Is elective abortion a woman taking or avoiding responsibility?

[WhipperSnapper]

I believe I'm fully qualified to do so because I have a financial interest in it. You don't believe the lie that taxpayers aren't funding abortions do you?

If taxpayer money is being used to "fund" abortion, and if it provides, say, a 1000x return on investment in terms of taxpayer money saved that would otherwise be spent on social welfare costs for a child born into poverty, does it really constitute "funding" or is it really "saving taxpayer money"?

If we ended the taxpayer funding of abortion, would you be willing to support a special tax on Christians to pay for the resultant costs of child welfare?

 

[DigDog]

implies abortion = murder

 

[pcgeek11]

Some of each depending on her individual situation... It is her choice.

However the taxpayers shouldn't be paying for it in either case.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I wouldn't go that far. If she, who has the sole decision, decides to keep your child the court will force you to use your body to perform some type of labor in order to pay child support. If you do not give up a part of your "bodily integrity and bodily sovereignty" the state will take away your rights and put you in jail.

Granted I don't know the answer for the above as fathers should obviously support their children but to say the above isn't true is disingenuous.

Are you familiar with the concept of "Male Abortion" or "Choice for Men"? The basic idea is that if a man offers to pay for the costs of an abortion and agrees to waive all legal rights to the child and the woman still chooses to give birth in spite of this, the male is absolved of all responsibility.

The underlying premise is that in this situation, the decision of whether or not a child will be born is 100% the woman's and that thus she should bear 100% of the responsibility for the infant.

It's an idea that's far ahead of its time in an age when most people still think that a magic sky god breathes a soul into an embryo at conception and that the sky god wants abortion to be illegal.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

They don't understand the concept of double standards. It's pretty fucking cute, yet sad and pathetic at the same time. It's exactly what the feminists are preaching and they have these cuckolds right where they want them.

"You're responsible for my body, NOT ME!" (In regards to getting her pregnant)
"I'm responsible for MY BODY, NOT YOU!" (In regards to having/aborting the baby).

Take it one step further: Women want to have 100% of the decision choice as to whether or not the child will be born but don't want to take 100% of the responsibility.

Sorry, no sale. She knows of the consequences and has made her initial decision (to have sex). If she does get pregnant from that then she has another decision to make and she already knows that. The man only has one decision to make and it's his problem if it's a bad decision.

If we lived in an age where abortion were not a practical option (either due to lack of technology such as in ancient times or for legal reasons), then what you say would make sense. However, today women have 100% of the choice as to whether or not to give birth.

What is your logic for making a man responsible for a woman's choice? If a man is to be responsible, shouldn't he have some say in an abortion decision if the woman wants to abort and he wants the infant to be born? If a male has no say over the fate of the fetus, then how do you tether him to it after the fetus is born? He acquires responsibility at conception, then loses responsibility at the junction of an abortion decision, and then responsibility is magically reconnected to him at birth?

Is there some sort of a metaphysical requirement of human survival that necessitates responsibility on the male's part, or is this just some sort of social/moral convention that has developed and been cemented in our culture over the years? We can definitely see the very close connection between the female and the infant, but it's much more abstract regarding the male.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Why do you care? Does a woman's decision about this issue impact your life one whit? Didn't think so.....so why do you care?

Simple questions:

Do you pay income taxes? Do you have any sort of an interest in what the government does with tax revenue? Do you have an interest in paying lower tax rates or receiving more/better services for the taxes that you do pay?

Do you have an interest in maintaining lower crime rates? (Children born into poverty are more likely to end up engaging in criminal activity. Coincidentally, the resultant criminal justice costs also come out of taxpayer money.)

Do you have an interest in decreasing the prices that you pay for natural resources? Do you have an interest in reducing pollution and environmental degradation? (As you may have learned in an Economics 101 course, a higher population (demand for resources) decreases the amount of natural resources per capita, increasing prices, ceteris paribus. Also, more people means more waste product and means a larger environmental footprint--it's not a touchy-feely thing to say, but it's true)

 

[DrDoug]

Take it one step further: Women want to have 100% of the decision choice as to whether or not the child will be born but don't want to take 100% of the responsibility.



If we lived in an age where abortion were not a practical option (either due to lack of technology such as in ancient times or for legal reasons), then what you say would make sense. However, today women have 100% of the choice as to whether or not to give birth.

What is your logic for making a man responsible for a woman's choice? If a man is to be responsible, shouldn't he have some say in an abortion decision if the woman wants to abort and he wants the infant to be born? If a male has no say over the fate of the fetus, then how do you tether him to it after the fetus is born? He acquires responsibility at conception, then loses responsibility at the junction of an abortion decision, and then responsibility is magically reconnected to him at birth?

Is there some sort of a metaphysical requirement of human survival that necessitates responsibility on the male's part, or is this just some sort of social/moral convention that has developed and been cemented in our culture over the years? We can definitely see the very close connection between the female and the infant, but it's much more abstract regarding the male.

