Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You know, why shouldn't we be putting all the responsibility of contraception on men?
Women don't get themselves pregnant. Our eggs are just sitting there minding their own business, until a bunch of sperm come along. Why shouldn't the owner of the sperm be responsible for where it ends up?
If I let my dog off leash and she runs into my neighbors yard and digs up her flowerbed, that's on me. I'm responsible for not controlling my dog. My neighbor isn't at fault for not putting up a fence or for having the flowers in the first place.
So let's hold men accountable for letting their sperm run around loose. If men don't take responsibility for properly diverting or restraining their sperm, they should be responsible for the outcome.
Well that makes sense if you believe all sex is rape, otherwise those eggs ain't just sitting there, they are active participants.
Unplanned pregnancy occurs even when preventative methods are followed and both parties should have a say in the path chosen. Please don't give me the "don't do the deed..." garbage its takes 2 and legal choices are still available. Why should one person have the only say...
Because biology dictates it. Can you explain the compromise if a woman decides to have an abortion and the man does not want her to?\, or vice versa?
This is already a thing, we call them Deadbeat Dads.
I guess you like picking up the tab for other people's children. Imagine the increase in SNAP, cash assistance, Section 8 if this was implemented. You would let off every male who wanted to walk away from responsibility. Could I make 20 kids a year and not take responsibility for any? I would image the OP would not want to cover these children's needs as that would inevitably increase taxation.
This is the same problem with eliminating abortion and contraception. You exchange one problem for another instead of eliminating a problem all together. I have never seen a plan to house, feed, educate these additional children. Nor do these groups ever provide one or tell us how they plan to help with the extra mouths to feed. I guess we would bring the orphanages back.
Well deadbeat dads are breaking a court order in most cases. Anybody is free to break the law or ignore a court order at their own peril of course.
Eliminating abortion and contraception is a bad idea...in fact they should be taxpayer subsidized(aka "free"), as they are both cheaper than welfare.
The difference is women who have abortions aren't necessarily complaining about having them, any more than they are complaining about having a baby. These are the choices, these are the possibilities a woman chooses when she has sex.
A man complaining about either option doesn't have a say in either matter, so it makes more sense for him to avoid the situation entirely if he feels that strongly about not being able to decide for a woman.
Woman has a choice because we give her that right legally. Before Roe v Wade in the USA, a woman did not have that possibility in many states prior to that.
So, to be moral and just people, we need to give man a choice, somehow. Being forced to pay child support for 18 years is quite a price to pay for an accidental pregnancy. It's his life too, he can't get back those 18 years. Stop punishing men because you're unhappy with some man not wanting to stay with you after they have sex with you.
Woman has a choice because we give her that right legally. Before Roe v Wade in the USA, a woman did not have that possibility in many states prior to that.
.
Women have always had that that choice, now it's a safe, legal procedure. But of course abortion existed before Roe v Wade.
Well that makes sense if you believe all sex is rape, otherwise those eggs ain't just sitting there, they are active participants.
The eggs are just sitting there. The woman may be an active participant, but her eggs are just hanging out in the uterus.
Consenting to sex isn't consenting to being impregnated.
Again - why is the burden of contraception on the woman, when it's the sperm that cause the problem? Contain your sperm, don't get anyone pregnant, don't have to pay child support.
The eggs are just sitting there. The woman may be an active participant, but her eggs are just hanging out in the uterus.
Consenting to sex isn't consenting to being impregnated.
Again - why is the burden of contraception on the woman, when it's the sperm that cause the problem? Contain your sperm, don't get anyone pregnant, don't have to pay child support.
Well those poor sperms are being forced in to the womb by the male's evil muscle spasms then, through no fault of their own and those poor eggs should chastise the owner of the body they reside in for accepting the sperm dispenser in to her womb instead of her mouth.
Let's remember our poor reproductive organs are blameless in all this!
In a free society either party should be able to walk away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
