No need to be snide, though I suppose you just can't resist.
The man should have the same control over what happens to the fetus (that is 50% his) as the woman does. If he could just have it transplanted into his body like someone else suggested, I'd be all for that. Unfortunately that isn't currently medically practical. Therefore... see below.
Which is why she should be compensated financially by the father if he wants it and she doesn't.
I think maybe they think that not wanting a pregnancy means you were somehow irresponsible and they link that irresponsibility to the outcome of abortion because abortion is the easier option. Though this of course ignores people who had poor luck, who changed their mind, or some other thing.
Not when only one of them is having to bear it. Equal powers for equal burdens.The man should have the same control over what happens to the fetus (that is 50% his) as the woman does
I actually meant you dismissed your own point, aka you claimed you needed to be retarded to not bring the gear... I attempted to mention it and you thought i dismissed the whole agurment perhaps. It was a jokey jest btw, since we were both on the same page i just disagreed with the wording of it and retard being slipped in.
You've been saying that nearly verbatim every post. "It's a woman's body, men have no control over it." "A man's sperm doesn't belong to him once it's outside his body." "You just want to enslave women if you want to keep your kid." (Maybe not direct quotes, but fucking close)
You are saying a man has no rights to, at the very least, his genetic material. You are saying it's his responsibility if a woman gets pregnant, but not his choice as to whether she keeps the baby or not. You're hung up on the decision being hers because his dick flung some gunk into her, and not the other way around. You're obsessed with semantics in an argument that can't be handled with a simple "It's in so-and-so's body, so ipso facto the guy's shit out of luck."
What compensation can be given for:
c-section - permanent scarring, surgery
"normal" birth - scarring, stretch marks, tearing
problems with birth, such as death, or less mild situations that leave her with a permanent disability (ranging from mild to serious)
because of another person FORCING her to do something she was against. That's like saying it's okay to beat the shit out of a guy for his money if you pay him back double later.
Old article from a uk paper
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...h-control.html
Seems more than 10% of those asked where using it as a primary form.
I'm basically going to say one thing: It's not fair. Life isn't fair, biology isn't fair, there is nothing you can do to change that and trying to make it fair to the man will make it more unfair for the woman that it was for the man.
I'm not sure why they feel abortion as a form of birth control is a particularly terrible thing anyway.
Last edited by v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk; 2012-12-05 at 06:31 AM.
Oh well at least he's buying, I mean compensating, her.
Still curious how telling a woman she has to bear your child isn't controlling her body for your own gain against her wishes.And it's ok for Wells to say people are advocating slavery? Or are we going to start arguing semantics about slander and name-calling too?
Again, medical complications would change the situation. I'm acting on the assumption of a normal, healthy pregnancy here.
And your analogy only holds up if you assume (like so many people in this thread seem to be assuming) that the pregnancy is entirely the fault of the man.