is funny.

 

[pcgeek11]

A swing and a miss! Please don't project your mother's regrets onto other women.

I was talking about your mother.

 

[pcgeek11]

While that sucks, it's still her body. Terminating pregnancy is not something people take lightly.



Uh yea, if you're man enough to procreate, you've assumed adulthood and will be require to at least financially raise your offspring. It's the republican thing to do.

Don't play if you aren't prepared to pay.

It is something that some people do take lightly.

Well if she is woman enough to procreate the same should be true right.

She also shouldn't play if she isn't prepared to pay.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I was talking about your mother.

 

[pcgeek11]

That's removing agency from the woman though.

Think of the following scenarios:
Man wants baby, woman doesn't - its her body she can do with it what she likes. In other words, the man had no input into what happened, was not responsible for the creation of the life, and has no say in it
Man does not want baby, woman does - too bad, should have worn a condom. In other words, the baby would not have happened without the man, he is partially responsible for the creation of the life, and has no say in the decision but is expected to take responsibility for the offspring.

These are mutually contradictory positions. Either the man is responsible or he isn't. If he is responsible for the creation of the life, then he ought to have a say in whether it is aborted. If he is not responsible, then he should not be forced to provide for it.

You explained my position very well. I am and have always been careful with whom I get involved with for these very reasons. It is complex and it seems that no matter which way the laws are set somebody gets screwed...

TO most in here the woman gets every say and the man can just get screwed. Which I disagree with in some cases. As I was playing a little devils advocate and got several snarky responses.

It is not as cut and dried as much as many like to think. I do not agree with this Representative in his views.

 

[pcgeek11]

The idea that inseminating a woman would give a man license to force her to have elective medical procedures performed on herself with the threat of financial ruin is seriously twisted.

Where did anyone say they would force a woman to have an abortion. I must have missed that.

 

[pcgeek11]

He started down the gender equality path, so I tossed that out there.

My bottom line is this, don't fuck anything you can....find someone you care about and much of this becomes moot.

Before you start having unprotected sex, make sure a conversation takes place regarding the consequences. Of course, dude's tend to lie, and you have a ton of single mothers due to that. Once in a while, there's a guy who gets burned...that's not the norm.

I think this happens a lot more often than you are willing to admit to. Not the norm, but far from rare.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Start digging, I've yet to encounter a single instance IRL. Look how many single mothers there are though.

 

[jackstar7]

Again, I present this: if the government is going to demand that all pregnancies be brought to term, then the government must then provide care to all pregnant women to that end. So there's an interesting taxpayer burden in the form of healthcare, baby-farms, and whatever else is required. Beyond that all miscarriages must be investigated fully by police as potential abortions without regard for the unreal trauma involved for the mother/host.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Are we back to arguing that women should be nothing more then axolotl tanks? (Dune ref)

 

[Zorba]

I have 2 kids. If my wife chose to abort them, would you begrudge me if I were very upset about it? Would you tell someone grieving from a miscarriage to get over it because no one was hurt?

Of course you have a right to be upset and leave her for it, if you so choose. But that clump of cells is living off of her body, just a like a parasite, she alone has the right to decide what to do it with. That doesn't mean that you have to be okay with that decision.

 

[WHAMPOM]

In a sane world a women visits her Doctor to certify a pregnancy and then either schedules an abortion or prenatal care. That is after checking for other medical conditions that mimic pregnancy.

 

[Zorba]

You explained my position very well. I am and have always been careful with whom I get involved with for these very reasons. It is complex and it seems that no matter which way the laws are set somebody gets screwed...

TO most in here the woman gets every say and the man can just get screwed. Which I disagree with in some cases. As I was playing a little devils advocate and got several snarky responses.

It is not as cut and dried as much as many like to think. I do not agree with this Representative in his views.

The problem is, not every situation in life has a possible fair/even outcome. The nature of pregnancy and childbearing is very lopsided, which explains why abortion choices are also completely lopsided.

 

[Sunburn74]

I see the point that you are making, but lets say for instance that you are involved with a woman and you both make a choice to have a child. Later she decides to abort that child and you think you shouldn't have even a small say so about it? None.

Reverse that and say she becomes pregnant and you as the father want no part of it even though you will be required to support this child until it is 18 years old. You still get no say so in what she decides to do even though it will also effect you the rest of your life.

Seems a little biased in my opinion.

With the woman's consent men can opt out of pare talk duties.

Women solely accept health risks associated with pregnancy. For this reason alone, the entire decision regarding carrying a fetus to term is hers.

 

[Meghan54]

Entirely hypothetical as I already see the answer, but....

With some needing the man's input into whether the woman has an abortion or not, does that mean the man in question is also willing to accept the infant immediately after being born, to care and raise said infant for its life? You know, sorta what the "expected" end result is for women today, having total responsibility for a child for 18 years, no matter whether the man is included in the loop?