Poland abortion ban: Thousands of women take to streets across country to demand reproductive rights
-Melancholy- said: Dark_Lord9 said: What I'm trying to imply is that your argument about people getting raped who can not "have control over it", is not valid and thus I am emphasizing the argument of @avory that states that people who don't want kids should just refrain from getting pregnant. I mean, there is condoms and other stuff for that. I would really love to hear how getting an abortion from being raped isn't justified. Why should someone have to bear a child that they didn't want? Obviously people can wear condoms if they're having sex... but being raped? No rapist is going to bother wearing a condom. If you think that, you're being plain ignorant. If rape is out of the equation then yes, people should just refrain from it. We aren't at a disagreement there and don't see how we're on different sides of the coin. Are you serious ? How did you get such a conclusion ? Did I say that getting an abortion from being raped isn't justified ? You said that people can't prevent raping therefore abortion is a necessity so I told you that according to OP, rape is excluded. What I meant is that I agree with you when it comes to rape but we do not have to worry about that because this law took rape in consideration. |
Dark_Lord9 said: -Melancholy- said: I would really love to hear how getting an abortion from being raped isn't justified. Why should someone have to bear a child that they didn't want? Obviously people can wear condoms if they're having sex... but being raped? No rapist is going to bother wearing a condom. If you think that, you're being plain ignorant. If rape is out of the equation then yes, people should just refrain from it. We aren't at a disagreement there and don't see how we're on different sides of the coin. Are you serious ? How did you get such a conclusion ? Did I say that getting an abortion from being raped isn't justified ? You said that people can't prevent raping therefore abortion is a necessity so I told you that according to OP, rape is excluded. What I meant is that I agree with you when it comes to rape but we do not have to worry about that because this law took rape in consideration. I drew that from the "not valid" part of your prior message, sorry. Well, since we agree, I don't see why we're still debating this. Yes, this law did take rape into consideration and yes, people in general should just be more careful when it comes to sex, though abortions, in my opinion, should always be an option because accidents with condoms and other forms of birth control do happen. No system is without its flaws. Those who think abortions are murder are just saying that because they're the ones who don't have to deal with the birth. |
 CURRENT OTPS - Kaito Kid x Shinichi Kudou CURRENT OBSESSION - Detective Conan CURRENTLY PLAYING - Spyro | Crash Bandicoot CURRENTLY LISTENING TO - WRLD: By Design CURRENT HUSBAND - Kaitou Kid |
SpamuraiSensei said: Comic_Sans said: What about "personal responsibility is not an argument unless it applies to both parties" does not make sense? That's rather naive.. Ladies are the ones getting pregnant. There is nothing to stop a guy from sticking around if he doesn't care about what happens. inherently illogical argument, to shift the blame onto females because they carry the baby doesn't change the fact male contribution is required in order for the process to begin with. Just because someone doesn't care doesn't mean it's okay. The only naivety is thinking you can knock up a chick and not get stuck with some sort of issues. this argument makes even less sense in the context of this era where child support is literally in place to cuck people who try to bail on their kids. |
  come, you sweet hour of death |
| Those mothers really wanna kill their babies. |
 |
Abhorrent said: SpamuraiSensei said: That's rather naive.. Ladies are the ones getting pregnant. There is nothing to stop a guy from sticking around if he doesn't care about what happens. inherently illogical argument, to shift the blame onto females because they carry the baby doesn't change the fact male contribution is required in order for the process to begin with. Just because someone doesn't care doesn't mean it's okay. The only naivety is thinking you can knock up a chick and not get stuck with some sort of issues. this argument makes even less sense in the context of this era where child support is literally in place to cuck people who try to bail on their kids. Umm no.. You're wrong and here is why. Men knock up women everyday without issue, and these women shoulder the responsibility alone. Men have the option to leave since they aren't carrying the child. As a woman you're stuck with it. And that is the reality. It's why there's so many single mothers. The equal responsibility argument isn't based in reality. |
| I hope one day other countries can make elective abortions illegal just like Poland did.Killing unborn children shouldn't be a form of birth control. |
