Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-08-05 19:43pm
foreverblue
wrote:
.. And viagra and
circumcision are not even close to
abortion.
why? Because you say
so?
Quote:
are you trying to
say that your husband or boyfriend having
a circumcision has the same effect on
people as you having an
abortion.
some men are greatly
disturbed that they were circumsized,
feeling mutilated. Should they have had
a say? Should there be a law prohibiting
circumsitions before age 18? Or should
it be mandated? Should there be a law
dictating wehther this should be allowed
or not?
Or is it a medical decision best left to
the physician and the person in charge of
the bady (in this case, the parent)?
Quote:
as for the effect
on men only being little I dont think so
girl,i have been there and it is no little
effect believe
me.
the effect on you
regarding the pregnancy is minimal
compared to the effect on the woman.
What gives you the right to comandeer
another person's body? Should you be
able to force a woman to remain pregnant,
should you be able to control what happens
to her body? Is that a right any person
has? In that case, certainly the kidney
patient has a "right to life" by forcing
you to provide a kidney.
|
FISHX
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Posts: 920 Location: UK
Posted: 02-09-05 05:49am
steen
wrote:
fishx
wrote:
sorry my opinion is the
complete opposit of yours as I think that
termination affects more than just the
woman.
It also affects the grandparents and any
siblings that the fetus/baby may have
had.
once again, your opinion
is completely out of line with the legal
system, which clearly have ruled that
grandparents, f.Ex., have no rights
whatsoever regarding grandchildren, and
thus much less regarding their childrens'
fetuses..
Quote:
to say that the
father has no rights sounds pretty unfair
to me as you can almost guarantee that if
the woman had decided to continue the
pregnancy the c.S.A would soon be after
them for child
support.
it is the reality of
biology. Until the man can be pregnant,
he has no right to control the
pregnancy.
Quote:
so you see if you
look at it really in the eyes of society
if not the law then the father should have
equal say in what happens to thier
fetus/baby.
nonsense. This is not
the eye of society, but rather your
opinion. There is no such consensus as
you describe in
society.
yes I know that legaly grandparents don,t
have rights that is why I said it is my
opinion but the law doesn,t make it
right.
If the male has no rights over the
pregnancy then he shouldn,t have to pay
child support if the woman decides to
continue the pregnancy.
Yes this is my opinion as I stated at the
start of the post but it is also the
oppinion of thousand of would be fathers
in the uk.
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 06:00am
steen
wrote:
foreverblue
wrote:
sorry I do not agree with
that only women should have a say in
wether abortion is legal or not,abortion
is not just a problem for women,are women
the only ones involved in a
pregnancy?
they are the only ones
whose body is involved and on the line.
If you give anybody else a say, they
effectively get to decide what to do with
her body. That is known as slavery.
.
50\50 steen thats what I mean,are you in
slavery steen,are you a slave.We give
goverments the power to make decisions for
us,does that make us slaves.Do the
goverment say this is an issue only for
women,so only female politicians can vote
or would that be considered sexist.
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 06:12am
Quote:
do you not think
it affects the man when his
wife\girlfriend has an abortion[i can tell
you from personal experiance that it can
have a devastating effect on the
man}
sure it does. It
affects homosexuals when legislation
prohibits their marriage as well, and I
must have missed where you advocated
against such devastating effect on them.
And guess what. That you have the right
to your own kidney has a devastating
effect of the patient on dialysis who will
die because he can't take charge of your
extra kidney. He will die which is a
lot more serious than you having emotional
consequenses..
But wait, I must have missed where you
insisted that he can force somebody to
give him a kidney, even against their
will. So you are *not* advocating
anybody having control over other people's
bodies *except* when it is a pregnant
woman, when you then think that the man
should control her body. Isn't that
hypocritical?
.[/quote]
you continue with:should you be forced to
give up a kidney for someone else:major
difference steen I dont know them and as I
was talking about my own experiance I
think your anology is just plain daft and
a smoke screen.Where the bloody hell have
I said anybody has control over anyone
elses body,thats right nowhere.You say
maybe it was not the time for her,are you
going to fight for the mans right if it is
time in his mind,but you will not do that
will you because you are a sexist.You
people are the sort that think men cannot
be the victim of domestic violence.Have
you given up a kidney steen,no I didnt
think so,so quit with that stupid anology
has most of the time we are discussing
personal experiances,oh and yes if I knew
them,and was as close as I would be with
my partner then I would,if possible give a
kidney,would you?
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 06:21am
[quote="steen"]
foreverblue
wrote:
Quote:
i also believe it
is a social problem and can only be
resolved through better education and
better birth control.This means educating
male as well as females,because I am sure
you are not just putting the blame on the
woman for birth control.In my oppinion
there should be a proper national debate
and maybe a public vote as to wether it be
legal or
illegal.
birth control?
Actually, that legal battle was won as
well, but is still being obstructed by the
catholic church. Guess you need to
take issue with their opinion regarding
contraception.
Or are you talking about abortion? Why
should there be a national vote on a
medical procedure? There is no
national vote on any other medical
procedure or practice, including that of
comfort-care only for neonates weighing
less than 500 gram. Shouldn't you
leave medical decisions to those who know
what they are doing?
Quote:
,unless there is
new scientific evidence to disprove what
is known today:ie fetal pain and
viability,even then it should be medically
allowed.
well, it is medically
allowed.
steen once again you are reading things
into my posts that sre not there,please
stop,do you want .homicide to be legal,i
must of missed that post steen.Yes steen I
was talking about abortion,and why
should;nt it be put up for a public
vote,are you scared that the public will
veto it,it is a public and social
problem,not just a womans.I must of missed
the post where you are advocating bodily
autonomy for men in relation to
circumsion.
[quote= foreverblue]personaly I do not
believe that abortion should be
illegal[quote]
[quote=steen]what will you seek outlawed
next? Plastic surgery? Amputations
that are bloody and gruesome to watch?
Did you miss that bit steen,how can that
quote of mine bring you to say I want to
outlaw any procedure?
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 06:37am
steen
wrote:
foreverblue
wrote:
.. And viagra and
circumcision are not even close to
abortion.
why? Because you say
so?
Quote:
are you trying to
say that your husband or boyfriend having
a circumcision has the same effect on
people as you having an
abortion.
some men are greatly
disturbed that they were circumsized,
feeling mutilated. Should they have had
a say? Should there be a law
prohibiting circumsitions before age 18?
Or should it be mandated? Should there
be a law dictating wehther this should be
allowed or not?
Or is it a medical decision best left to
the physician and the person in charge of
the bady (in this case, the parent)?
Quote:
as for the effect
on men only being little I dont think so
girl,i have been there and it is no little
effect believe
me.
the effect on you
regarding the pregnancy is minimal
compared to the effect on the woman.
What gives you the right to comandeer
another person's body? Should you be
able to force a woman to remain pregnant,
should you be able to control what happens
to her body? Is that a right any person
has? In that case, certainly the kidney
patient has a "right to life" by forcing
you to provide a
kidney.
so my feelings have no bearing,even though
I would of been the one who paid and
looked after her.Have you been pregnant
steen,have you been involved on a personal
level with an abortion?If not what right
have you got to sit on your high horse and
tell me that the depression I suffered is
nothing,you are out of order.I spent years
believing it was my fault and I became a
self harmer,i still have the scars both
mental and phsyical ones,it was a very
good psychistrist and a lot of time to
pull me round and get me back up,while she
was out every night having fun,and was
pregnant within a year of aborting our
child,this one she kept,that had an almost
devastating effect on my already fragile
mental state,you are some doctor to just
dismiss a persons emotional state like you
did.If it was my fault that the other
person needed a kidney then yes it should
be law that I give it to him,as I was the
one that caused his\hers to fail
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 14:31pm
fishx
wrote:
if the male has no rights
over the pregnancy then he shouldn,t have
to pay child support if the woman decides
to continue the
pregnancy.
he has no rights or
duties to the pregnancy, but both have
duties to a child if it is born. The
child support is for the child, not the
woman. So your argument doesn't match
reality.
Quote:
yes this is my
opinion as I stated at the start of the
post but it is also the oppinion of
thousand of would be fathers in the
uk.
the ones who don't want
to support their child, yes. How very
un-prolife of them.
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 14:36pm
steen
wrote:
fishx
wrote:
if the male has no rights
over the pregnancy then he shouldn,t have
to pay child support if the woman decides
to continue the
pregnancy.
he has no rights or
duties to the pregnancy, but both have
duties to a child if it is born. The
child support is for the child, not the
woman. So your argument doesn't match
reality..
so even if he does not want the child in
the first place,should he still be held
responsible when the child is born.Yet the
female makes all the decisions in regards
to wether or not she has it.
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 14:41pm
foreverblue
wrote:
Quote:
do you not think
it affects the man when his
wife\girlfriend has an abortion[i can tell
you from personal experiance that it can
have a devastating effect on the
man}
sure it does. It
affects homosexuals when legislation
prohibits their marriage as well, and I
must have missed where you advocated
against such devastating effect on them.
And guess what. That you have the
right to your own kidney has a devastating
effect of the patient on dialysis who will
die because he can't take charge of your
extra kidney. He will die which is a
lot more serious than you having emotional
consequenses..
But wait, I must have missed where you
insisted that he can force somebody to
give him a kidney, even against their
will. So you are *not* advocating
anybody having control over other people's
bodies *except* when it is a pregnant
woman, when you then think that the man
should control her body. Isn't that
hypocritical?.
Quote:
you continue
with:should you be forced to give up a
kidney for someone else:major difference
steen I dont know them and as I was
talking about my own experiance I think
your anology is just plain daft and a
smoke screen.
really? You advocate
that if a person's actions have a
devastating effect on others, be that
action an abortion or holding on to your
kidney, then, should the effect be
devastating enough, the other should have
the right to override bodily autonomy.
But now you are saying that this is only
true if this devastating effect is mental
anguish, but not if it is death? That's
just absurd.
Quote:
where the bloody
hell have I said anybody has control over
anyone elses body,thats right
nowhere.
you insist that the man
has a say over the woman's body.
Quote:
you say maybe it
was not the time for
her,
huh? What do you
mean?
Quote:
are you going to
fight for the mans right if it is time in
his mind, but you will not do that will
you because you are a
sexist.
to have a baby? If he
has sex for the purpose of having a baby,
he should make sure first that the woman
actually agrees wit him. The reality of
biology is that men can only be parents if
they find a likeminded woman. That is
physical, biological reality. That is
not sexism or discrimination ony more than
complaining that men don't ovulate.
Quote:
you people are
the sort that think men cannot be the
victim of domestic
violence.
ah, back to the idiotic
ascribing opinions to others through lies,
then. Yes, now you show yourself as the
typical prolifer.
Quote:
have you given up
a kidney steen,no I didnt think so,so quit
with that stupid
anology
i was on the list until
the mad cow disease scare removed all
europeans from that list. And I was
regularly givinbg blood as well, because
my blood was needed. But nobody can
actually force me to do so the way you
want to force a pregnant woman, enslaving
her and taking control over her body.
Quote:
has most of the
time we are discussing personal
experiences,oh and yes if I knew them,and
was as close as I would be with my
partner then I would,if possible give a
kidney,would
you?
yes. And I would, even
if I don't know them. I am from a family
that does not have history of kidney or
heart trouble, and as such, my extra
kidney truly is extra. But per new
federal rules, it is no longer available.
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 14:49pm
steen
wrote:
Quote:
are you going to
fight for the mans right if it is time in
his mind, but you will not do that will
you because you are a
sexist.
to have a baby? If he
has sex for the purpose of having a baby,
he should make sure first that the woman
actually agrees wit him. The reality of
biology is that men can only be parents if
they find a likeminded woman. That is
physical, biological reality. That is
not sexism or discrimination ony more than
complaining that men don't ovulate.
that is so absurd steen what about when
the woman decides she wants a baby but the
man dosent,now if she lies and says she is
on birth control and isnt should the man
have the right to make her abort,so no
steen that is not biological reality
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 14:51pm
Quote:
where the bloody hell have I said anybody
has control over anyone elses body,thats
right nowhere.
You insist that the man has a say over the
woman's body.
No steen I insist that the man has some
say in an abortion,keep up the smoke
screen
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 14:52pm
foreverblue
wrote:
so my feelings have no
bearing,even though I would of been the
one who paid and looked after
her.
to you, but not to her.
You don't get to make her your slave,
never mind how much money you put out.
Quote:
have you been
pregnant steen,have you been involved on a
personal level with an
abortion?
neither. Only on a
medical level.
Quote:
if not what right
have you got to sit on your high horse and
tell me that the depression I suffered is
nothing,
i am not, so please don't
misrepresent me. I am saying that it
doesn't give you the right to impose your
will on her. She does not become
responsible to you, merely because you are
affected by what she does with her own
body. Otherwise, the kidney patient
certainly is affected by you not giving
them your kidney and should be able to
mandate this.
Ah, I forgot. You want to ascribe duties
to the woman but don't want similar duties
levied onto yourself. What does that
make you?
Quote:
you are out of
order.I spent years believing it was my
fault and I became a self harmer,i still
have the scars both mental and phsyical
ones,it was a very good psychistrist and a
lot of time to pull me round and get me
back up,while she was out every night
having fun,and was pregnant within a year
of aborting our child,this one she
kept,that had an almost devastating effect
on my already fragile mental
state,
i am sorry that happened
to you. That doesn't give you the right
to control her, though. You don't own
her, she is not a slave.
