should abortion be legal?

[Olthar]

In essence - protection fails all the time, and it's not the woman's fault. Forcing the woman to carry a child that was a resultant of failed protection is hence coercive - against her will.

Consent to sex =! consent to pregnancy.

I'm going to get jumped for this, I know it.

*Fearful person is fearful*

I agree that a woman should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Why, then, should a man be forced to pay for a child based on the same logic?

That's not really the point of this thread. If you want to discuss that, start a new thread about it.

[Nua Corda]

If I pay for gas with my credit card, and the gas station attendant uses a piggyback device he installed on the pump to steal my identity, should he be charged with theft? I consented to using my credit card to buy gas, didn't I?

You, in fact, consented to insert your credit card into the willing gas station pump. The intercourse was consensual.

What if I put my credit card in it's cash slot?

[Mavorpen]

If they don't have the forethought to realize having sex could likely lead to pregnancy, that's not my fault. Sex is designed to achieve pregnancy. Sidewalks are not designed to be hit by a car while walking. Again, never said it should be completely banned.

In humans, sex is not designed to achieve pregnancy. Hence why human females have varying levels of fertility. Lrn2biology

See above.

It doesn't address anything.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I'm going to get jumped for this, I know it.

*Fearful person is fearful*

I agree that a woman should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Why, then, should a man be forced to pay for a child based on the same logic?

That's not really the point of this thread. If you want to discuss that, start a new thread about it.

Yes, but in a new thread you wouldn't have several pages of my rather boisterously defending women's right to abortion. I would, in short order, be rendered into little more than quivering meat.

[Neutraligon]

In essence - protection fails all the time, and it's not the woman's fault. Forcing the woman to carry a child that was a resultant of failed protection is hence coercive - against her will.

Consent to sex =! consent to pregnancy.

I'm going to get jumped for this, I know it.

*Fearful person is fearful*

I agree that a woman should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Why, then, should a man be forced to pay for a child based on the same logic?

Actually dependent on circumstance I don't think he should be. If in the case of rape, and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay for support. If in the case that the woman wants an abortion, but he does not and the woman (free of coercion) decides to keep it, then again he should pay either by keeping the child himself, or in the case that custody is given to the mother he should pay child care. If in the case of sabotage and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay. In the case were he has made his feeling known on his desire to not have a child I don't think he should. I am personally very supportive of the government and or charities aiding in the raising of a child through money.

[Nua Corda]

I'm going to get jumped for this, I know it.

*Fearful person is fearful*

I agree that a woman should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Why, then, should a man be forced to pay for a child based on the same logic?

Actually dependent on circumstance I don't think he should be. If in the case of rape, and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay for support. If in the case that the woman wants an abortion, but he does not, then again he should pay either by keeping the child himself, or in the case that custody is given to the mother he should pay child care. If in the case of sabotage and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay. In the case were he has made his feeling known on his desire to not have a child I don't think he should. I am personally very supportive of the government and or charities aiding in the raising of a child through money.

Agreed. With a proper nanny state, there should be no need for child support. It takes a village nation to raise a child, afterall.

[The Emerald Dawn]

I'm going to get jumped for this, I know it.

*Fearful person is fearful*

I agree that a woman should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Why, then, should a man be forced to pay for a child based on the same logic?

Actually dependent on circumstance I don't think he should be. If in the case of rape, and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay for support. If in the case that the woman wants an abortion, but he does not, then again he should pay either by keeping the child himself, or in the case that custody is given to the mother he should pay child care. If in the case of sabotage and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay. In the case were he has made his feeling known on his desire to not have a child I don't think he should. I am personally very supportive of the government and or charities aiding in the raising of a child through money.

Part of this is a problem though. If he wants a baby, and she doesn't, in no way shape or form should she be forced to have the baby. If she wants an abortion, it's an abortion. That should be absolute. It's the other side I'm curious on.

[Swirbland]

What if someone decides they do not want to have a child, due to a change in circumstance?

[Olthar]

That's not really the point of this thread. If you want to discuss that, start a new thread about it.

Yes, but in a new thread you wouldn't have several pages of my rather boisterously defending women's right to abortion. I would, in short order, be rendered into little more than quivering meat.

That's no excuse for a threadjack.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Yes, but in a new thread you wouldn't have several pages of my rather boisterously defending women's right to abortion. I would, in short order, be rendered into little more than quivering meat.

That's no excuse for a threadjack.

It isn't a threadjack. It still is about the legality of abortions. I'm not "BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MEN"ing this, I'm asking a continuation of the main question.

[Vaklor]

What is getting pregnant when young?

"Getting" is the problem word in your thinking, it seems to imply an active desire to enter into the state of something. "Getting high", "getting laid", "getting plastered".

A better word would be "becoming". What is becoming pregnant when young? Exactly what it says on the tin. It doesn't necessarily imply they wanted it, or they didn't. The ones that didn't wish to become pregnant, or don't wish to continue to be pregnant, will seek an abortion. The ones that don't care they have become pregnant or wished to be pregnant will allow the pregnancy to go to term.

But that's exactly what I'm saying. The ones that want a child will keep it, and the ones that do not will have an abortion. I simply said that surely they must realize the risk, I did not say they should be punished or forced to live with unwanted side-effects.

[Neutraligon]

Unless someone sets fire to your house, you chose to set your house on fire. Ban fire extinguishers.

Nice strawman there. Because I totally said abortion should be banned, and fetuses are totally like fires, amirite?

They chose to have sex. I didn't dispute this. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. Do you now want to argue that consent to walking down he street is consent to being hit by a drunk driver?

If they don't have the forethought to realize having sex could likely lead to pregnancy, that's not my fault. Sex is designed to achieve pregnancy. Sidewalks are not designed to be hit by a car while walking. Again, never said it should be completely banned.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

See above.

No sex sometimes leads to pregnancy, and consent to sex does not mean consent to pregnancy, especially when people purposely attempt to prevent said pregnancy.

Then get an abortion.

Condoms break. You accidentally skip a pill. Now what?

Get an abortion.

The police consent to be shot. Therefore, ban medical treatment for gunshot wounds.

Because I totally said abortion should be banned.

Cut yourself with a knife? Shouldn't have chosen to cut tomatoes.

Making snarky remarks sure will solve everything. Sex is built around pregnancy. A kitchen knife is not built around accidentally cutting yourself.

Since I haven't got an answer to how would it be dealt with, how would you deal witht he fact that banning abortion would just move it back to the black market for poor women?

This is like the fifth time I've had to say I never said abortion should be banned.

In essence - protection fails all the time, and it's not the woman's fault. Forcing the woman to carry a child that was a resultant of failed protection is hence coercive - against her will.

Consent to sex =! consent to pregnancy.

If the protection fails, then get an abortion.

If I pay for gas with my credit card, and the gas station attendant uses a piggyback device he installed on the pump to steal my identity, should he be charged with theft? I consented to using my credit card to buy gas, didn't I?

That's ridiculous and you know it. Having sex is very different than stealing someone's identity. Why do you think that I wish to apply my thinking on this ONE issue to everything else? You would not have known about this piggyback device. Surely you must realize that there is the risk of pregnancy in sex. But, again, let me state it: IF YOU WANT AN ABORTION, THEN FUCKING GET ONE

Sorry, the excuse that a woman who had sex therefore consents to pregnancy and should therefore carry the baby to term is often used by the "pro-life" side as an argument. We made an assumption that since you were arguing consent to sex was in essence consent to pregnancy, we followed along with the most common conclusion of said though, which is she should thus be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.

[Vaklor]

What if someone decides they do not want to have a child, due to a change in circumstance?

Then they could get an abortion.

[Ifreann]

Cut yourself with a knife? Shouldn't have chosen to cut tomatoes.

House gets blown up? Shouldn't have chosen to live in a warzone.

Constant tentacle sex? Shouldn't have chosen to live near Olthar.