ezikialrage said: I hope one day other countries can make elective abortions illegal just like Poland did.Killing unborn children shouldn't be a form of birth control. yes, you're right. women unable to care for or unprepared to care for a child should still give birth, so both her and her child can live in misery, as they should be for letting men impregnate her. ...i think i need to vomit now. brb. |
| You can buy lossless digital music from your favorite Japanese artists on https://ototoy.jp/. The songs are all DRM-free and you can re-download your purchased albums as you wish. Show your support to your favorite artist if you can! ps. if you are looking for Japanese albums, you have to search it in Japanese (not romaji). Just copy and paste the name. For those who want to learn Japanese through anime Resources for learning the language |
ezikialrage said: I hope one day other countries can make elective abortions illegal just like Poland did.Killing unborn children shouldn't be a form of birth control. Th only problem with banning abortion entirely is you have to take consideration of rape and the health of the woman, not taking thee two things in consideration has gotten whole countries in trouble, particularly in South America. You must have at least those two factors as exceptions in any abortion restrictions as the life of the woman is often in danger. |
 |
| I don't mind so much that the abortions are happening, but rather that taxpayers are paying it. Idk what it's like in Poland, but I think it would just be fair if whoever is getting the abortion pay for their own. |
 "The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." -Friedrich Nietzsche |
| I don't think banning abortion is a good idea as it'll likely not reduce the abortion rate and will put women in danger with illegal abortions. Having said that, I think having abortions (especially late term) is a morally wrong thing to do. |
 |
SpamuraiSensei said: Yes, these women have to shoulder the responsibility alone... because the men who made them pregnant don't take responsibility, which is the very basis of the "equal responsibility" argument, that men are able to get away with it but they shouldn't. It's not based on a "men take responsibility" scenario as you're trying to make it out to be, it's based on a "men don't take responsibility, but they should" scenario Umm no.. You're wrong and here is why. Men knock up women everyday without issue, and these women shoulder the responsibility alone. Men have the option to leave since they aren't carrying the child. As a woman you're stuck with it. And that is the reality. It's why there's so many single mothers. The equal responsibility argument isn't based in reality. nicethings said: What? B-but my menstrual cycles are so short! I'm literally a mass murderer at this pointFun fact: women’s menstrual cycles technically “abort” unfertilized eggs. |
 Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
Comic_Sans said: SpamuraiSensei said: Yes, these women have to shoulder the responsibility alone... because the men who made them pregnant don't take responsibility, which is the very basis of the "equal responsibility" argument, that men are able to get away with it but they shouldn't. It's not based on a "men take responsibility" scenario as you're trying to make it out to be, it's based on a "men don't take responsibility, but they should" scenario Umm no.. You're wrong and here is why. Men knock up women everyday without issue, and these women shoulder the responsibility alone. Men have the option to leave since they aren't carrying the child. As a woman you're stuck with it. And that is the reality. It's why there's so many single mothers. The equal responsibility argument isn't based in reality. nicethings said: What? B-but my menstrual cycles are so short! I'm literally a mass murderer at this pointFun fact: women’s menstrual cycles technically “abort” unfertilized eggs. Remember when you lost the debate a few pages back and had to use the "I'm just shit posting card"? I had fun with you at first. But now you're just boring me. |
Yomiyuki said: in a perfect world everyone would be fully aware of the responsibilities that pregnancy entails, and we wouldn't be having these conversations. what's saddening is that this isn't even difficult to accomplish, but of course it ends up being a complete shit show. Because rape doesn't happen obviously. In a real perfect world women's rights would always be supported. |
SpamuraiSensei said: I have no idea what debate you're referring to as I have yet to lose any debates.Remember when you lost the debate a few pages back and had to use the "I'm just shit posting card"? I had fun with you at first. But now you're just boring me. The shitposting part was true though, my serious posts consist of more than just one liners and quirky questions. (My latest posts in this thread are an example of that) Not my feels.jpg, not my problem |
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