First, he is not being held responsible for 100% of that child's expense, is he? Second, he made a choice when he decided to have sex with her, right? It seems pretty damned simple to me at this point. What you are proposing is for men to be able to impregnate women and not be held responsible at all if they don't want the child. No. I already know someone going through this exact same thing right now and I think the young guy is getting exactly what he deserves. The poor guy thinks the world is out to get men now, just because he isn't getting his way. All he had to do was abstain from sex or use proper birth control so of course it's all a evil plot against men.

Guys like him love to play but they sure hate to pay for it.

 

[glenn1]

If we ended the taxpayer funding of abortion, would you be willing to support a special tax on Christians to pay for the resultant costs of child welfare?

Unconstitutional as that would be a Bill of Attainder. And I would guess that responsibility also includes caring for your child after birth. Which seems to be the argument that I hear a lot of pro-choice people using - "the woman is taking accountability by getting an abortion rather than being a welfare recipient and net drain on taxpayers." It's like you've infantilized her to basically declare she's incapable of being responsible, thus we need to take the course of action which minimizes her burden on the rest of us. Unlike child support, a custodial parent (almost always a woman) can completely fail to support her child and we don't care, we just bend over backwards to give her welfare. In an equal world, just as a non-custodial parent would have child support in arrears build up and be garnished from salary for the rest of their life, so should the custodial parent. If we give you welfare for your child, then you should be paying that shit back until you die and long after your kid turns 18.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

First, he is not being held responsible for 100% of that child's expense, is he? Second, he made a choice when he decided to have sex with her, right? It seems pretty damned simple to me at this point. What you are proposing is for men to be able to impregnate women and not be held responsible at all if they don't want the child. No. I already know someone going through this exact same thing right now and I think the young guy is getting exactly what he deserves. The poor guy thinks the world is out to get men now, just because he isn't getting his way. All he had to do was abstain from sex or use proper birth control so of course it's all a evil plot against men.

Guys like him love to play but they sure hate to pay for it.

CUCKOLD ALERT! CUCKOLD ALERT!

Once again,...

"You're responsible for my body, NOT ME!" (In regards to getting her pregnant)
"I'm responsible for MY BODY, NOT YOU!" (In regards to having/aborting the baby).

You are absolutely correct. He made a choice and bears responsibility. You know what else comes with responsibility? The choice of whether or not to have it. Oh, you say he can't make that choice? Then guess what? He isn't responsible.

 

[Cozarkian]

Here's an interesting (at least I think so) idea:

Men are not liable for child support, if, prior to engaging in sex, they provide a signed writing to the women waiving any rights if a pregnancy occurs AND the women signs the paper.

If a woman will still have unprotected sex with a man after that occurs, she has no right to complain and if a man doesn't want to risk a woman saying no, he has no right to complain.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Yup. Anti-choice nut jobs produced the misleading videos that led directly to the murder of three people at a PP facility. Nothing they claim can be relied on.

I was out of town visiting family when this happened; so I was deliberately taking a break from the news. Been playing catch up since I've returned. Given the situation, I don't have much trust in anyone covering this accurately, please share a credible source that some vid directly prompted this guy to do what he did. Also, what I have gleaned is that he was holed up in the PP center for some time, but he didn't kill anyone in the facility. That seems a bit odd for someone allegedly hell-bent on dishing out the wrath of God on the abortionists. Also, have the cops issued a statement as to the guy's motivation?

Not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that. I just haven't been able to sift through the chaff on this story.

 

[dank69]

Here's an interesting (at least I think so) idea:

Men are not liable for child support, if, prior to engaging in sex, they provide a signed writing to the women waiving any rights if a pregnancy occurs AND the women signs the paper.

If a woman will still have unprotected sex with a man after that occurs, she has no right to complain and if a man doesn't want to risk a woman saying no, he has no right to complain.

Nothing really sets the mood like legally binding documents.

 

[dank69]

I was out of town visiting family when this happened; so I was deliberately taking a break from the news. Been playing catch up since I've returned. Given the situation, I don't have much trust in anyone covering this accurately, please share a credible source that some vid directly prompted this guy to do what he did. Also, what I have gleaned is that he was holed up in the PP center for some time, but he didn't kill anyone in the facility. That seems a bit odd for someone allegedly hell-bent on dishing out the wrath of God on the abortionists. Also, have the cops issued a statement as to the guy's motivation?

Not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that. I just haven't been able to sift through the chaff on this story.

Witnesses testified that he said "no more baby parts." Where do you think he got the FALSE idea that they are selling baby parts?

 

[CitizenKain]

CUCKOLD ALERT! CUCKOLD ALERT!

Once again,...



You are absolutely correct. He made a choice and bears responsibility. You know what else comes with responsibility? The choice of whether or not to have it. Oh, you say he can't make that choice? Then guess what? He isn't responsible.

Listen, if you are too stupid to follow what the smarter people on here are saying, then don't say anything.

 

[buckshot24]

Go ahead and rail against it all you want, I don't give a shit if you want to be a caveman about this and you don't give a shit if what you believe offends anyone. But right now the law is what it is and the procedure is legal.

But we've already agreed that something being legal isn't a reason for accepting it. This point is vacuous and a non sequitur, so at least you have that going for you.

If you think you can successfully argue the fight against slavery is the same as the fight against abortion then you can just stick that lame-assed thought right back from where you pulled it.

Nobody said it was the same thing. One thing was legal (which is your argument for not questioning abortion) and now it is illegal. Nobody is saying slavery is the same thing. I'm saying something being legal isn't a good reason for accepting it as "ok". But you probably knew that but decided to rail against it as if you didn't.

And I am under no illusions that I will convince you of any of this.

Beliefs like that can lead to innocent people being maimed and murdered, as we have recently been reminded once again.

Ironic since abortion claims 3000 innocent babies every day. Were those saline solution babies I posted earlier innocent? Were they maimed?

Regarding my view of it being a right? No matter how I look at it, it's her body and men fuck with it at their own risk.

It isn't "her body", DNA tests would confirm this.

I really can't waste any more time with you other than to ridicule your positions when they make me laugh hard enough. I learned long ago that fools can't be reasoned with because they realize that if they admit they were foolish then it would make them look foolish, as if that matters.

Try to get the actual point next time. Nobody says slavery is the same thing as abortion, that was your own jumping to conclusions.

 

[Ackmed]

Nothing really sets the mood like legally binding documents.

Happens with Prenups all the time.

 

[MrPickins]

CUCKOLD ALERT! CUCKOLD ALERT!

I don't think that word means what you think it means. :hmm:

 

[MrPickins]

Are you familiar with the concept of "Male Abortion" or "Choice for Men"? The basic idea is that if a man offers to pay for the costs of an abortion and agrees to waive all legal rights to the child and the woman still chooses to give birth in spite of this, the male is absolved of all responsibility.

The underlying premise is that in this situation, the decision of whether or not a child will be born is 100% the woman's and that thus she should bear 100% of the responsibility for the infant.

Here's an interesting (at least I think so) idea:

Men are not liable for child support, if, prior to engaging in sex, they provide a signed writing to the women waiving any rights if a pregnancy occurs AND the women signs the paper.

If a woman will still have unprotected sex with a man after that occurs, she has no right to complain and if a man doesn't want to risk a woman saying no, he has no right to complain.

Again, child support is awarded for the child's benefit, not the custodial parent's.

You people seem to forget that.

 

[dank69]

Happens with Prenups all the time.

Just a bit of a difference between getting married and two people having sex for the first time.

 

[buckshot24]

Sorry men, if you want to have sex you have to care for the child. The children are the first priority, they didn't ask to be born and shouldn't suffer because you didn't want them.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Witnesses testified that he said "no more baby parts." Where do you think he got the FALSE idea that they are selling baby parts?

Oh, I got that quote, but again there's chaff that stated that he was raving about a lot of things. That's why I asked.

But I did read a blirb that his ex wife (who the eff would've married that guy??!!) that he was doing God's work, based on prior incidents.

I'm not pro choice, but I'm seriously relieved that this freak didn't go on a turkey shoot while he was holed up inside that center.

 

[buckshot24]

Witnesses testified that he said "no more baby parts." Where do you think he got the FALSE idea that they are selling baby parts?

What is false about it? They aren't making a profit or not selling them at all?

 

[dank69]

What is false about it? They aren't making a profit or not selling them at all?

"Selling baby parts" is a gross misrepresentation of the truth. "Baby parts" are actually fetal tissue. "Selling" is actually donating while charging a facilitation fee. If I send you a gift on the condition that you pay for shipping, did I sell you something? No. You don't hear pro-life activists chanting "PP is charging facilitation fees for the fetal tissue it donates to researchers!" because what they were actually doing doesn't stir up controversy.

 

[buckshot24]

"Selling baby parts" is a gross misrepresentation of the truth. "Baby parts" are actually fetal tissue. "Selling" is actually donating while charging a facilitation fee. If I send you a gift on the condition that you pay for shipping, did I sell you something? No. You don't hear pro-life activists chanting "PP is charging facilitation fees for the fetal tissue it donates to researchers!" because what they were actually doing doesn't stir up controversy.

So baby parts are being distributed. Calling them "fetal tissue" really doesn't change anything either.

If you see a "fetal" head sitting on your desk you're not going to say "who put that fetal tissue on my desk". So cut the crap.

 

[bshole]

So baby parts are being distributed. Calling them "fetal tissue" really doesn't change anything either.

If you see a "fetal" head sitting on your desk you're not going to say "who put that fetal tissue on my desk". So cut the crap.

Better than being wasted. Gene therapy is the cutting edge with limitless possibilities. It bothers me that troglodytes such as yourself will benefit from breakthroughs garnered through it even though you viciously opposed it's development every step of the way.