Quote:
you are some
doctor to just dismiss a persons emotional
state like you
did.
please cease your
misrepresentation. I am not dismissing
it. I am saying that it doesn't give you
the right to enslave others. Your
distress is not a legitimate reason for
dictating what happens to other people’s
bodies, unless it also is the kidney
patient’s prerogative.
Quote:
if it was my
fault that the other person needed a
kidney then yes it should be law that I
give it to him,as I was the one that
caused his\hers to
fail
fault is irrelevant.
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 14:55pm
foreverblue
wrote:
steen once again you are
reading things into my posts that sre not
there,please
stop,
could you then be more
clear, not so vague and unambiguous?
Quote:
do you want
.homicide to be legal,i must of missed
that post
steen.
no, I don't.
Quote:
yes steen I was
talking about abortion,and why should;nt
it be put up for a public vote,are you
scared that the public will veto it,it is
a public and social problem,not just a
womans.
i find the social bigoted
singling out of only one medical procedure
to be wrong. Medical decisions are
between the patient and their doctor, not
anybody else.
Quote:
i must of missed
the post where you are advocating bodily
autonomy for men in relation to
circumsion.
as there are no proven
significant benefits from circumcision, no
I don't favor it. Yet, it is not my
decision to make, just like it is not your
decision whether a woman has an abortion
or not.
|
foreverblue
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 577
Posted: 02-09-05 14:57pm
Now is'nt that funny you forgot the part
where you dismissed my depression has of
no consequence and of no matter,of little
relation to the woman having a baby,are
you trying to say that every woman who
gives birth is going to have serious
mental health problems,oh and for your
information steen I was nearly dead so
wheres your argument now
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 15:00pm
foreverblue
wrote:
that is so absurd steen what
about when the woman decides she wants a
baby but the man dosent,now if she lies
and says she is on birth control and isnt
should the man have the right to make her
abort,so no steen that is not biological
reality
if you don't want to be a
parent, the only one who can protect
yourself is you. Why should you believe
her?
The biological reality is that she is the
one carrying the pregnancy and he is not.
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 15:00pm
foreverblue
wrote:
so even if he does not want
the child in the first place,should he
still be held responsible when the child
is born.Yet the female makes all the
decisions in regards to wether or not she
has it.
yes, that is the reality
of biology.
Now, we can talk about changing this,
about possibly setting up some alternate
funding from the child instead, either
through something like a financial
adoption of the man's share of the duties
to the child, or possibly in increasing
taxes and let society take over that duty.
I have nothing against such solutions.
If you can find a way to voluntarily
transfer the financial duties towards the
child away from a man that doesn’t want to
be a father, then I am all for it.
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 15:01pm
foreverblue
wrote:
quote:
where the bloody hell have I said anybody
has control over anyone elses body,thats
right nowhere.
You insist that the man has a say over the
woman's body.
No steen I insist that the man has some
say in an abortion,keep up the smoke
screen
you insist that he has a
say in whether she aborts or not. That
is you insisting that he has control over
her body.
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 15:05pm
foreverblue
wrote:
now is'nt that funny you
forgot the part where you dismissed my
depression has of no consequence and of no
matter,of little relation to the woman
having a
baby,
i am not dismissing your
mood or suffering by saying that it has no
conferred right to control the woman's
pregnancy.
I am not dismissing your mood. I am
dismissing the idea that it somehow gives
you a right to control her or the
pregnancy.
Quote:
are you trying to
say that every woman who gives birth is
going to have serious mental health
problems,
no. 15% have some
depression, and 0.5% get psychotic.
Quote:
oh and for your
information steen I was nearly dead so
wheres your argument
now
ah, just like the kidney
patient. Does that give you the right to
control another body, even if it is for
your slef-preservation? *that* is the
point I am tryinhg to make here. That
doesn't make your pain or suffering any
less. I am not dismissing what happened
to you. I am just saying that this
didn't give you any special rights to
control her body, unless you also insist
on such control for others with severe
problems, such as the kidney patient.
Is that even remotely clear to yuo by now?
|
lil_blaze2004
Supporter
Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 6491 Location: ,
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
Posted: 02-09-05 15:31pm
How did this post get into this??? I
started it to find out who was male and
who was female??? How did it turn into
another big discombobulated argument?????
|
steen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Upper Midwest
Posted: 02-09-05 16:09pm
Lol. I think it was when blue reported
not wanting to start an argument :d
that was all it took