| I'm still waiting for them to ban condoms. The best thing is, Kaczyński (president of PiS, de facto most influential person Poland, giving orders to president and prime minister) is single, nearly 70 yo man, living alone with his cat. But people like him know the best about making families. Government is against birth control, not only abortion. You need to look at bigger picture, not just this single topic. Abortion ban today, protection ban tomorrow and the day after tax for being single (we had that long time ago btw). |
JustAnotherShiroJan 21, 2018 12:40 PM
Comic_Sans said: -Spades- said: It's me shitposting and responding a person who thinks all unwanted pregnancies are a result of man-on-woman and woman-on-man rapewhat even is this comment XD SpamuraiSensei said: You tell me. You know so much No man willing to stick his penis inside of a woman = no unwanted pregnancy Now that I think about it, I never really heard of women raping men. Does this happen often? |
Daviner said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#Female-on-male_rapeNow that I think about it, I never really heard of women raping men. Does this happen often? |
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
avory said: Just don't get pregnant if you don't want a kid. This ^. Use protection, guys. |
Terkhev said: I'm still waiting for them to ban condoms. The best thing is, Kaczyński (president of PiS, de facto most influential person Poland, giving orders to president and prime minister) is single, nearly 70 yo man, living alone with his cat. But people like him know the best about making families. Government is against birth control, not only abortion. You need to look at bigger picture, not just this single topic. Abortion ban today, protection ban tomorrow and the day after tax for being single (we had that long time ago btw). Watch as the HIV/AIDS rate goes up, it's one thing banning abortion it's another thing banning items that prevent STDs which is outrageous. |
|
Daviner said: Comic_Sans said: It's me shitposting and responding a person who thinks all unwanted pregnancies are a result of man-on-woman and woman-on-man rape Now that I think about it, I never really heard of women raping men. Does this happen often? Any statistics on rape aren't that reliable to figure out the exact actual rate because the stigma around it influences how it's reported and tried. Even on polls not everyone who was raped would say they were either because they don't want others to know or they don't want to beleive it themselves and some cases they don't think it was rape because n of their perceptions of rape. |
DreamingBeats said: These "19th century men" believe that this is not a decision about the female body, but a decision about the body of a new human being, which makes it a very logical thing for them to make the decision. maybe i'm crazy, but i think decisions regarding female body should be done by females instead of over-religious males living in the 19th century. Why would you let a woman whose life will be ruined/harder/changed forever by not murdering someone make the decision wether or not to murder someone? Especially when she doesn't believe what she's doing is even murder. |
SnufkinJan 21, 2018 10:29 PM
avory said: DreamingBeats said: These "19th century men" believe that this is not a decision about the female body, but a decision about the body of a new human being, which makes it a very logical thing for them to make the decision. maybe i'm crazy, but i think decisions regarding female body should be done by females instead of over-religious males living in the 19th century. Why would you let a woman whose life will be ruined/harder/changed forever by not murdering someone make the decision wether or not to murder someone? Murder is a legal term for killing of a person. To be a person you must have personhood. A fetus until at earliest maybe 20 weeks does not have consciousness thus lacks personhood so it's not a person. Even in countries voluntary abortion is fully illegal, it's not called murder, it's called abortion. |
traed said: they define what is a person differently than you and you know it.avory said: These "19th century men" believe that this is not a decision about the female body, but a decision about the body of a new human being, which makes it a very logical thing for them to make the decision. Why would you let a woman whose life will be ruined/harder/changed forever by not murdering someone make the decision wether or not to murder someone? Murder is a legal term for killing of a person. To be a person you must have personhood. A fetus until at earliest maybe 20 weeks does not have consciousness thus lacks personhood so it's not a person. Even in countries voluntary abortion is fully illegal, it's not called murder, it's called abortion. If I used the wrong word by your definition of person that's unfortunate, but I don't think you misunderstood anything I said. When do you think a baby should not be allowed to be aborted anymore? |
SnufkinJan 21, 2018 10:55 PM
