Huge difference here. They can talk about it all they want, but the man is completely powerless in this scenario. The man is still at the absolute mercy of the woman. The woman absolutely has the man by the b*lls and controls his future. The woman can easily say "no I will have the child and there's nothing you can do about it and I will demand child support" and there's literally nothing the man can do. You talk about men controlling women's health and their futures. I would say that right there is a pretty big control women currently have over men and it's not right IMO.
It takes two to tango, I would say the same for women. Don't want to risk a pregnancy? Stay a virgin until you get married. How about that? You have a complete double standard. Do you really not think there aren't plenty of women out there that treat men like sex objects? I assure you there are many many women out there who only care about two things when it comes to men, their body and their bank account. Women are just as guilty of being superficial and fake in dating and sex as men. The double standard is very real. If a woman wants to not have the baby, is not ready to be a mother and wants to get an abortion, the man has no say. Outside of various state laws the woman can absolutely get an abortion. Even in states where it's banned the woman can travel to another state, the man can not do anything to stop it. On the other hand, if a man is not ready to be a father, the woman can absolutely force him to pay child support and essentially end his life financially for 18 years in the very least. That is the definition of control. Let's go back to my wild night example gatormom. It takes a man and a woman to do it. If they're both willing, the man uses the condom and it breaks (so he was trying to do the right thing) and the woman gets pregnant, why should the woman be able to get out of the mistake and the man can't?
Obviously a sex strike really wouldn't work for either sex. It wouldn't work for men just like it by and large didn't work for women. But make no doubt about it, if the majority of men went on a sex strike, most women would be absolutely losing their minds within 2 to 3 days, don't kid yourself. As for signing away your rights to the kid as a man, once again that is only if the woman allows it. A man can not unilaterally do that by themselves. The argument is, with the law in place regarding reproduction and parental rights, men would actually be more justified than women to do a sex strike. Men have far more to lose during sex than Women. Something women never consider.
Let me ask you this futuregatormom, or any poster on this board. Would you take the following deal: - Women get rights to abortion with no limit or restrictions up until birth. So even at 8 months for example, if the woman wanted to abort the baby, they could. - Men get rights to a financial abortion (no ability for the woman to force the man to support the child financially against their will) up until 6 months. I say 6 months so that the woman has the third trimester to decide if they will have the baby or not knowing the man will not provide financial support. Would you be willing to give men the financial abortion above outlined above if it meant getting full abortion right up until birth with no restrictions?
I'm just going to respond to everything under this one. First, 93% of all abortions take place in the first trimester. About 1/3 of those are because of the partner relationship. They had just met, he is abusive, or that the partner is not supportive. I think most often the relationship is one of the above and not the nice well meaning guy hooking up with a sex driven nymph. You are pointing at a rare case and I'm pointing out the norm. My niece got married and when she got pregnant he wanted nothing to do with it, left the marriage, and his and his family turned their backs on her. He couldn't keep a job and didn't want the expense. It's not easy to get the guy to pay child support. There are ways they avoid it and he has been the master. Now, to the question of allowing a woman to have an abortion up to birth. Are you seriously out of your mind? Why do you people think that is a thing?? It's just not! With Roe, after 24 weeks you couldn't. Now if she developed complications that showed that the fetus was dying and the woman would die, that was an exception. So this is a NON ISSUE. Men have more to lose??? What? Money? Did you know that women put their lives at risk getting pregnant? That was BEFORE Roe was overturned. There are so many complications we are at risk for that can kill us, even while in labor. Now, if we suffer a miscarriage, the doctors have to wait util death is imminent in order to do a D&C. A D&C ( Dilation and Curettage) cleans out the left over tissue. Sepsis sets in and we die if it isn't done. I'm not even going to go into the outrageous way a growing fetus destroys our bodies. There are stories I posted before, but this one I am watching on tv now: Georgia Mom Was Hemorrhaging but Couldn't Get Life-Saving Care Due to State Abortion Ban: ‘I Wanted to Live’ Tell women to keep their legs closed until marriage?? The mysogyny in here is neck deep. I gotta take a break.
I'm just going to say one more thing about this topic today. Roe addressed everything and women still died in childbirth in this country. Now we have gone in a radical direction where where over 70k women are carrying their rapest's baby and teens are dying in ER's. Pro life? Nevaeh Crain Died During a Miscarriage After Trying to Get Care in Texas Hospitals — ProPublica
Tell ot to UF health. They call ot a baby. I trust them over you. As for your question. I have answered it. I believe exceptions exist for everything. Rape is so horrible and tragic that I can understand that exception.
I bet if you talk to the actual scientists at UF they would call it a fetus. The wording of their brochure or website is addressing parents, so of course they will use the word baby.
Tilly doesn't understand this. He thinks a fetus is scientifically a baby because literature addressed to expectant mothers says 'your baby'.
So you think it's ok to kill babies under certain conditions. See, I don't think it's ok to kill babies under any condition.
Conservatism killed itself with people like Romney, the Bushes, McCain etc. the GOP is now controlled by populism We’re living in a failed country because there is no credible counter to the insanity of the cultural left
This. Thinks like gay marriage, transgenders in bathrooms, and.....other stuff....has totally destroyed our nation and caused us to be a failed country. It's total insanity. [...checks 401k]
Since we are coming up with dumb ideas, for any woman that wants an abortion, a conservative needs to be allocated the medical costs for the now surrogate, adoption costs, and have to raise the child. We’ll just do a draft system. No abortions, but put your money where your vote sits.
Lol. Thats my point. People in this thread are telling me "no one" says that word. "Scientist" dont say you broke your "hand" either, but we all say it. The being inside the womb is a "baby" , just like the thing my wife broke in an accident is a "hand". This word salad is just a new thing to take the sting out of reality.
Ok. Problem is the government red tape to adopt an American baby will still exist forcing people overseas to adopt. Get rid of the red tape and watch American adoptions soar.
Sorry Tilly, it just doesn't fit your argument. Terminology means nothing when it comes to the facts that women lives are more important than any potential baby. I'm not talking about the occasional "whoopsie" situation. We are losing more women, and men who are against abortion don't understand that this also affects them. If their wife dies and leaves them with children, or if the delay in care renders the woman incapable of having more children, or any children in the future that would affect the potential dad. I would have not chosen to an elective abortion in my life, but I would never tell someone else to not. Abortion is medical care, and it's not been more evident than the last two years.
