Men not being involved in the abortion debate

Removable Mind said:

Y2L, do you honestly believe that opt out or Repay has a snowball chance in hell of becoming either a Constitutional right or the Civil Rights Act Revision? If you don’t, then what’s the point of trying to make some type of argument that will have absolutely zero impact on those who are proponents of these meaningless fantasies?

Seriously....

Click to expand...

Of course not.

I think even Bodhi admitted opt out was stupid.

year2late said:

Of course not.

I think even Bodhi admitted opt out was stupid.

Click to expand...

Indeed, it is. As is paying back child support.

The hypocrisy is trying to see if faking issues of equality or civil rights will fly.

Ruh oh!

:fly:

Oopsie! Men are not entitled to sex without consequences anymore, no matter how some spin it. :spin:

It's an embarrassingly ignoble cause, but I guess the anonymity of the Internet enables it.

year2late said:

Of course not.

I think even Bodhi admitted opt out was stupid.

Click to expand...

I know that it may come as a surprise, but there are men who actually believe that they should have the right to have sex without any consequences at all. Ever! For any reason! I’m talking about a 100% right - that is supported by the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

This means that they would have the right to knock up as many women that they are capable of, without being accountable. I’m willing to bet that a guy who knows that he’s HIV positive would believe that if he can impregnate as many women as he wants without consequences, then why the hell not infect them with a potentially deadly STD. Now obviously not all men would go that far, but those guys who have a vendetta against women would do it in a heart beat. They would claim it’s their civil right to do so.

You can’t have a civil debate with men who believe that they are above accountability.

Removable Mind said:

I know that it may come as a surprise, but there are men who actually believe that they should have the right to have sex without any consequences at all. Ever! For any reason! I’m talking about a 100% right - that is supported by the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

This means that they would have the right to knock up as many women that they are capable of, without being accountable. I’m willing to bet that a guy who knows that he’s HIV positive would believe that if he can impregnate as many women as he wants without consequences, then why the hell not infect them with a potentially deadly STD. Now obviously not all men would go that far, but those guys who have a vendetta against women would do it in a heart beat. They would claim it’s their civil right to do so.

You can’t have a civil debate with men who believe that they are above accountability.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

But the entitlement goes back to prehistoric times....it's deeply ingrained...neanderthal-level. OTOH, times change and and it's surprising to see that some men continue to knowingly act in their own worst interests...and then complain that 'it's not fair.'

Paying child support for a kid you dont want would suck...ALOT. I have friends that are stuck and it's tough financially on them, in terms of their discretionary income. One cant even get a driver's license in this state, where he moved after he got married.

But considering how bad it is...it's mind-boggling that so many are willing to risk it. And pure victimization to try and claim 'unfair' when they gamble and lose.

Lursa said:

Agreed.

But the entitlement goes back to prehistoric times....it's deeply ingrained...neanderthal-level. OTOH, times change and and it's surprising to see that some men continue to knowingly act in their own worst interests...and then complain that 'it's not fair.'

Paying child support for a kid you dont want would suck...ALOT. I have friends that are stuck and it's tough financially on them, in terms of their discretionary income. One cant even get a driver's license in this state, where he moved after he got married.

But considering how bad it is...it's mind-boggling that so many are willing to risk it. And pure victimization to try and claim 'unfair' when they gamble and lose.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Strong Arm Mentality lives on. We’re witness to it in so many aspects of our lives. Granted, while women in the US are subjected to all-out subservience. There are still men and institutions that support such ideology in the US.

There’s men in DP who believe that women should be subservient to men. There’s religions that promote the beliefs that women should be subservient.

Bageebus, evolution is dragging on slowly it seems.

year2late said:

The man had a choice and he wanted in. If he did not know the consequences of his actions, perhaps he could plead ignorance with the judge.

Click to expand...

The man does not have a post conception choice and the woman does... that is unequal.

Bodhisattva said:

The man does not have a post conception choice and the woman does... that is unequal.

Click to expand...

The man does not have any biological post conception risks associated with abortion and pregnancy - that is hella beyond unequal.

year2late said:

The man does not have any biological post conception risks associated with abortion and pregnancy - that is hella beyond unequal.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant...

year2late said:

The man does not have any biological post conception risks associated with abortion and pregnancy - that is hella beyond unequal.

Click to expand...

That's not the reason for most abortions, and you ****ing well know it! It's all about power and money and convenience.

Bodhisattva said:

Irrelevant...

Click to expand...

It is the core reason a woman has a post conception choice. Totally relevant.