Terkhev said: Only whores need birth control, so I don't see a problem with it.I'm still waiting for them to ban condoms. The best thing is, Kaczyński (president of PiS, de facto most influential person Poland, giving orders to president and prime minister) is single, nearly 70 yo man, living alone with his cat. But people like him know the best about making families. Government is against birth control, not only abortion. You need to look at bigger picture, not just this single topic. Abortion ban today, protection ban tomorrow and the day after tax for being single (we had that long time ago btw). |
avory said: traed said: they define what is a person differently than you and you know it.Murder is a legal term for killing of a person. To be a person you must have personhood. A fetus until at earliest maybe 20 weeks does not have consciousness thus lacks personhood so it's not a person. Even in countries voluntary abortion is fully illegal, it's not called murder, it's called abortion. If I used the wrong word by your definition of person that's unfortunate, but I don't think you misunderstood anything I said. When do you think a baby should not be allowed to be aborted anymore? Murder has an objective legal definition. Personhood criteria varies by philisophy but personhood is also a legal definition which is something objective although varies by country and time. I'm merely explaining how it is in many places. I'm not aware of any countries that legally charge it as murder only ines that have charged it as abortion. This is simple fact stating. That is irrelevant. |
traed said: Thank you for your legal definition of words I used in an obviously not legal setting.avory said: they define what is a person differently than you and you know it. If I used the wrong word by your definition of person that's unfortunate, but I don't think you misunderstood anything I said. When do you think a baby should not be allowed to be aborted anymore? Murder has an objective legal definition. Personhood criteria varies by philisophy but personhood is also a legal definition which is something objective although varies by country and time. I'm merely explaining how it is in many places. I'm not aware of any countries that legally charge it as murder only ines that have charged it as abortion. This is simple fact stating. That is irrelevant. I just asked out of curiousity, personally I have no opinion on the matter. |
SnufkinJan 22, 2018 12:04 AM
traed said: Grey-Zone said: I noticed a strange trend recently, where British (and German) media often attack/critisize the polish people or government. Alongside that I remember a trend mentioned by Polish media reporting about British businesses moving to Poland a lot recently... Might be related to the surge of fascists in Poland https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/poland-independence-day-march-warsaw-far-right-fascists-a8050181.html I get a sneaky suspicion that these so-called 'fascists' are merely people who want to preserve their culture and traditions for the people who were born there, or naturally assimilated, and I see nothing wrong with that. And how they refuse to take even a single refugee https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/poland-refuses-to-take-a-single-refugee-because-of-security-fears-a7020076.html Likewise, most 'refugees' are economic migrants, who moved out of their country to seek better fortunes. These people are not in any danger whatsoever and should be sent back asap. Fuck the EU for trying to force its member states to take these people in. EDIT: And as for the abortion ban, I say good. The vast majority of abortions are done as means of contraceptive, and far less cases are done when the mother's life, or the fetus' life is in danger. Women have tons of contraceptives at hand if they don't want to get pregnant, maybe it's about time they started using them. Women need to take more responsibility. |
Firelord76Jan 22, 2018 12:33 AM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Hoppy said: ezikialrage said: I hope one day other countries can make elective abortions illegal just like Poland did.Killing unborn children shouldn't be a form of birth control. Th only problem with banning abortion entirely is you have to take consideration of rape and the health of the woman, not taking thee two things in consideration has gotten whole countries in trouble, particularly in South America. You must have at least those two factors as exceptions in any abortion restrictions as the life of the woman is often in danger. Which is why I said "elective abortion". |
God more of these “my body” people, protesting there right to kill babies. SpamuraiSensei said: I want the right to murder my baby or not! Basically what people are fighting for in a nutshell. Doesn't sound so nice when it's phrased like that now does it? The best way to put it. |
| it's worth noting that while contraceptives significantly lowers the odds of pregnancy, contraceptives do not prevent pregnancy 100% of the time, even with perfect usage https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/how-effective-contraception/? should women who get pregnant despite using contraceptives be forced to care for an unwanted child? and statistically, there's guaranteed to be a few women to be pregant even after taking birth control pills and other forms of contraceptives. |
| You can buy lossless digital music from your favorite Japanese artists on https://ototoy.jp/. The songs are all DRM-free and you can re-download your purchased albums as you wish. Show your support to your favorite artist if you can! ps. if you are looking for Japanese albums, you have to search it in Japanese (not romaji). Just copy and paste the name. For those who want to learn Japanese through anime Resources for learning the language |
DreamingBeats said: it's worth noting that while contraceptives significantly lowers the odds of pregnancy, contraceptives do not prevent pregnancy 100% of the time, even with perfect usage https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/how-effective-contraception/? should women who get pregnant despite using contraceptives be forced to care for an unwanted child? and statistically, there's guaranteed to be a few women to be pregant even after taking birth control pills and other forms of contraceptives. DreamingBeats said: it's worth noting that while contraceptives significantly lowers the odds of pregnancy, contraceptives do not prevent pregnancy 100% of the time, even with perfect usage https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/how-effective-contraception/? should women who get pregnant despite using contraceptives be forced to care for an unwanted child? and statistically, there's guaranteed to be a few women to be pregant even after taking birth control pills and other forms of contraceptives. 99% effective? LOL I'm more curious as to how they're coming up with their data. I hope it's not in the form of a questionnaire. |
I just noticed the thread suffers from a severe lack of pictures of a certain Romanian dictator. Guess it's time for me to do something about it "Wow I love Romanian communism" – Pro "life"ers in a nutshell |
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
DreamingBeats said: it's worth noting that while contraceptives significantly lowers the odds of pregnancy, contraceptives do not prevent pregnancy 100% of the time, even with perfect usage https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/how-effective-contraception/? Nothing is perfect, but with proper use, the chances are greatly reduced. should women who get pregnant despite using contraceptives be forced to care for an unwanted child? and statistically, there's guaranteed to be a few women to be pregant even after taking birth control pills and other forms of contraceptives. I've grown to despise this argument in the recent few years . There are so many people who would happily adopt a child, but for some reason, abortion has pretty much become the go-to method to get rid of an unwanted child, and adoption is often not even considered. Another argument against it is that the father has no say in it. Even if he wants it, the woman can still have the child aborted if she so desires. And if the opposite is the case, there is no way for him to get out of parenthood without having to pay child support. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Macewindex said: It sounds downright delightful when phrased like that. One can only eagerly await your next flourish of rhetorical genius. SpamuraiSensei said: The best way to put it.I want the right to murder my baby or not! Basically what people are fighting for in a nutshell. Doesn't sound so nice when it's phrased like that now does it? Firelord76 said: That's what bodily autonomy looks like. Equality =/= equivalence. Another argument against it is that the father has no say in it. Even if he wants it, the woman can still have the child aborted if she so desires. |
JoshJan 22, 2018 9:56 AM
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
Firelord76 said: I've grown to despise this argument in the recent few years . There are so many people who would happily adopt a child, but for some reason, abortion has pretty much become the go-to method to get rid of an unwanted child, and adoption is often not even considered. Another argument against it is that the father has no say in it. Even if he wants it, the woman can still have the child aborted if she so desires. And if the opposite is the case, there is no way for him to get out of parenthood without having to pay child support. 1. there are already enough children available for adoption as is. you are not one of the parents adopting children though, so your concern here is pretty peculiar. 2. if they wanted children they woud not use contraceptives. the woman can still have the child aborted if she so desires. it's almost as if you forgot the subject of this thread. hint: "abortion ban" if the opposite is the case, there is no way for him to get out of parenthood without having to pay child support. when doing sex, there's an inherent risk of impregating the woman. it's a choice the man deliberately makes, and if the woman does become pregnant as a result, he bears the responsibility as well. i've never heard of cases of men being forced to impregnate woman, but in those cases - if they even exist - then yes, they should be free from parental obligation. |
