• 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!

Do MEN have a Right to CONTROL Women's Health Issues and Reproductive Systems?

Do Men Have the Right to Control Women's Health Issues and Reproductive Systems?

  • Total voters
    41
katiegrrl0 said:
I go back to the fact that my taxes are used toward the military and i do not support anything they do. Nothing. Yet i pay that and don't whine.
Click to expand...

Comparing military and welfare programs is not workable.
 
Henrin said:
Comparing military and welfare programs is not workable.
Click to expand...

Well it is, actually. I am a Buddhist. I don't approve of war, yet my taxes and yours are used to kill people. I don't support it, but I pay my taxes. Other religions and my government never asked me if I was OK with that. I'm expected to pay for the U.S. military in the ME. I pay, while at the same time I am religiously opposed.
 
Harshaw said:
She's entitled to the opinion, of course, but "justified" is another argument.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't she be justified? Whether it is or not is subject to her opinion, and hers alone. No one can present her with an argument for why she's wrong.

Like which ones?
Click to expand...

Mares and male pipefish (the males carry the pregnancy) are a couple who can abort. Kangaroos, rodents, bears, etc can delay pregnancy.

Then that's something other than regarding the pregnancy, the process happening in their bodies, negatively.
Click to expand...

Usually their environment. But the result is that it's a bad time for young. Thus, the pregnancy is bad.

The general regard of reproduction as a negative is an aberration. There's certainly no species where it's the norm.
Click to expand...

You mean as in the case of myself? Yes, granted. But plenty of non-aberrant people and animals may view pregnancy as bad under certain circumstances.
 
Henrin said:
Comparing military and welfare programs is not workable.
Click to expand...
Sure it is. I don't want to waste money on the repugnant military. Someone else does not want to pay for abortion. It is about paying for something you don't want to without whining.
 
Jerry said:
Equality demands that all voters have an equal say in all maters of public policy regardles of sex.
Click to expand...

You definitely don't believe in egalitarianism, that's for sure.

In general: pro-life to me isn't always about 'controlling the women' - I can see it in some views that it's not at all trying to contorl. But the views of many pro-life males on this forum and not on this forum: that is EXACTLY what it means *to them* and *their views* - to them it IS about control. They hold that view purely as an extension of what they deem to be 'just gender bias'

It's a thin line - quite fuzzy at times - between those who are being respectful of women and our individuality VS the others who hold no respect for us as individuals.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Well it is, actually. I am a Buddhist. I don't approve of war, yet my taxes and yours are used to kill people. I don't support it, but I pay my taxes. Other religions and my government never asked me if I was OK with that. I'm expected to pay for the U.S. military in the ME. I pay, while at the same time I am religiously opposed.
Click to expand...

The question there has more to do with if the government has the right to tax and decide where the funds are going. The problem with her comparison is basically how welfare and how the military work and what is there overall purpose and function. In that way they are not comparable.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
Sure it is. I don't want to waste money on the repugnant military. Someone else does not want to pay for abortion. It is about paying for something you don't want to without whining.
Click to expand...

No, its about that welfare is an individual assistance program using general funds. What you are talking about is a different issue.
 
Henrin said:
The question there has more to do with if the government has the right to tax and decide where the funds are going. The problem with her comparison is basically how welfare and how the military work and what is there overall purpose and function. In that way they are not comparable.
Click to expand...

You make a wrong assumption. Risky stated clearly what I meant and in fact said in response to another poster. I object to my taxes paying even a dime toward anything military. I do not object to paying for abortions. I pay for both and do not whine about the taxes that go toward military expenditures.
 
Henrin said:
The question there has more to do with if the government has the right to tax and decide where the funds are going. The problem with her comparison is basically how welfare and how the military work and what is there overall purpose and function. In that way they are not comparable.
Click to expand...

Well, they are very much the same in that my moral standards are such that I do not support killing people in the ME. I most certainly never supported our presence in Iraq and I still do not support our presence there. My tax money has been used to kill people, wound people, destroy a nation, cause misery and despair. We can agree or disagree about the US presence in the ME, but what we cannot disagree on is that my tax money helped make it possible. I paid and am paying for the continued misery and pain that is life in Iraq. You cannot disagree that I am paying for it. I have no choice. You must agree to that as well.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
You definitely don't believe in egalitarianism, that's for sure.

In general: pro-life to me isn't always about 'controlling the women' - I can see it in some views that it's not at all trying to contorl. But the views of many pro-life males on this forum and not on this forum: that is EXACTLY what it means *to them* and *their views* - to them it IS about control. They hold that view purely as an extension of what they deem to be 'just gender bias'

It's a thin line - quite fuzzy at times - between those who are being respectful of women and our individuality VS the others who hold no respect for us as individuals.
Click to expand...

To me it has to do with defending children.

I find the mere accusation that I'm trying to control women to be profoundly arrogant, because the accuser assumes I'm primarily concerned about them.

A pregnant women is not an individual, there's another person inside her.
 
JohnWOlin said:
My position has always been no matter what your political views are if you are a man with a half brain, you just let women have this one and do what they want if you agree with it or not. Some things just arent worth fighting women over and this is one of them. Give it up guys. Just give it up.
Click to expand...

I once thought like this too... and even voiced that opinion to my wife.
it didn't go over very well at all... she chewed my ass.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
You make a wrong assumption. Risky stated clearly what I meant and in fact said in response to another poster. I object to my taxes paying even a dime toward anything military. I do not object to paying for abortions. I pay for both and do not whine about the taxes that go toward military expenditures.
Click to expand...