But of course the topic of this thread is men being involved in the abortion DEBATE. Of course they should.

American said:

That's not the reason for most abortions, and you ****ing well know it! It's all about power and money and convenience.

Click to expand...

A woman without adequate resources will not have good access to health care. She may be dependent on Medicaid (assuming she qualifies) and overburdened county clinics. She may already be working paycheck to paycheck and time she may need to take off could thrust her (and her born children) further into poverty. I personally was set up to have an easy pregnancy and delivery. I was off 6 months due to two serious pregnancy conditions and had a C-section unrelated to those conditions. I likely would not have my kidneys if I did not have decent access to an experienced obstetrician and being off work 6 months???If I did not have decent resources I would have been pregnant with complications in a homeless shelter.

Yeah...it is about resources for MOST women. Most women who abort are poor and have no or crappy access to healthcare. Most already are struggling to care for a born child.

It is not about missing a nail appointment or a trip to Cancun for most women. Yes some have resources and abort anyway.

Their reasons are not singular. Their reasons are based on their personal situation which may include ability to support herself, access to health care, her family situation, her ability to support herself if her pregnancy gets complicated, personal situations such as an abusive family member.

year2late said:

A woman without adequate resources will not have good access to health care. She may be dependent on Medicaid (assuming she qualifies) and overburdened county clinics. She may already be working paycheck to paycheck and time she may need to take off could thrust her (and her born children) further into poverty. I personally was set up to have an easy pregnancy and delivery. I was off 6 months due to two serious pregnancy conditions and had a C-section unrelated to those conditions. I likely would not have my kidneys if I did not have decent access to an experienced obstetrician and being off work 6 months???If I did not have decent resources I would have been pregnant with complications in a homeless shelter.

Yeah...it is about resources for MOST women. Most women who abort are poor and have no or crappy access to healthcare. Most already are struggling to care for a born child.

It is not about missing a nail appointment or a trip to Cancun for most women. Yes some have resources and abort anyway.

Their reasons are not singular. Their reasons are based on their personal situation which may include ability to support herself, access to health care, her family situation, her ability to support herself if her pregnancy gets complicated, personal situations such as an abusive family member.

Click to expand...

We're talking about abortion. We're talking about power over human reproduction, and pro-abortionist want women to have 100% of it. We all know they want men to sit down and STFU, plain and simple. They look at a man as a walking bank account and a sperm donor; not a father, not a man who might have feelings about anything.

American said:

We're talking about abortion. We're talking about power over human reproduction, and pro-abortionist want women to have 100% of it. We all know they want men to sit down and STFU, plain and simple. They look at a man as a walking bank account and a sperm donor; not a father, not a man who might have feelings about anything.

Click to expand...

You are a man.

You have complete autonomy over your body and health care decisions.

Why should a woman be different?

BTW...get a clue. Most pro-choicers (what you term pro-abortionist) would not chose abortion personally.

This thread is about whether men should be included in the abortion debate. Of course they should. We are debating now, and no woman is kicking you out.

But in terms of the FINAL decision to abort - the woman pregnant is the one to make the final decision. just like any personal health care decision. I would hope she was in the position to discuss the decision with the person who impregnated her.

year2late said:

You are a man.

You have complete autonomy over your body and health care decisions.

Why should a woman be different?

BTW...get a clue. Most pro-choicers (what you term pro-abortionist) would not chose abortion personally.

This thread is about whether men should be included in the abortion debate. Of course they should. We are debating now, and no woman is kicking you out.

But in terms of the FINAL decision to abort - the woman pregnant is the one to make the final decision. just like any personal health care decision. I would hope she was in the position to discuss the decision with the person who impregnated her.

Click to expand...

Nice side-step.

American said:

Nice side-step.

Click to expand...

SHe answered you directly. Do you or do you not have 100% control over your own reproduction? 100% control over who you decide to share your sperm with?

And medical procedures? 100% control over those too, right?

What would your reaction be if someone demanded that they do an invasive procedure on you, like a mandatory vasectomy? (And after you dismiss it as 'impossible,' remember that a woman would be entitled to the same outrage and dismissal...we are entitled to bodily sovereignty too.)

Lursa said:

SHe answered you directly. Do you or do you not have 100% control over your own reproduction? 100% control over who you share your sperm with?

And medical procedures?

What would your reaction be if someone demanded that they do an invasive procedure on you, like a mandatory vasectomy? (And after you dismiss it as 'impossible,' remember that a woman would be entitled to the same outrage and dismissal...we are entitled to bodily sovereignty too.)

Click to expand...

Clearly not, since any women can abort the fetus without permission.

American said:

Clearly not, since any women can abort the fetus without permission.

Click to expand...

DId she force a man to give her the sperm required to create the unborn?

Now who's sidestepping?

American said:

That's not the reason for most abortions, and you ****ing well know it! It's all about power and money and convenience.

Click to expand...

There are many reasons researched and listed, we can provide plenty of sources, for abortion and 'power' and 'convenience' are never listed.

Financial reasons are. That is very legitimate...and you would have to agree since your own argument is that it's not fair for men to have to be 'financially inconvenienced' by child support.

But for financial reasons, abortion can be a very responsible choice:

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid you cant afford and expecting tax payers to take up that burden with public assistance.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid you arent emotionally prepared to have and may abuse or neglect.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid if you know you wont stop drinking, smoking, doing drugs, etc that will damage the unborn.

--There's nothing responsible about remaining pregnant and dropping out of high school or college or missing work and not fulfilling your potential in society.

--There's nothing responsible about having a kid and giving it up for adoption when there are already over 100,000 kids in America waiting to be adopted. It means one less waiting will find a home.

Click to expand...

So I dont know why you'd object to that reason. Can you explain?

Lursa said:

There are many reasons researched and listed, we can provide plenty of sources, for abortion and 'power' and 'convenience' are never listed.

Financial reasons are. That is very legitimate...and you would have to agree since your own argument is that it's not fair for men to have to be 'financially inconvenienced' by child support.

But for financial reasons, abortion can be a very responsible choice:



So I dont know why you'd object to that reason. Can you explain?

Click to expand...

I'm objecting to a system that gives women all the options, but denies men the same say over offspring/procreation and uses them as financial slaves. If a woman doesn't want a baby for some reason, why can't a man not want a baby for some reason. Or, if I want the baby, I could be overruled by the woman's right to an abortion. The man is never off the hook.

American said:

I'm objecting to a system that gives women all the options, but denies men the same say over offspring/procreation and uses them as financial slaves. If a woman doesn't want a baby for some reason, why can't a man not want a baby for some reason. Or, if I want the baby, I could be overruled by the woman's right to an abortion. The man is never off the hook.

Click to expand...

I asked before...do men have the ability to avoid that financial 'penalty' (as you seem to consider it) or not?

Do men know that having sex with someone outside marriage can lead to that? Yes or no?

The answer is yes...so my question is, if you dont want to risk that, why give that control to women? You have absolute control over your own decision.

And if you want a baby, then I would presume you'd have discussed it previously with the woman? And been in agreement? If not...why on earth would you presume to have a voice in the decision?

American said:

Nice side-step.

Click to expand...

Side step. It is completely pertinent.

By virtue of the fact that a woman is pregnant she can lose health and ability to attempt to support herself. Most women who choose abortion are working poor with crappy access to health care. Special things like FMLA do not apply to people who are not working enough shifts to allow or at a place with not enough employees to qualify.

To add icing on the cake, these women who are working poor likely will either have Medicaid or emergency Medicaid and be relegated to busy county clinics . My guess is that I would either be dead or lack functional kidneys if I did not have access to an experienced Obstetrician that had the time to notice the discreet symptoms I was having. I certainly felt symptom free.

A person is entitled to make their own health care decisions that are best suited to their life circumstances.

Why should men be entitled to complete autonomy with their health care decisions and not women?

year2late said:

Side step. It is completely pertinent.

By virtue of the fact that a woman is pregnant she can lose health and ability to attempt to support herself. Most women who choose abortion are working poor with crappy access to health care. Special things like FMLA do not apply to people who are not working enough shifts to allow or at a place with not enough employees to qualify.

To add icing on the cake, these women who are working poor likely will either have Medicaid or emergency Medicaid and be relegated to busy county clinics . My guess is that I would either be dead or lack functional kidneys if I did not have access to an experienced Obstetrician that had the time to notice the discreet symptoms I was having. I certainly felt symptom free.

A person is entitled to make their own health care decisions that are best suited to their life circumstances.

Why should men be entitled to complete autonomy with their health care decisions and not women?

Click to expand...

My daughter is pregnant and lost her job recently. There will be no FMLA for her. Of course they didn't have that a long time ago, and people survived. My point is about men's rights, which you contend they have none, nor do they deserve any. I realize men are boogie-monsters these days, especially if they're white. Then they lower than worm ****; almost sub-human. Nevertheless, in the world of procreation, men have zero rights.

year2late said:

Side step. It is completely pertinent.

