Current Events > Japan says women will need consent of their partner to have abortion...

(+) Yeah! (+)

Will_VIIII posted...

That's a risk one takes when having sex.

Don't want to be on the hook for child support? Then don't have sex.

This is just the pro-life argument but in the other direction

Giblet_Enjoyer posted...

This is just the pro-life argument but in the other direction

I mean yeah I guess but I'm not going to randomly hook up with women I don't really know on the chance they get pregnant and want to keep the child. I do want children someday but not under those circumstances.

It's something I'd discuss with a partner beforehand anyway.

Gamerguymass posted...

The fact that you think someone being against abortion or thinking a man should have some say is the same thing as making women slaves is just so mind bogglingly stupid that I can't even comprehend it.

The fact that people like you exist who refuse to see the anti-abortion campaign for its end goals is how we got in this mess in the first place.

Gamerguymass posted...

This why no one in real life takes progressives seriously.

The fact that you think someone being against abortion or thinking a man should have some say is the same thing as making women slaves is just so mind bogglingly stupid that I can't even comprehend it.

You can have a say when you're carrying a body inside your body. Until then, shut the fuck up.

Complete agency over your body should not be a "progressive" view. It shouldn't be polticial. It shouldn't even be an opinion that can be disagreed with.

You clearly don't care about freedom.

If women don't have full say over whether or not to carry a fetus to term, then they are basically not even human beings. I am fortunate to not have been born female and have to deal with people literally thinking they should have any say over my body.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Once again, the mother also carries financial burden for the child.

With a father and mother both on the hook for the care of a child, to say that "forcing the father is cruel" is presuming that the mother is raising her child specifically to be cruel to the father. It's not about men.

SHRlKE posted...

I mean generally Im on the side of more mens rights but being a parent and providing finances cause of the law are two different things. You can most definitely have a kid and not be a dad to them if you chose. This sounds like maybe we are getting into semantics though.

Providing finances to support your child is a essential part of being a parent, whether you are there or not.

You're moving the goal posts though.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

When men can get pregnant, they can choose whether to keep the baby. And yes I am repeating myself, because it really seems like you're not getting it. I said it before the lack of choice on the part of the father is the lack of their capacity to carry.

Name an alternative that is not cruel to the mother.

CyricZ posted...

When men can get pregnant, they can choose whether to keep the baby. And yes I am repeating myself, because it really seems like you're not getting it. I said it before the lack of choice on the part of the father is the lack of their capacity to carry.

Name an alternative that is not cruel to the mother.

Men can get pregnant.

Oswaldo posted...

Men can get pregnant.

I recognize that in my efforts to simplify the dialogue that I wasn't being inclusive of trans men and nonbinary parents. If it pleases you I will resume in inclusive dialogue.

But in short, this is not the gotcha you think it is. It's not like I'd trust you to worry about inclusion unless you had an advantage to get out of it.

Oswaldo posted...

Providing finances to support your child is a essential part of being a parent, whether you are there or not.

You're moving the goal posts though.

Im not moving anything. This was an isolated post. If you wanna start an argument out of nowhere go whistle.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

The adoption/foster system is absolutely blitzed with problems of its own. This is not a mercy by any respect. Please tell me you're not insisting on this alternative simply because it exists, because I have a funny feeling you know that this is not a noble decision.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Fetus/child/baby/human/son/daughter/family, whatever you call it, it's the same person whether it's a "clump of cells" or not.

I mean, by this logic, a recently killed person is still alive, and a person, because not all of the cells are dead yet. There's not really a scientific angle that you're coming from, here.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

But it's not remotely a long term solution for this issue. It's an already overwhelmed system with a lot of unique problems that apparently you just assume works.

And it still doesn't change the fact that you're trying to suggest this not for the sake of the mother, but so the father can choose to abandon the child.

It again gives power to the father for pushing the mother into a decision she may not want to make by being able to threaten abandonment. It's back to being cruel to the mother.

CyricZ posted...

The fact that people like you exist who refuse to see the anti-abortion campaign for its end goals is how we got in this mess in the first place.

No, you are just delusional in that you think there is some vast conspiracy to chain all women up as slaves.

Gamerguymass posted...

No, you are just delusional in that you think there is some vast conspiracy to chain all women up as slaves.

We did it for hundreds of years. If you think there isn't a vested interest in seeing those days return, then I'm not the delusional one.

CyricZ posted...

We did it for hundreds of years. If you think there isn't a vested interest in seeing those days return, then I'm not the delusional one.

If you think women being homemakers instead of being allowed to work is the same thing as slavery, then yes, you are the delusional one.

CyricZ posted...

I recognize that in my efforts to simplify the dialogue that I wasn't being inclusive of trans men and nonbinary parents. If it pleases you I will resume in inclusive dialogue.

But in short, this is not the gotcha you think it is. It's not like I'd trust you to worry about inclusion unless you had an advantage to get out of it.

It's weird that you typed all of that and didn't make a point.

Gamerguymass posted...

If you think women being homemakers instead of being allowed to work is the same thing as slavery, then yes, you are the delusional one.

Yes, because that's all men did to women. "Made them homemakers". Dangerously close to "not worth it" at this point.

Oswaldo posted...

It's weird that you typed all of that and didn't make a point.

It's weird that you keep coming back with new accounts, but perhaps you can tell me what point you were trying to make?

The point I made was said a good amount of times now. You keep moving the goalposts.

I'll say it again if you missed it.

Pregnancy=\=Parenthood. Only the birthgiver can go through a pregnancy. There isn't a choice based on gender.

However, a mother has the choice of being a parent when the father does not. She can keep the child and be a parent. She can put the child up for adoption and not be a parent. That is is the issue, because a father legally is not afforded the same right.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Pregnancy and childbirth is a biologically unequal situation stacked against the mother. A point I will reiterate as many times as you need me to.

Any suggestion of making it "more equal" for the father is opening the situation to abuse. Abuse that is already happening in this world right now at a considerable rate and illegally, and to suggest that it be made legal is something I don't accept.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Nothing you've offered as an alternative is not provably subject to abuse.

We are in a world where a woman's right to choose is being directly and constantly threatened and your take on the issue is "but where's mine as a man?"

Oswaldo posted...

However, a mother has the choice of being a parent when the father does not. She can keep the child and be a parent. She can put the child up for adoption and not be a parent. That is is the issue, because a father legally is not afforded the same right.

One more time. Once a father can carry and birth a child, they will have that say.

I'm aware it's not perfectly fair and equal, but as I've said, any solution I've heard up to this point is a cruelty to the mother.

And one last thing, a point that was brought up a couple times that I haven't addressed is the idea that the mother may be having a baby that the father may not want, and my simple answer to that is that that person should make their stance clear prior to sexual relations if it's that important to them, especially if they don't trust their partner to be of a similar mind.

And that's a responsibility of equality. Both partners should be making that clear if it's a dealbreaker.

One more time. Once a father can carry and birth a child, they will have that say.

One more time, pregnancy =\= parenthood

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

"Your Honor I object!"
"On what grounds?"
"Because it's devastating to my case!"

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Please reference Post #177, which is where we get into the responsibility with regards sexual relations, and both parties' responsibilities therein.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Why does it not surprise me that you don't believe better communication in relationships solves anything.

I don't know what else I can say other than what I already stated, it just doesn't feel to me that you're objectively attacking the situation.

You don't have to say anything. I've stopped taking you seriously.

CyricZ posted...

Yes, because that's all men did to women. "Made them homemakers". Dangerously close to "not worth it" at this point.

It's weird that you keep coming back with new accounts, but perhaps you can tell me what point you were trying to make?

Pretty obvious at this point that you have an astounding level of ignorance of history if you think being a housewife is the exact same thing as slavery and they were treated the same.

Gamerguymass posted...

Pretty obvious at this point that you have an astounding level of ignorance of history if you think being a housewife is the exact same thing as slavery and they were treated the same.

Pretty telling how you think I'm equating it exactly to historical slavery, since it'd be the only way your little hissy fit makes sense.

But then again, you were the one stomping into this topic "mad at progressives" because the exaggerations they use make you want to vote Republican.

CyricZ posted...

Pretty telling how you think I'm equating it exactly to historical slavery, since it'd be the only way your little hissy fit makes sense.

But then again, you were the one stomping into this topic "mad at progressives" because the exaggerations they use make you want to vote Republican.

You are the one who literally said it's enslavement of women if people are against abortion or even letting the guy have a say. You then repeatedly compared it to slavery in subsequent posts. You are the one claiming it is slavery and not differentiating from actual slavery.

And I don't know what delusions you suffer from that you think anyone was "stomping in here mad at progressives." You really suck at hyperbole. I have also never voted for a Republican in my life, so another swing and a miss.

CyricZ arguing in good faith challenge (impossible)

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I'm not the one trying to solve the problem by creating new ones.

Gamerguymass posted...

You are the one who literally said it's enslavement of women if people are against abortion

And you're the one trying to tell me "it wasn't that bad". How bad was it?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

See this is why I'm no longer really interested in engaging with you.

CyricZ posted...

I'm not the one trying to solve the problem by creating new ones.

And you're the one trying to tell me "it wasn't that bad". How bad was it?

When did I say it wasn't that bad? I said it's not the same thing as slavery. That's it.

Is it not possible for you to have any type of discussion without making stuff up and claiming people said things that they never actually said?

Gamerguymass posted...

Is it not possible for you to have any type of discussion without making stuff up and claiming people said things that they never actually said?

Now that you're done talking to the mirror, you can address me.

CyricZ posted...

Now that you're done talking to the mirror, you can address me.

I'll take that as your concession since you completely ignored the part where I pointed out how you did make up something claiming I said it when I never did.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I don't think you understand just how badly slaves had it. That is disgusting that you're even comparing this as steps towards it, as if they're even in the same ballpark now or even after several rights are taken.

Seriously.
Stfu