Taxes has always been a messy business and I'm not going to try to defend actions of the military or how taxes are levied and decided to be used as I strongly disagree with both, however, like I said for the reasons I put out the comparison you tried to throw out there is lack luster.
 
EVERYBODY... has a stake. The resulting birth/non-birth resonates far beyond the initial nine months. And I don't see anyone advocating that women take all the responsibility (i.e. leaving men off the hook in all matters) in exchange for all the 'control' after the kid is born.

Disclaimer: I answered in spite of the use of the word "control" in the title/original post. As far as I am concerned, "control" is (intentionally?) misleading.
 
Last edited:
Thrilla said:
I once thought like this too... and even voiced that opinion to my wife.
it didn't go over very well at all... she chewed my ass.
Click to expand...

My husband learned the same lesson when he told me - even after all we've gone through to have children - that if I get pregnant again it would be a 'blessing'

Why would it be a blessing? Because I had a tubal ligation to avoid being pregnant I'm somehow subverting blessings? Aren't 4 blessings enough?
 
Jerry said:
To me it has to do with defending children.

I find the mere accusation that I'm trying to control women to be profoundly arrogant, because the accuser assumes I'm primarily concerned about them.

A pregnant women is not an individual, there's another person inside her.
Click to expand...
That is your opinion and you agree with 44% of the population and 50% are pro choice with 6% not having an opinion. So it's almost an even split why should there be a change in the law as it stands? Did you know that abortion was legal in the early US and was stopped in about 1862 because of the danger to women and the fetus was not even part of that debate. To many women at the time were being damaged by the procedure.
Then all of a sudden in 1973 everyone is concerned about the fetus. Fancy that,
 
Risky Thicket said:
Well, they are very much the same in that my moral standards are such that I do not support killing people in the ME. I most certainly never supported our presence in Iraq and I still do not support our presence there. My tax money has been used to kill people, wound people, destroy a nation, cause misery and despair. We can agree or disagree about the US presence in the ME, but what we cannot disagree on is that my tax money helped make it possible. I paid and am paying for the continued misery and pain that is life in Iraq. You cannot disagree that I am paying for it. I have no choice. You must agree to that as well.
Click to expand...

If you really must know I agree with funding the military and find it beyond stupid to sit back and say you are unwilling to do it. Still, yes, I disagree with how the military is used these days and how much they get. But the whole death thing is just part of the idea really. These men and women are more or less paid to kill for us and personally I have no problem with it if it is protect our rights and liberties as a people and not further some stupid interest that some politician thinks is important.

Either way, this is kind of the whole purpose of government, so really there is more wrong with her argument than just what I said.
 
Henrin said:
Taxes has always been a messy business and I'm not going to try to defend actions of the military or how taxes are levied and decided to be used as I strongly disagree with both, however, like I said for the reasons I put out the comparison you tried to throw out there is lack luster.
Click to expand...
It is not when you consider what that was a reply to. Our taxes pay for a lot of things that we like or dislike. It is a perfect comparison. You don't need to defend the military. They could be picking grapes and I would not agree with the tax for it. But I pay and don't whine like the poster was whining about paying for abortions. It is exactly the same.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
It is not when you consider what that was a reply to. Our taxes pay for a lot of things that we like or dislike. It is a perfect comparison. You don't need to defend the military. They could be picking grapes and I would not agree with the tax for it. But I pay and don't whine like the poster was whining about paying for abortions. It is exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Nope. Protection of the rights and liberties of the people as a whole and to pay for what you need or to provide you what you want in the case of abortion, is not at all the same.
 
Henrin said:
If you really must know I agree with funding the military and find it beyond stupid to sit back and say you are unwilling to do it. Still, yes, I disagree with how the military is used these days and how much they get. But the whole death thing is just part of the idea really. These men and women are more or less paid to kill for us and personally I have no problem with it if it is protect our rights and liberties as a people and not further some stupid interest that some politician thinks is important.

Either way, this is kind of the whole purpose of government, so really there is more wrong with her argument than just what I said.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with it at all. It is a ****ing comparison about paying for something you don't want to. Come down from your defending the military high horse. I could have said its the same as someone without children paying local school taxes. Is that better suited to your sensitivity about military. For Christ's sake give it up already.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
That is your opinion and you agree with 44% of the population and 50% are pro choice with 6% not having an opinion. So it's almost an even split why should there be a change in the law as it stands? Did you know that abortion was legal in the early US and was stopped in about 1862 because of the danger to women and the fetus was not even part of that debate. To many women at the time were being damaged by the procedure.
Then all of a sudden in 1973 everyone is concerned about the fetus. Fancy that,
Click to expand...

Information can be a bitch sometimes.
 
jamesrage said:
Only when those issues conflict with a child's safety and right to live.
Click to expand...

1. Would you apply that same logic to hospice patients?

2. Current laws do protect viable fetuses. That has come about since Roe v Wade, so you must applaud the balanced pragmatism of that decision.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
There is nothing wrong with it at all. It is a ****ing comparison about paying for something you don't want to. Come down from your defending the military high horse. I could have said its the same as someone without children paying local school taxes. Is that better suited to your sensitivity about military. For Christ's sake give it up already.
Click to expand...

It would be the same thing. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom