• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

Hospital admitting privileges not required to perform abortions

Women, because of their biological assignment via circumstance of birth, don't possess the political power to deny men to be recognized or legitimize men's legal or Constitutional rights or lack of rights regarding their reproductive roles.

Consequently, your continuing claim of female bigotry is a false belief.

What? You are saying that women are incapable of oppressing men because they inherently lack political power due to their gender? That's just plain sexist. Your conclusion is invalid. My claim of female bigotry stands and is unhindered by the sexism you introduced to the discussion. One cannot cancel out sexism against men by rationalizing that sexism against women exists, either.


No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I have no idea why you should think that lying to get sex has anything to do with this discussion. As we previously discussed in another thread, men are not responsible for the creation of children. Notwithstanding the abortion of parental status, medical abortion of a fetus is a personal decision made by a woman alone.

Although sexual intercourse is a common cause of conception, maintaining bodily autonomy does not justify women forcing men to become fathers. Therefore, as nature takes its course, a man may naturally father children through no action of his own. As a woman may choose to not become involved in matters that concern men, so should a man choose to become or not become involved in matters that concern women, e.g. personal decisions made by men involving fatherhood. It is plainly obvious that the choice does not end at sex. Since women have access to abortion, why shouldn't men also have access to abortion?
 
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I have no idea why you should think that lying to get sex has anything to do with this discussion.
IT IS PART OF THE WHOLE. I previously stated something to the effect that it is too easy for men to lie, to escape responsibility for raising their offspring, IF that was all they needed to do to get out of it. YOU replied in a way that could be interpreted as not believing men lie to escape responsibility. Perhaps I should have pointed at all the male criminals in the world, arrested and denying their guilt? But I thought it would be obvious to you that if men lie to obtain sex, why wouldn't they lie to escape responsibility for the consequences?

Therefore what you are asking for, full freedom of men to escape the costs of raising their offspring, is too easily confounded by simple lying. AND MOST CULTURES KNOW THAT! Which is why you are not going to get what you want!

As we previously discussed in another thread, men are not responsible for the creation of children.
A STUPID LIE. I know full well that men are PARTLY responsible, and I would have said so in any other Thread. They are not fully responsible (because other entities are involved, such as independently-acting sperm and ova), but they are most certainly partly responsible.

... medical abortion of a fetus is a personal decision made by a woman alone.
GENERALLY TRUE. That's because the existence of the unborn human DIRECTLY affects her, and doesn't directly affect the man. There are exceptions, however --I think you will find cases where parents have insisted their underage pregnant daughters get abortions (along, of course, with other parents preventing their underage pregnant daughters from obtaining abortions).

Although sexual intercourse is a common cause of conception, maintaining bodily autonomy does not justify women forcing men to become fathers.
STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. Why was the man so stupid as to get involved with that woman, in this era when it is easy for men to be informed of the existence of such women, and to be wary of them? AND, why was he so stupid as to assign all the responsibility for birth control to the woman? I told you before that Stupidity Has A Price, and it is still true, whether you want to believe it or not.
BESIDES, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL FACTOR. The State wants more taxpayers, remember? That means the State has to make sure that when babies are born, they will also receive appropriate rearing. And WHOSE babies are they? The mothers' and the fathers'!!! Modern genetic analysis can prove that! Why should someone else pay for what the father was most certainly partly responsible for?!?!

Therefore, as nature takes its course, a man may naturally father children through no action of his own.
A STUPID LIE. Even making a deposit at a sperm bank counts as the man taking an action toward fathering children. It is far from common for women to **rape** men in order to become impregnated, and therefore that means the men did some acting on their own.

As a woman may choose to not become involved in matters that concern men,
FOOTBALL?

so should a man choose to become or not become involved in matters that concern women,
KNITTING?

e.g. personal decisions made by men involving fatherhood.
A FALSE COMPARISON. Parenthood by definition automatically involves both contributors to the offspring. It is not a matter that only concerns women.

It is plainly obvious that the choice does not end at sex.
TRUE FOR WOMEN; less true for men --although some men have made the choice to murder pregnant woman to prevent offspring from getting born.

Since women have access to abortion,
BECAUSE PREGNANCY DIRECTLY/IMMEDIATELY AFFECTS THEM. Not at all true for men, who have been known to run far away, simply because they are already physically separate from a pregnancy.

why shouldn't men also have access to abortion?
THEY DO. They have the right to try to convince pregnant women to get abortions. You seem to think they should also have a "right to succeed", but THAT sort of "right" exists nowhere, not for anything, including abortion.
 
IT IS PART OF THE WHOLE. I previously stated something to the effect that it is too easy for men to lie, to escape responsibility for raising their offspring, IF that was all they needed to do to get out of it. YOU replied in a way that could be interpreted as not believing men lie to escape responsibility. Perhaps I should have pointed at all the male criminals in the world, arrested and denying their guilt? But I thought it would be obvious to you that if men lie to obtain sex, why wouldn't they lie to escape responsibility for the consequences?

You are reaching far beyond sound reason. This is all speculation and it is designed to be detrimental to men. Additionally, men do not always lie to "obtain" sex, therefore your premise is not applicable in general to "the consequences."

The more assumptions you make and the more generality you lose over the course of your reasoning makes it less and less palatable to any reasonable person.
 
You are reaching far beyond sound reason.
FALSE. There is a tremendous amount of Factual Data available, not assumptions, about men lying, both with respect to obtaining sex, and with respect to attempting to evade responsibility for actions. It is totally "sound" to describe facts.

This is all speculation
FALSE. Tremendous amounts of Factual Data does exist on the subject.

and it is designed to be detrimental to men.
FACTS ARE FACTS. Men have the power of choice to act intelligently, or act stupidly. Another Fact Is, stupid choices are usually associated with a higher price than intelligent choices.

Additionally, men do not always lie to "obtain" sex,
TRUE. Nor do they always try to evade responsibility for actions. YOU, however, are specifically focusing on men who DO want to evade responsibility for stupid actions that resulted in pregnancies those men didn't want. SO: if allowed to escape that responsibility by simply lying, why wouldn't they?

therefore your premise is not applicable in general to "the consequences."
FALSE. See above.

The more assumptions you make
JUST TWO: If men could simply lie to evade the responsibility of unwanted fatherhood, I assume they would indeed lie. And the second assumption is, if they are honest enough not to lie, then they are honest enough to not try to evade responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
 
FALSE. There is a tremendous amount of Factual Data available, not assumptions, about men lying, both with respect to obtaining sex, and with respect to attempting to evade responsibility for actions. It is totally "sound" to describe facts.


FALSE. Tremendous amounts of Factual Data does exist on the subject.


FACTS ARE FACTS. Men have the power of choice to act intelligently, or act stupidly. Another Fact Is, stupid choices are usually associated with a higher price than intelligent choices.


TRUE. Nor do they always try to evade responsibility for actions. YOU, however, are specifically focusing on men who DO want to evade responsibility for stupid actions that resulted in pregnancies those men didn't want. SO: if allowed to escape that responsibility by simply lying, why wouldn't they?


FALSE. See above.


JUST TWO: If men could simply lie to evade the responsibility of unwanted fatherhood, I assume they would indeed lie. And the second assumption is, if they are honest enough not to lie, then they are honest enough to not try to evade responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Besides all the BS about lying to get sex, which is not particularly relevant to this thread, the fact is that men are regularly coerced into supporting what a woman personally decides to do with her own life.

Now, we call both abortion and childbirth "medical." The premise of the thread is that requiring women to visit a doctor who has admitting privileges is a bit like requiring men to jump through legal hoops. Men should ideally get a lawyer when they are assigned paternity, just like women should ideally visit a doctor in a hospital. I know that doctors and lawyers are not the same, however they both stand to gain when the rest of us seek their guidance. What's at stake is the autonomy to make personal decisions.

A hospital is an institution where people can be treated for a physical condition. Like a hospital, a psychiatric hospital or mental hospital is an institution where people can be treated for a mental condition.

Suppose there is a woman who is pregnant. She goes to a hospital to deliver a baby, and pregnancy is her condition. Ideally, she will have been advised on proper pre natal care in addition to the attention of a doctor or doctors during the delivery of a healthy child. Now suppose there is another woman who is insane. Ideally, she will be treated in a psychiatric hospital.

The treatment of both of these women will help each of the women and their respective family, friends, coworkers, etc. The difference is that in the case of a pregnant woman delivering a child, she may force a man to be a child support obligator in a court of law. As a result of her condition, and her decision alone, she may do this. On the contrary, we do not force people to become beholden to the decisions of crazy people, regardless of what their personal decisions or conditions might be.

It's crazy to think that men should be forced to be fathers, while women should not be forced to be mothers.
 
the fact is that men are regularly coerced into supporting what a woman personally decides to do with her own life.
INCOMPLETE. The fact is, those particular men got involved with women in a stupid way, and are expected to pay the consequences. Why do you keep ignoring that part of the WHOLE story?

The premise of the thread is
JUST ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO IGNORE PART OF THE WHOLE STORY. Stupid actions have a price tag, plain and simple.
 
INCOMPLETE. The fact is, those particular men got involved with women in a stupid way, and are expected to pay the consequences. Why do you keep ignoring that part of the WHOLE story?
I am not ignoring any part of the whole story. I am well aware that the law disproportionately punishes men, and that women are privileged enough to have sex without being punished. I've moved beyond that and I'm not interested in discussion of that particular injustice here, as it does not fall within the scope of the thread. Unless you can show otherwise, please refrain from bringing it up, not because it is absent from the "whole story" but because as part of the "whole story" it is not relevant to this discussion in particular.
 
I am not ignoring any part of the whole story.
YES YOU ARE. And here is why:

I am well aware that the law disproportionately punishes men,
FALSE! Since the "whole story" includes a lot of male stupidity, and THAT is what the punishment is all about. It is QUITE proportionate to the magnitude of the stupidity.
 
What? You are saying that women are incapable of oppressing men because they inherently lack political power due to their gender? That's just plain sexist. Your conclusion is invalid.

I think ecofarm hijacked his account because that sounds EXACTLY like his argument regarding racism.
 
YES YOU ARE. And here is why:


FALSE! Since the "whole story" includes a lot of male stupidity, and THAT is what the punishment is all about. It is QUITE proportionate to the magnitude of the stupidity.

Again, I'm not sure if we are even in the same plane of existence. The law punishes men disproportionately on the basis of their gender. I'm not talking about any measure of intelligence. I am not ignoring the stupidity of men or women, however that stupidity which you introduced to the thread is not particularly relevant to this discussion.
 
Again, I'm not sure if we are even in the same plane of existence.
IT GIVES YOU A CHANCE TO GET SOME OF YOUR IGNORANCE CURED.

The law punishes men disproportionately on the basis of their gender.
A DISTORTION OF THE ACTUAL FACTS. The two genders are Naturally predisposed toward certain stupidities (how often do women fall for men who abuse them?), but the Law only cares about actualized stupidities (like the stupidity of actually abusing a woman). Child support is a consequence of a man doing certain stupid things while knowing child-support was a possible consequence of those stupidities. In that sense it is little different from a jail sentence for committing the stupidity of a bank robbery.

I'm not talking about any measure of intelligence.
THE LAW PUNISHES UNACCEPTABLE ACTIONS. Intelligence can affect the extent to which such actions are done. Which means intelligence is a factor that cannot be outright-ignored. (You could also look at the total percentages of men and women in prison, but no normal investigator would conclude that men are punished in disproportionate numbers just for being men. They've been punished for actions!)

I am not ignoring the stupidity of men or women,
SO LONG AS YOU CLAIM THE LAW DISPROPORTIONATELY PUNISHES MEN, YOU ARE DOING EXACTLY THAT, FOR MEN.

however that stupidity which you introduced to the thread is not particularly relevant to this discussion.
FALSE. Because you want the discussion to totally ignore male actions derived from male stupidity as the real reason they must pay child support!
 
Back
Top Bottom