[Neutraligon]

Actually dependent on circumstance I don't think he should be. If in the case of rape, and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay for support. If in the case that the woman wants an abortion, but he does not, then again he should pay either by keeping the child himself, or in the case that custody is given to the mother he should pay child care. If in the case of sabotage and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay. In the case were he has made his feeling known on his desire to not have a child I don't think he should. I am personally very supportive of the government and or charities aiding in the raising of a child through money.

Part of this is a problem though. If he wants a baby, and she doesn't, in no way shape or form should she be forced to have the baby. If she wants an abortion, it's an abortion. That should be absolute. It's the other side I'm curious on.

And I answered that in the above quote. If he has made his opinion clear that he does not want a child, and he has done nothing to force the woman to get pregnant (ie rape and the such) then I don't think he should have to pay. I do think the government has a vested interest in children and thus should have to pay. I however do think that the man should take classes on the proper use of contraceptives so that the problem does not occur again.

[Olthar]

House gets blown up? Shouldn't have chosen to live in a warzone.

Constant tentacle sex? Shouldn't have chosen to live near Olthar.

But why would anyone not enjoy that?

[Ifreann]

Constant tentacle sex? Shouldn't have chosen to live near Olthar.

But why would anyone not enjoy that?

Sometimes people want to do other things. Things like sleep.

[Neutraligon]

But why would anyone not enjoy that?

Sometimes people want to do other things. Things like sleep.

What is this word, I've never heard it before. S-l-e-e-p

[Kamchastkia]

Part of this is a problem though. If he wants a baby, and she doesn't, in no way shape or form should she be forced to have the baby. If she wants an abortion, it's an abortion. That should be absolute. It's the other side I'm curious on.

And I answered that in the above quote. If he has made his opinion clear that he does not want a child, and he has done nothing to force the woman to get pregnant (ie rape and the such) then I don't think he should have to pay. I do think the government has a vested interest in children and thus should have to pay. I however do think that the man should take classes on the proper use of contraceptives so that the problem does not occur again.

(Referring to US in this post)

Woah, woah, woah. You want the government to do something to support mothers? You evil no good socialist! You want to get rid of our military and give money to stuff that ACTUALLY accomplishes things for the good of the people! HOW DARE YOU!

[Individuality-ness]

Sometimes people want to do other things. Things like sleep.

What is this word, I've never heard it before. S-l-e-e-p

Apparently it's a state in which you experience something called REM and have hallucinations. What's up with that?

[Neutraligon]

And I answered that in the above quote. If he has made his opinion clear that he does not want a child, and he has done nothing to force the woman to get pregnant (ie rape and the such) then I don't think he should have to pay. I do think the government has a vested interest in children and thus should have to pay. I however do think that the man should take classes on the proper use of contraceptives so that the problem does not occur again.

(Referring to US in this post)

Woah, woah, woah. You want the government to do something to support mothers? You evil no good socialist! You want to get rid of our military and give money to stuff that ACTUALLY accomplishes things for the good of the people! HOW DARE YOU!

Neut is ashamed *hangs head in shame...for less then a second, well now that that's done with.

[Neutraligon]

What is this word, I've never heard it before. S-l-e-e-p

Apparently it's a state in which you experience something called REM and have hallucinations. What's up with that?

That sounds scary, I really don't want to hallucinate. Ah well, I don't have to worry about it anyway.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Actually dependent on circumstance I don't think he should be. If in the case of rape, and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay for support. If in the case that the woman wants an abortion, but he does not, then again he should pay either by keeping the child himself, or in the case that custody is given to the mother he should pay child care. If in the case of sabotage and the woman decides to keep the child, he should pay. In the case were he has made his feeling known on his desire to not have a child I don't think he should. I am personally very supportive of the government and or charities aiding in the raising of a child through money.

Part of this is a problem though. If he wants a baby, and she doesn't, in no way shape or form should she be forced to have the baby. If she wants an abortion, it's an abortion. That should be absolute. It's the other side I'm curious on.

This was what I was referring to.

[Alowwvia]

Alright, I'm back

Anyone got any highlights from this shitslinging match?

[Olthar]

But why would anyone not enjoy that?

Sometimes people want to do other things. Things like sleep.

I don't understand.