DreamingBeatsJan 22, 2018 10:03 AM
| You can buy lossless digital music from your favorite Japanese artists on https://ototoy.jp/. The songs are all DRM-free and you can re-download your purchased albums as you wish. Show your support to your favorite artist if you can! ps. if you are looking for Japanese albums, you have to search it in Japanese (not romaji). Just copy and paste the name. For those who want to learn Japanese through anime Resources for learning the language |
| Pretty sure the men who penned this law no nothing about lady parts or reproductive system. As they all do. Not shocked, never will. |
 |
avory said: traed said: Thank you for your legal definition of words I used in an obviously not legal setting.Murder has an objective legal definition. Personhood criteria varies by philisophy but personhood is also a legal definition which is something objective although varies by country and time. I'm merely explaining how it is in many places. I'm not aware of any countries that legally charge it as murder only ines that have charged it as abortion. This is simple fact stating. That is irrelevant. I just asked out of curiousity, personally I have no opinion on the matter. I was pointing out the bias in your word choices. Unless you meant that on purpose but still don't see the point in restating claims everyone has heard a million times. It depends on situation but maybe 19-20 weeks for non special reasons. I could adjust it to update to any correct objective data so it's not a hard set number either. Most abortions happen long before then anyway and anything after is almost always medical reasons. That's based on before the brain and nervous system is fully developed and also is a few weeks before regular brain activity and even more weeks before the earliest premature birth ever to survive with heavy use of modern medical help. |
traed said: I did pick those words intentionally, yes, to paint a clear picture of why these men would be right, by their beliefs, in making this decision instead of the woman. avory said: Thank you for your legal definition of words I used in an obviously not legal setting. I just asked out of curiousity, personally I have no opinion on the matter. I was pointing out the bias in your word choices. Unless you meant that on purpose but still don't see the point in restating claims everyone has heard a million times. It depends on situation but maybe 19-20 weeks for non special reasons. I could adjust it to update to any correct objective data so it's not a hard set number either. Most abortions happen long before then anyway and anything after is almost always medical reasons. That's based on before the brain and nervous system is fully developed and also is a few weeks before regular brain activity and even more weeks before the earliest premature birth ever to survive with heavy use of modern medical help. Perhaps it was unclear I wasn't saying the second sentence as something I personally agree with, but as a logical conclusion to the way these people think. The reason I bothered doing so is because the original comment did not seem to take into account that 1. these men are doing the right thing by their beliefs, 2. decisions regarding what you are allowed to do to/with your body are constantly being made by others (like what drugs are illegal, or where you're not allowed to be naked, or masturbate) because certain actions are wrong (in the eyes of the people making the laws at least), and 3. that the woman has a personal stake in the situation which is not in the benefit of the survival of the fetus, which would naturally lead to the decision not being up to her if it were up to people that believe the survival of the fetus is morally correct wether or not the decision is up to her. My opinion on it is that both sides have different beliefs and I can see the logic behind both of them, I would not want to say "you are wrong" or "you are right" to either one of them, but I do want both sides to realise the other side isn't simply "wrong" and is doing the right thing based on their beliefs. That's why someone saying "these people should have the power of the decision" bothers me, because this is something so completely gray I can't pick a side, and someone dismissing the other side without any understanding or compassion for them in their tone bothers me. I mostly just shitpost in a contrarion way though (in previous posts), so I'm not really helping anyone, but this time I actually meant what I said. |
