Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 60
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    4,514
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by moonman View Post
    That you're striving for fairness, equality and responsibility is understood and appreciated gcoll.

    What happens, under your "Male Abortion Act" when the male opts for abortion and female opts for carrying to term and vice versa?

    Before we got married, my bride asked this question, "What would you do if the doctors told you to make a choice between saving my life or our baby who I was carrying? Without any hesitation I told her, I save you. Stunned she asked, "Why?" I answered, "My first commitment is to you, not to our child. I honor you first."

    She is still stunned and shared that story with some women recently. Men and women see it differently. Once a decision to carry to term is made, all married guys know this, the woman's first priority becomes her child and her mate is second.

    Still, we are only talking about heterosexual couples here and evidence shows that responsible people who happen to be gay are equally capable of raising children.

    So now let's raise a second, more complicated question under your "Male Abortion Act." A male gay couple decide and contract with a female to artificially inseminate with the intention to adopt. Let's say the female changes her mind and wants to abort. Do both males, legally contracted to the female, have a say under the contract or does the Male Abortion Act only allow for the biological parties to have rights? In other words, how would you, under the Male Abortion Act and our right to contract, resolve such conflicts in the law?

    Under a similar situation with a partner Id agree. But that is the exception, not the rule. IMO the 'vote' from one parent to carry the child overrides the vote for abortion. Even if you agree with abortion, how can you agree in a fair, equal society in which men and women should have equal footing and opertunity in all walks, from the army to the home, and yet say the womens right in child bearing overrides the mans?

    In the situation with the gay couple, their votewould count as one, I guess the one who was the hiological father (or mother in a reverse situation) would get the choice. But the question you highlited shows a problem with the current system. So some -itch of a women decides that she wants to back out, she is effectively killing someone elses baby with litle or no consideration for the father. A system which protects a womens right to do this is anything but fair and equal.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by NotVeryOriginal View Post
    ^^^^ Means you didnt even read what I wrote and just made your own assumption. You know what the first 3 letters in assumption is?

    No the child is alive once inception happens, from that moment on it is a human life growing until the day it dies. From that moment on it has two parents who are equal gaurdians, and from that moment on both parents have the right to choice or veto any decision made. Are you a guy or a women?

    You honestly telling me that if a man wants to have a baby but his GF is a skanky hoe and wants to kill the unborn baby then he has no say? ****ing liberal BS at its purists. This is why Im a republican, being a white male in the western world is the evilest thing in existance
    Wrong, I read every word of your post. The Courts (US) have held consistently that the rights of the fetus are derived solely from the intent or apparent intent of the mother. This is why in some cases, Scott Peterson for example that a defendant in a criminal murder case is charged with two counts of murder. One for the mother and one for fetus intended to be carried to term.

    On the other hand, had the victim Laci Peterson made it known that she intended to abort, Scott Peterson would have been charged and convicted of one count of murder. When the intent of the mother isn't known, the Court's assume the mother intended to carry to term and extend legal protection to the fetus.

    Just for clarity sake. Say while making an illegal turn I run over a pregnant pedestrian, killing her and her fetus. Let's say she just kissed her boyfriend goodbye and was walking toward an abortion clinic. I am charged with only one count of criminal negligence. If she were crossing the street for the purpose of being admitted to a hospital to give birth, I am charged with two counts of criminal negligence.

    I agree with Courts BTW. I think granting rights to the unborn based on the intent of the mother is exactly where the Court's should come down on the issue.
    Last edited by moonman; 07-06-2008 at 03:31 AM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    4,514
    vCash
    1500
    ....the world is just one ****ed up place.

    What does a guy killing his pregnant wife have to do with a guy wanting to have a baby (or for religious reasons being dead set against abortion) but having no say in the matter because the current law system in the west gives all the power to the female?

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,572
    vCash
    1500
    That you're striving for fairness, equality and responsibility is understood and appreciated gcoll.
    That's what I do.

    In other words, how would you, under the Male Abortion Act and our right to contract, resolve such conflicts in the law?
    I'm a very simple man. I'll try to put this simply.

    All the Male Abortion Act does, is allow fathers to accept or decline parental responsibility over their child, when they get someone pregnant.

    If the woman decides at any point to abort the fetus (as is her right), then there are no paternal matters to be resolved as there is no more baby.

    Simple enough?

    In your gay couple example, unless the gay couple has something in writing.....I think they're kind of screwed. They can probably sue to recoup anything they may have lost. If there was some kind of verbal agreement (as there had to be) I would say they could probably win some kind of settlement or something.
    Just for clarity sake. Say while making an illegal turn I run over a pregnant pedestrian, killing her and her fetus. Let's say she just kissed her boyfriend goodbye and was walking toward an abortion clinic. I am charged with only one count of criminal negligence. If she were crossing the street for the purpose of being admitted to a hospital to give birth, I am charged with two counts of criminal negligence.
    Really? That seems kind of odd. So, the actual fetus is considered to have more rights, if it will one day be a baby?

    If I kill a suicidal person, can I ask for a lesser sentence, because he was going to kill himself?

    It seems odd that the law would view a fetus differently based on what will happen to it in the future.

    What does a guy killing his pregnant wife have to do with a guy wanting to have a baby (or for religious reasons being dead set against abortion) but having no say in the matter because the current law system in the west gives all the power to the female?
    For the sake of clarity. The Male Abortion Act does nothing to give fathers a say in whether or not an actual abortion happens.

    *Note. And I do notice the flaws in my "Male Abortion Act", but I still think I can put up a decent argument for it.
    Last edited by gcoll; 07-06-2008 at 03:56 AM.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by NotVeryOriginal View Post
    Under a similar situation with a partner Id agree. But that is the exception, not the rule. IMO the 'vote' from one parent to carry the child overrides the vote for abortion. Even if you agree with abortion, how can you agree in a fair, equal society in which men and women should have equal footing and opertunity in all walks, from the army to the home, and yet say the womens right in child bearing overrides the mans?

    In the situation with the gay couple, their votewould count as one, I guess the one who was the hiological father (or mother in a reverse situation) would get the choice. But the question you highlited shows a problem with the current system. So some -itch of a women decides that she wants to back out, she is effectively killing someone elses baby with litle or no consideration for the father. A system which protects a womens right to do this is anything but fair and equal.
    Exception to the rule or law? In western democracy or republics, there is no such thing. An exception would make one above the law and as corrupt and unmanageable as our justice system might appear, I can assure you that in my ten years of writing law and motion briefs on numerous legal issues I have yet to come across an exception. It doesn't happen. Honest.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500

    Wink

    G'day gcoll,

    thanks to you and NotVeryOriginal for engaging. It's been fun and interesting but this is my last post for the nite or morning as it is on the left coast.

    Anyway I wish the mods or someone else would do something worthwhile like actually posting how one gets part of a quote into those rectangles. Just a suggestion.

    You say, "All the Male Abortion Act does, is allow fathers to accept or decline parental responsibility over their child, when they get someone pregnant."

    I passionately disagree. While pregnancy is occasionally the result of trickery it is also a possible known outcome and no man should opt in or opt out based on whim, fancy or prerogative. If a man impregnates a woman and delivers a child, he is responsible.

    You wrote, "Really? (Editorial comment omitted) So, the actual fetus is considered to have more rights, if it will one day be a baby?"

    Yes, in lay terms you are correct.

    You teased, "If I kill a suicidal person, can I ask for a lesser sentence, because he was going to kill himself?"

    You can ask sure. Good freakin' luck sellin' it to a judge or jury.

    Bang on point, "It seems odd that the law would view a fetus differently based on what will happen to it in the future."

    Really? Then it must likewise seem odd to you that newborn children don't have full rights and privileges as adults?

    You noted, "*Note. And I do notice the flaws in my "Male Abortion Act", but I still think I can put up a decent argument for it."

    Agreed, and when you do put a decent argument for it I'll sign on to it.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by NotVeryOriginal View Post
    ....the world is just one ****ed up place.

    What does a guy killing his pregnant wife have to do with a guy wanting to have a baby (or for religious reasons being dead set against abortion) but having no say in the matter because the current law system in the west gives all the power to the female?
    You're making three rhetorical points. But each is worth answering anyway.

    Maybe you haven't noticed but the fetus is totally dependent upon the mother for its existence so long as it exists in the womb. This is why the law has determined that any rights the fetus has, while in the womb, is totally dependent upon the intent of the mother. It's her body. She is the host. The fetus cannot survive unless the mother is willing.

    So if a guy is wanting to be a father and/or is dead set against abortion for religious reasons it might a good idea to find a like minded female, no?
    Last edited by moonman; 07-06-2008 at 04:44 AM.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,572
    vCash
    1500
    Anyway I wish the mods or someone else would do something worthwhile like actually posting how one gets part of a quote into those rectangles. Just a suggestion.
    Copy/paste the text you wish to quote. Highlight it, and click on that little talk bubble icon.

    While pregnancy is occasionally the result of trickery it is also a possible known outcome and no man should opt in or opt out based on whim, fancy or prerogative.
    The same rule applies to women.

    But, women are given a get out of jail free card.

    I don't think that's fair.

    If a man impregnates a woman and delivers a child, he is responsible.
    See....but the "and delivers a child" part. That was entirely the woman's choice. That has nothing to do with the guy. If abortion is her choice....then carrying the baby to full term, is her choice. I don't see how this involves the man. He had nothing to do with this choice, why is he held responsible for it?

    A 16 year old girl....has sex. Gets pregnant. Isn't prepared to have a child...that's okay. She can have an abortion.

    A 16 year old male...has sex. Gets a girl pregnant. Isn't prepared to have a child. Too bad. He's ****ed.

    "Keep your laws off my body" ---fine.

    But don't expect other people to be responsible for choices you made about your body. And if the decision of whether or not to have an abortion, is entirely the woman's choice....she is entirely responsible for the results of that choice. I don't see why a guy owes her 18 years of payments for a choice she made about her body.

    That's where the male abortion comes in. You don't want a baby....sign this paper here. Let the woman know you do not want a baby, and will not be caring for it. Then, the choice is hers. Carry it to term if you wish. Abort it if you wish. After all, it is HER body, and HER choice, i figure the results of that choice are HER responsibility, no?

    And if she's against male abortion on moral grounds, she should have found a like minded male.

    You can ask sure. Good freakin' luck sellin' it to a judge or jury.
    I'm gonna plead insanity.

    Really? Then it must likewise seem odd to you that newborn children don't have full rights and privileges as adults?
    Well, yes it would.....but that wasn't my point.

    I'm not comparing fetus to adult, or fetus to baby....I'm comparing fetus to fetus. It seems odd that it's future, determines how it is viewed by the law. Physically, it's the exact same thing.
    Last edited by gcoll; 07-06-2008 at 05:24 AM.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Geez, I can't believe I'm still awake here. In my youth, I lived in Toronto, she lived in Windsor. It was a weekend thing. An abortion in Detroit cost $200.00 and back in the day they were easier to get than in Canada. So one day I get a call that I owe her $200.00. I'm like aren't we going to talk about this first? "No, it's done." she says.

    A week later I show up at her door hand her $100.00 and tell her to lose my phone #. I'm ticked at being left out of the decision. I never learned her reasons for doing it. Maybe she thought I wouldn't be around or wouldn't pay support. I've never cared what her reasons were. I'm was po'd at how cold she was about it. I assumed she talked to friends or family because women rarely make decisions without talking to someone. So I was bugged as well that she was getting advice about my seed and our creation from everyone but me.

    So it ain't like I ain't sympathetic to your idea. I just don't see it as an area where law can make things equal because men and women are not equal with regard to child bearing.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    4,514
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by moonman View Post
    Geez, I can't believe I'm still awake here. In my youth, I lived in Toronto, she lived in Windsor. It was a weekend thing. An abortion in Detroit cost $200.00 and back in the day they were easier to get than in Canada. So one day I get a call that I owe her $200.00. I'm like aren't we going to talk about this first? "No, it's done." she says.

    A week later I show up at her door hand her $100.00 and tell her to lose my phone #. I'm ticked at being left out of the decision. I never learned her reasons for doing it. Maybe she thought I wouldn't be around or wouldn't pay support. I've never cared what her reasons were. I'm was po'd at how cold she was about it. I assumed she talked to friends or family because women rarely make decisions without talking to someone. So I was bugged as well that she was getting advice about my seed and our creation from everyone but me.

    So it ain't like I ain't sympathetic to your idea. I just don't see it as an area where law can make things equal because men and women are not equal with regard to child bearing.
    Men naturally produced more testosterone, as such are naturally strong and more agressive, both key skills in being a soldier, also men are shown to hold up better under prolonged pressure related to combat. So because of this men should be the ones that fight wars and women should mind their own business and keep the **** out.

    Also, nature by design makes monogamy a silly idea. Most animals arent monogamous, it works against their best interest, survival of the species.

    These are both example of how nature doesnt work if we are to believe in higher evolution, or just evolution in general. This is like me meeting mindy on friday, flying to vagas and placing a 20 grand bet, 10 from each of us, that the Red Sox win thr world series. She tyhen decides she wants to pull out before the bet is place, lo behold this November the Red Sox win and I get a call from Mindy asking for her half. You cant have it both ways.

    Im sorry to hear about what that ***** did, that sucks. If that was be Id probably have capped her in the knee or sumit.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by gcoll View Post
    That's what I do.


    I'm a very simple man. I'll try to put this simply.

    All the Male Abortion Act does, is allow fathers to accept or decline parental responsibility over their child, when they get someone pregnant.

    If the woman decides at any point to abort the fetus (as is her right), then there are no paternal matters to be resolved as there is no more baby.

    Simple enough?

    In your gay couple example, unless the gay couple has something in writing.....I think they're kind of screwed. They can probably sue to recoup anything they may have lost. If there was some kind of verbal agreement (as there had to be) I would say they could probably win some kind of settlement or something.


    Really? That seems kind of odd. So, the actual fetus is considered to have more rights, if it will one day be a baby?

    If I kill a suicidal person, can I ask for a lesser sentence, because he was going to kill himself?

    It seems odd that the law would view a fetus differently based on what will happen to it in the future.


    For the sake of clarity. The Male Abortion Act does nothing to give fathers a say in whether or not an actual abortion happens.

    *Note. And I do notice the flaws in my "Male Abortion Act", but I still think I can put up a decent argument for it.
    With regards to the suicide question, the answer is a resounding yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

    Dr. Kevorkian served 8 years for second degree murder. The court was lenient because it was an "assisted suicide" rather than a premeditated attack on someone who wanted to live.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,584
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ari1013 View Post
    With regards to the suicide question, the answer is a resounding yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

    Dr. Kevorkian served 8 years for second degree murder. The court was lenient because it was an "assisted suicide" rather than a premeditated attack on someone who wanted to live.
    Such BS. He is actually a hero of mine
    The Hoss in action

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,584
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ari1013 View Post
    With regards to the suicide question, the answer is a resounding yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

    Dr. Kevorkian served 8 years for second degree murder. The court was lenient because it was an "assisted suicide" rather than a premeditated attack on someone who wanted to live.
    Such BS. He is actually a hero of mine
    The Hoss in action

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by eyememine View Post
    Such BS. He is actually a hero of mine
    And that's why he wasn't given the typical sentence for murder.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,572
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ari1013 View Post
    With regards to the suicide question, the answer is a resounding yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian

    Dr. Kevorkian served 8 years for second degree murder. The court was lenient because it was an "assisted suicide" rather than a premeditated attack on someone who wanted to live.
    Not really sure that's comparable to what I was talking about.

    Let me try it a different way....

    A cancer patient, that will die soon. If I murder him, should it be viewed the same as murdering someone who will live a full life? Of course.

    That's why I don't see how say....a kick to the stomach of a pregnant woman who will have the baby, is different than a kick to the stomach of a pregnant woman who will not have the baby.

    It seems odd that the law would view the exact same crime, differently....based on what will happen to the fetus in the future. Seems kind of crazy actually.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •