[Brenda]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Chumley Chumley:

What about the man's choice?

He is perfectly welcome to carry the baby to term in his uterus and endure the rigors of childbirth.

And perfectly welcome to undergo an abortion if need be

[Chumley]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Chumley Chumley:

What about the man's choice?

He is perfectly welcome to carry the baby to term in his uterus and endure the rigors of childbirth.

So if a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby, but the man wants the baby, it's tough luck?

[Brenda]

Chumley Chumley:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Chumley Chumley:

What about the man's choice?

He is perfectly welcome to carry the baby to term in his uterus and endure the rigors of childbirth.

So if a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby, but the man wants the baby, it's tough luck?

Yes.

If a woman wants a baby and a man doesn't, and she gets pregnant anyway, he walks away, after telling her she is such a stupid bitch for getting pregnant without his consent. On the birthcertificate: "father unknown".

[Chumley]

Brenda Brenda:

Yes.

If a woman wants a baby and a man doesn't, and she gets pregnant anyway, he walks away, after telling her she is such a stupid bitch for getting pregnant without his consent. On the birthcertificate: "father unknown".

As I said, that is wrong too. A man should not have the choice to walk away.

[DerbyX]

Chumley Chumley:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Chumley Chumley:

What about the man's choice?

He is perfectly welcome to carry the baby to term in his uterus and endure the rigors of childbirth.

So if a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby, but the man wants the baby, it's tough luck?

Isn't that just what you propose if the women doesn't want it?

To answer honestly, yes. This entire debate is about choice and the choice resides with the women because its her body.

[Wally_Sconce]

Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:

if you don't want babies, then stop having sex. Is that what the women tell the men?

goddamn, will no one give me a direct answer to this?

I think women love to say this to men. And, I think it should apply to women, too.

[DerbyX]

If you aren't intending to get pregnant each and every time don't have sex.

An assinine statement deserves another assinine statement in response.

[Brenda]

Chumley Chumley:

Brenda Brenda:

Yes.

If a woman wants a baby and a man doesn't, and she gets pregnant anyway, he walks away, after telling her she is such a stupid bitch for getting pregnant without his consent. On the birthcertificate: "father unknown".

As I said, that is wrong too. A man should not have the choice to walk away.

Sometimes you just never see your one night stand again...

"what was your name again?"
"not important hun, just do what you were doing and don't stop"



Even if he doesn't walk away, he still doesn't have to carry it to term and deliver it. It is in a woman's body, whether you like it or not. That makes it her decision.

[Chumley]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Isn't that just what you propose if the women doesn't want it?

To answer honestly, yes. This entire debate is about choice and the choice resides with the women because its her body.

It is still her body if she carries the child to term. And the baby while it is indeed growing in the woman, is still part of the man. After the baby is born, she can carry on.
Look, I am not balls to the wall against abortion, and while I think it is wrong I wouldn't condemn you to hell for having one.
And to the point of the topic, I just don't think Morgantaler deserves an Order of Canada for this.

[Brenda]

Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:

Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:

if you don't want babies, then stop having sex. Is that what the women tell the men?

goddamn, will no one give me a direct answer to this?

I think women love to say this to men. And, I think it should apply to women, too.

Euhmm, no?
I never said that and I never will either.

I thought you were the one to tell the ladies to keep their legs closed if they don't want to get pregnant?

[Chumley]

Brenda Brenda:

Sometimes you just never see your one night stand again...

"what was your name again?"
"not important hun, just do what you were doing and don't stop"

But that is exactly the kind of irresponsible behavior I am talking about.

[Brenda]

Chumley Chumley:

Brenda Brenda:

Sometimes you just never see your one night stand again...

"what was your name again?"
"not important hun, just do what you were doing and don't stop"

But that is exactly the kind of irresponsible behavior I am talking about.

Exactly. You want those two to raise a kid?

[Chumley]

Brenda Brenda:

Chumley Chumley:

Brenda Brenda:

Sometimes you just never see your one night stand again...

"what was your name again?"
"not important hun, just do what you were doing and don't stop"

But that is exactly the kind of irresponsible behavior I am talking about.

Exactly. You want those two to raise a kid?

I want those two to do everything possible not to start one.
Wear the condom, use the pill.
I know it is not 100% effective, and I know you couldn't tell if they were lying about how safe they tried to be when they walk into the clinic with thier story, but the thought of ending a kids life repulses me. I don't think Morgantaler deserves and award for it.

[DerbyX]

Chumley Chumley:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Isn't that just what you propose if the women doesn't want it?

To answer honestly, yes. This entire debate is about choice and the choice resides with the women because its her body.

It is still her body if she carries the child to term. And the baby while it is indeed growing in the woman, is still part of the man. After the baby is born, she can carry on.
Look, I am not balls to the wall against abortion, and while I think it is wrong I wouldn't condemn you to hell for having one.
And to the point of the topic, I just don't think Morgantaler deserves an Order of Canada for this.

Women do make the choice to carry the baby to term then give it up for adoption. The scarcity of women giving the child up to the biological father should present some evidence that most of the men involved are in a situation where they don't want the child either. In fact it used to be a staple argument decades ago that women weren't in fact exercising choice as they were being unfairly pressured by the man to get an abortion.

The key factor is choice.

The anti-abortionists are free to set up family friendly orphanges, couselling services, whatever they want. They can make the choice to carry the baby and give it up as attractive as they want but what they can't do is shrug their shoulders and say "too bad" to any women who ultimately decides to have an abortion.

Lets switch gears a little bit. Since people have no problem with the law forcing women to have these babies, presumably for adoption if nothing else then the law should also ensure they get adopted into families.

By law all married couples names are held in a register of sorts and any child unadopted after a certain period of time is simply forced into a family whose name is drawn from the registry. Kinda like a family draft system.

Would that be fair? Would having the gov't forcing families to adopt children they don't want be any worse then forcing women to have babies they don't want. Afterall its in the best interest of the child to grow up in a stable family (or so they say). Sure alot of people won't like the fact they are being forced to do it but what the hell, they'll just have to suck it up and accept it.

Fairs fair. If you are against abortion then you should be held responsible for these children, hell you should be running up to the plate with offers.

[Chumley]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Chumley Chumley:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Isn't that just what you propose if the women doesn't want it?

To answer honestly, yes. This entire debate is about choice and the choice resides with the women because its her body.

It is still her body if she carries the child to term. And the baby while it is indeed growing in the woman, is still part of the man. After the baby is born, she can carry on.
Look, I am not balls to the wall against abortion, and while I think it is wrong I wouldn't condemn you to hell for having one.
And to the point of the topic, I just don't think Morgantaler deserves an Order of Canada for this.

Women do make the choice to carry the baby to term then give it up for adoption. The scarcity of women giving the child up to the biological father should present some evidence that most of the men involved are in a situation where they don't want the child either. In fact it used to be a staple argument decades ago that women weren't in fact exercising choice as they were being unfairly pressured by the man to get an abortion.

The key factor is choice.

The anti-abortionists are free to set up family friendly orphanges, couselling services, whatever they want. They can make the choice to carry the baby and give it up as attractive as they want but what they can't do is shrug their shoulders and say "too bad" to any women who ultimately decides to have an abortion.

Lets switch gears a little bit. Since people have no problem with the law forcing women to have these babies, presumably for adoption if nothing else then the law should also ensure they get adopted into families.

By law all married couples names are held in a register of sorts and any child unadopted after a certain period of time is simply forced into a family whose name is drawn from the registry. Kinda like a family draft system.

Would that be fair? Would having the gov't forcing families to adopt children they don't want be any worse then forcing women to have babies they don't want. Afterall its in the best interest of the child to grow up in a stable family (or so they say). Sure alot of people won't like the fact they are being forced to do it but what the hell, they'll just have to suck it up and accept it.

Fairs fair. If you are against abortion then you should be held responsible for these children, hell you should be running up to the plate with offers.

Hey that reminds me of a marriage arguement from a while back.
I think you might be on to something, but I would change it slightly.
Anyone who gets married should do so with the intent of having kids. If you don't have kids you get to raise one. That way people will get married for the purpose of having kids, and people will think twice before getting married because there would be more serious repercussions to doing something they haven't thought out.
Might avoid a lot year long marriages that way.