DreamingBeats said: there are already enough children available for adoption as is. Define 'enough'. Also, is this because too many children get offered, or because the process of getting them to new parents isn't going smoothly enough? you are not one of the parents adopting children though, so your concern here is pretty peculiar This is irrelevant. I don't need to have an actual stake in a matter to have an opiinion on it. 2. if they wanted children they woud not use contraceptives. Thank you, Captain Obvious. Whatever would I have done without you? the woman can still have the child aborted if she so desires. it's almost as if you forgot the subject of this thread. hint: "abortion ban" I'm ever so sorry for not being starting off with "in the current situation" (or something similar, to demonstrate I was talking about the present). I should have known better than to assume you would have understood the context. if the opposite is the case, there is no way for him to get out of parenthood without having to pay child support. when doing sex, there's an inherent risk of impregating the woman. it's a choice the man deliberately makes, and if the woman does become pregnant as a result, he bears the responsibility as well. i've never heard of cases of men being forced to impregnate woman, but in those cases - if they even exist - then yes, they should be free from parental obligation. Sex is a two-way street (in the case of consensual sex, anyway; rape is a different story). While it's true that the man impregnates the woman, she is the one who allowed him to do so in the first place. That is why it;s consensual sex, after all. My point still stands, though, why can't a man opt out of parenthood after conception, but the women can? Josh said: That's what bodily autonomy looks like. Equality =/= equivalence. What does that have to do with anything? |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| All the incels showing up in this thread lol |
traed said: They spend all of their awake time whining about how women should have their rights restricted and get back into the kitchen and whatnot and yet at the same time they expect us to want to have sex with them. I wish they could just go gay or some shit because they wouldn't have to worry about having sex with us anymore + we probably wouldn't have to listen to their complaints because they'd be busy getting laid. It's a win-win situationAll the incels showing up in this thread lol |
Comic_SansJan 22, 2018 12:20 PM
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
| Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. Sex is for reproduction not fun. The only people this affects are skanks, thots, sluts, & hoes. |
| Wonderful. Another abortion thread explaining how banning murder doesn't stop murders from happening. Or that it is better to kill people than let them live poor. Try that on a homeless person next time and see how they take it. This exchange was pretty interesting though in showing just how ridiculously unbalanced the arguments are: "I want the right to murder my baby or not!" "I want the right to make women bleed to death after having a coat hanger stuck in their cervix!" ...As if a magical coat hanger boogeyman jumps on women to force coat hangers into their cervix. That is the best a pro-abortionist can come up with in response to women choosing to murder their children. It reveals a pretty poignant point that "responsibility" just doesn't play any part in abortionists' views on the matter. It's almost like Babies just magically hop into wombs, or coat hangers just magically go into cervices. Preceding actions, thought or choice are not a thing. |
| "Let Justice Be Done!" My Theme Fight again, fight again for justice! |
RedRoseFring said: You can just @ me you know instead of stating something about "murdering babies" out of thin air.Wonderful. Another abortion thread explaining how banning murder doesn't stop murders from happening. Or that it is better to kill people than let them live poor. Try that on a homeless person next time and see how they take it. This exchange was pretty interesting though in showing just how ridiculously unbalanced the arguments are: "I want the right to murder my baby or not!" "I want the right to make women bleed to death after having a coat hanger stuck in their cervix!" ...As if a magical coat hanger boogeyman jumps on women to force coat hangers into their cervix. That is the best a pro-abortionist can come up with in response to women choosing to murder their children. It reveals a pretty poignant point that "responsibility" just doesn't play any part in abortionists' views on the matter. It's almost like Babies just magically hop into wombs, or coat hangers just magically go into cervices. Preceding actions, thought or choice are not a thing. Reality doesn't care about what Bible thumping whiners think is immoral or irresponsible, just like it didn't care about anti alcohol whiners during the Prohibition. You can either deal with the issue accordingly by providing legal abortion, birth control and good sex ed and have low abortion rates in general like or deal with it inaccordingly like places like American Bible belt states and big parts of South America by providing coat hanger abortions, no birth control and abstinence only sex ed and get high teenage pregnancy rates and have few legal abortions but more coat hanger abortions. |