By virtue of the fact that a woman is pregnant she can lose health and ability to attempt to support herself. Most women who choose abortion are working poor with crappy access to health care. Special things like FMLA do not apply to people who are not working enough shifts to allow or at a place with not enough employees to qualify.

To add icing on the cake, these women who are working poor likely will either have Medicaid or emergency Medicaid and be relegated to busy county clinics . My guess is that I would either be dead or lack functional kidneys if I did not have access to an experienced Obstetrician that had the time to notice the discreet symptoms I was having. I certainly felt symptom free.

A person is entitled to make their own health care decisions that are best suited to their life circumstances.

Why should men be entitled to complete autonomy with their health care decisions and not women?

Click to expand...

And why should men be entitled to sex without consequences when women arent? Not in the past and not now. Every result of a pregnancy carries consequences for a woman, up to and including even death: having the kid, miscarriage, abortion. Certainly all can result in grave harm.

It seems that some men even want to control that....according to what they want.

American said:

Nevertheless, in the world of procreation, men have zero rights.

Click to expand...

How is it not embarrassing to play such a victim's role? It's a lie for one thing: men can control who they have sex with and when. They have a right to not be forced. A right to make those decisions.

And they know the risks. If you gamble and lose....do they just give you a pass in Vegas? No, you are responsible for your choice.

If there is a child born, a man has many rights to that child, by law. If family court justices dont always apply those laws equally...remember that most of those judges are men.

American said:

I'm objecting to a system that gives women all the options, but denies men the same say over offspring/procreation and uses them as financial slaves. If a woman doesn't want a baby for some reason, why can't a man not want a baby for some reason. Or, if I want the baby, I could be overruled by the woman's right to an abortion. The man is never off the hook.

Click to expand...

Firstly, I recognize that there are reproductive inequalities. I didn't cause them. I can't control them. And I can't cure them. But I can opine about the obvious issues and obstacles.

The man doesn't have to be on the hook in the first place (or he can greatly reduce the risk), but the consensus of opt out proponents are attempting to claim that that isn't possible.

Your "Overrule theory" isn't an equalizer. In a lot of cases it's a coercive attempt by a man to get women to abort, and more likely than not, it's known that a lot of women have a fundamental belief (a first amendment right) against "personally having an abortion". If it isn't known, it should be. It should be taught to every 12 year old boy and up.

Let me explain:

Are you aware that most pro-choice women won't have an abortion? And that most pregnancies are brought to full term? If you know that - then you also know the above beliefs by opt out proponents are significantly skewed. Such men are ignoring the very facts that should arm them with a new way to think about sex, unwanted pregnancies, and prevention before the fact UNTIL a more equitable solution can come into being. Men can choose to be proactively engaged in going to any length to avoid being in a situation that could potentially result in an unwanted pregnancy with someone that they absolutely knew before having sex that they didn't want as a parenting partner.

Having "the same say" is accomplished how without creating a different form of equality? You're going to have to devise a new name for gaining such a right. Claiming that "having a say is equality" - won't be "equality" that currently exists in the system you have disdain for has removed men from any consequences. There won't be any type of equality.

How does such a premise keep from becoming nothing less than a form of reckoning or retribution rather than and imagined form equality?

If men can legally knock up endless numbers of women, or as many as every individual man can, without any accountability, or consequences, what is your world going to look like 10 years from now? I can tell you what I predict under such situations. Men need to prepare to purchase sex or buy one of these semi-realistic sex dolls. Women will quickly turn to BOB (battery operated boyfriend). Who could blame them?

As my grandma use to say, "If there's no consequences for inadequate behaviors, why stop?"

This is an extremely complicated situation from both a Constitutional level, but also, and maybe more so, at the State Constitutional and Family Code levels. Yes, I know that the conventional belief is that it all comes to a halt for women prior to viability. But nobody has explained exactly how that would occur.

This issue extends way beyond the 14th Amendment, as so many believe is the core issue, and who believes that somewhere therein lies some type of equality for men. :no: It took men's rights groups a very long time to realize that strategy won't work.

That's it for me. Good luck on finding a genuinely true form of equality.

Oh, remember, when judicial and legislative bodies examine this issue they see not just 2 entities, they see 5 involved. Man, woman, child, state, and taxpayers. <----that won't ever leave the minds of the powers that are. Using Darwinistic means of virtually forcing all women to live with the decision to not abort - will come back to bite society in the ass. It's a given, not a theory. The Supreme Court and Lawmakers know this.