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.
So could the female (abstain). Women can dump the kid off for adoption,kill it or keep it and the man has no say in any of it except at the very start (not doing the deed) and "how much is this going to cost me".
Yeah, that's a fair deal.
I thought women wanted equality?
Women can't kill a "kid", that is illegal. They CAN kill a fetus, which is legal.
And it is 100% in the man's power to not impregnate a woman if he doesn't want her to have an abortion or if he doesn't want to pay child support. He can keep it in his pants. No sex, no pregnancy. If he does impregnate a woman, it is her right to deal with the pregnancy as she sees fit.
So could the female (abstain). Women can dump the kid off for adoption,kill it or keep it and the man has no say in any of it except at the very start (not doing the deed) and "how much is this going to cost me".
Yeah, that's a fair deal.
I thought women wanted equality?
Geez, dude, just don't offer to have sex, or accept it IF it is offered, and you'll be free of all that.
It sounds like you're more concerned with "punishing" the woman who chooses to abort.
If it's "OK" to abort in cases of rape, you're saying that particular fetus is okay to get rid of because the woman didn't have "irresponsible sex?" Is the fetus a potential human life or not? Does the fact that the fetus was conceived by rape somehow change its status?
I really think they also would like to punish the woman for actually having sex (and, the ultimate sin - enjoying it).
Doesn't matter as long as they abort within the legally allowed time frame.
Hey; I’m a moderate. Unrestricted first trimester. Some restrictions moving through second trimester. Heavily, but not completely, restricted third trimester.
I’m not one of the radicals that want it banned totally or want zero restrictions at all.
Women can't kill a "kid", that is illegal. They CAN kill a fetus, which is legal.
And it is 100% in the man's power to not impregnate a woman if he doesn't want her to have an abortion or if he doesn't want to pay child support. He can keep it in his pants. No sex, no pregnancy. If he does impregnate a woman, it is her right to deal with the pregnancy as she sees fit.
Double standard. She can also keep her legs closed. See how easy that is? Taking this argument to a logical end if a woman decides to open her legs recognizing the risks just as a man should/does then if one side doesn't want to keep it/take care of it they shouldn't have to which is now "automatically" ONLY the women's right. It should be the right of either side...
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.
Ohhhh, I think I know! 