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
| Luckily bodily autonomy is a tihng. If they ban abortion, then the government can force you take vaccinations, force you to give blood, force you to donate organs. Inb4 slippery slope fallacy even though this slope isn't that slippery. |
Comic_Sans said: RedRoseFring said: You can just @ me you know instead of stating something about "murdering babies" out of thin air.Wonderful. Another abortion thread explaining how banning murder doesn't stop murders from happening. Or that it is better to kill people than let them live poor. Try that on a homeless person next time and see how they take it. This exchange was pretty interesting though in showing just how ridiculously unbalanced the arguments are: "I want the right to murder my baby or not!" "I want the right to make women bleed to death after having a coat hanger stuck in their cervix!" ...As if a magical coat hanger boogeyman jumps on women to force coat hangers into their cervix. That is the best a pro-abortionist can come up with in response to women choosing to murder their children. It reveals a pretty poignant point that "responsibility" just doesn't play any part in abortionists' views on the matter. It's almost like Babies just magically hop into wombs, or coat hangers just magically go into cervices. Preceding actions, thought or choice are not a thing. Reality doesn't care about what Bible thumping whiners think is immoral or irresponsible, just like it didn't care about anti alcohol whiners during the Prohibition. You can either deal with the issue accordingly by providing legal abortion, birth control and good sex ed and have low abortion rates in general like or deal with it inaccordingly like places like American Bible belt states and big parts of South America by providing coat hanger abortions, no birth control and abstinence only sex ed and get high teenage pregnancy rates and have few legal abortions but more coat hanger abortions. Lol. Reality doesn't care about what goody two-shoes think is immoral or irresponsible. People will murder anyways.....so why not just let them? Glorious logic there buddy. The Bible, Quran, 50 Shades of Grey or whatever is irrelevant. Lol. The form a murder takes doesn't stop it from being a murder. "Would you rather have people shooting people to death or stabbing them to death?" Well, in case you are unaware.....both a bad. Just because poisoning someone is cleaner than stabbing them a hundred times doesn't make the former acceptable.....in case you did not know. As always, to support abortion one has to throw logic and sense out the window, as evidenced by the magical coat hanger boogeyman running around inserting things into women and his brother the magical baby-loader forcing babies into women's wombs. |
RedRoseFringJan 23, 2018 9:41 AM
| "Let Justice Be Done!" My Theme Fight again, fight again for justice! |
RedRoseFring said: Anti murder laws reduce murders to an extent (though there are other factors like biology), anti abortion laws (much like anti prostitution laws don't help against prostitution and anti alcohol laws don't stop people from drinking) do not reduce abortions. Glorious logic indeed, as that is the reality.Lol. Reality doesn't care about what goody two-shoes think is immoral or irresponsible. People will murder anyways.....so why not just let them? Glorious logic there buddy. The Bible, Quran, 50 Shades of Grey or whatever is irrelevant. Lol. The form a murder takes doesn't stop it from being a murder. "Would you rather have people shooting people to death or stabbing them to death." Well, in case you are unaware.....both a bad. Just because poisoning someone is cleaner than stabbing them a hundred times doesn't make the former acceptable.....in case you did not know. As always, to support abortion one has to throw logic and sense out the window, as evidenced by the magical coat hanger boogeyman running around inserting things into women and his brother the magical baby-loader forcing babies into women's wombs. That's a bad analogy, a better one would be to compare a two year long prison sentence for rape VS a ten year long one. Both of them are going to have an effect, but one is going to work better than the other. When it comes to abortion, legal abortions combined with birth control and good sex ed works better than coat hanger abortions combined with a lack of birth control and abstinence only sex ed if you wanna prevent "murder". Reality is neither logical nor illogical, it simply is. You having a problem with these "evil" women's behavior or wishing anti abortion laws worked is irrelevant. |
Comic_SansJan 23, 2018 3:03 PM
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |