Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>Wow, Weasel. Do you hate everyone this much or should I be honored?</STRONG>
I would edit this out but it's been quoted, so this is the best I can do.
I want to apologize for this statement. It was childish and ridiculous of me. (And it's not just because the mod stepped in, either )
In addition: I won't apologize for my debating tactics; but I do apologize if Weasel or anyone else took my sarcasm as a personal attack. It was not intended as such. It was merely intended to state a point in a clear and strong way. In the future I will try to be more clear in my intentions.
Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>Let me put it this way: If I see someone with a knife at someone else's throat, I'm going to do what I can to prevent a potential tragedy. Because I believe that murder is morally wrong. Same with theft, physical/emotional abuse, or any other kind of abuse of human life. Any kind of violence affects life as a whole. Something like abortion is a general moral wrong. This goes way beyond legalistic codes of behavior; it extends to the general dynamic of life itself. There cannot be so much death and acceptance of death without it affecting the life energy of the cosmos in some way. Just as acts of love affect the life force of the entire world, even if such acts remain unseen and unknown to conscious knowledge. Everything each person does affects all of us becaue we are all connected. Does this make sense at all? I don't mean to sound weird and esoteric...</STRONG>
You lost me at the last part, but I can see where the difference in our opinions is at.
It's in the definition of when a fetus is a human. I can only go on what doctors say. (My belief is it's a child when it's not part of the mother anymore) The doctors say ?(I believe the 9th week, I will have to check) Being they are doctors, they would know more than I would.
"Vile and evil, yes. But, That's Weasel" From BS's book, MD 20/20: Fine Wines of Rocky Flop.
Originally posted by Minerva:
<STRONG>I don't argue with this, though some of them are rightfully, and some are not.
It seems you are thinking having baby for woman is similar to her appendix out, unless there's any complications. It is not. Once she got pregnant, it will not go away mentally and physically, regardless she gave birth or had abortion (or miscarried), or if she wanted a baby or not.
If you think a man can tell her, "Don't worry, I'll look after the baby. You just carry the baby for 9 months, and forget about it all once you give birth", and that should be fine, then you are wrong. It may the case for some men (I repeat, "some" men), but not women. Never.
I suggest you to go and meet real pregnant women and see what it really is like for a few weeks. You obviously don't know the real life of pregnant women.</STRONG>
OK...i just gt back, and there is still at least apage to go...but do NOT assume that i have no prior knowledge on this subject. please do not go into the terrirtory of assuming that i know not of one side or th other. please just keep this as disciplinary as possible adn fair as possible.
I would be a serial killer if i didn't have such a strong distaste for manual labor
It's in the definition of when a fetus is a human. I can only go on what doctors say. (My belief is it's a child when it's not part of the mother anymore) The doctors say ?(I believe the 9th week, I will have to check) Being they are doctors, they would know more than I would.
IIRC the embryo becomes known as a foetus at 12 weeks. It remains called a foetus until it is born. The foetus is considered 'viable' ie capable of possibly sustaining life outside of the mother's womb at 20 weeks, though I believe the youngest to survive in the UK was 21 weeks.
It is only in the last couple of years the 'viability' has reduced - it used to be 28 weeks, meaning that abortion could legally be performed upto 28 weeks as it was not considered possible the baby could survive younger than that.
Now with modern technology, babies can.
Parachute for sale, like new! Never opened!
Guinness, black goes with everything.
does anyone know if a civil suit for a wrongful death has been filed for an abortion? particularly in relation to this topic, filed from the father of the baby?
I believe there was a case in the US a couple of years ago. The court decided that they could not force the woman to go through with the pregnancy against her will. Unfortunately I cannot remember the names involved - sorry. IMHO I believe this was a just decision. I am not supporting abortion here, just expressing the opinion that if they had forced her to have the child, they would have been taking away her freedom of choice - though not a happy subject, abortion is legal.
I know many will argue for the freedom of choice here for the man, and indeed the unborn child. As I have said before, it takes two to conceive the child but only one will bring it into the world - the responsibility is with both to make sure this situation does not arise in the first place...
Parachute for sale, like new! Never opened!
Guinness, black goes with everything.
Originally posted by nael:
<STRONG>OK...i just gt back, and there is still at least apage to go...but do NOT assume that i have no prior knowledge on this subject. please do not go into the terrirtory of assuming that i know not of one side or th other. please just keep this as disciplinary as possible adn fair as possible.</STRONG>
I am assuming you have knowledge, but only the paper knowledge and theory, not the real life knowledge. Also, I am suggesting you are not giving fair view/opinion at all. Don't tell me I am not fair. I am only giving the other side of view to your more male oriented opinion.
Sorry, but I had enough of this conversation, and I do not see the point to continue this discussion.
"Strength without wisdom falls by its own weight."
A word to the wise is sufficient Minerva (Semi-retired SYMer)
Originally posted by Minerva:
<STRONG>I am assuming you have knowledge, but only the paper knowledge and theory, not the real life knowledge. Also, I am suggesting you are not giving fair view/opinion at all. Don't tell me I am not fair. I am only giving the other side of view to your more male oriented opinion.
Sorry, but I had enough of this conversation, and I do not see the point to continue this discussion.</STRONG>
do you honestly see no point in this discussion? well, obviously no one will change their mind and no one will effect change, but that's true for any of these threads. it's just a good spirited topic and one that i think is well worth talking about. as i stated before, i think it is important for people to realize that we are gettign the short end of the stick.
and you are still makign assumptions about me. i have been on and had friends on all sides of these issues. i even took care of a friend of mine who was directed by her physician to stay in bed as much as possible due to some possible problem (don't knwo the same, i'm not a MD), the father had skipped out and i waited on her hand and foot for about a month, drove her to the hospital for all her appointments and to have the baby.
and you can probably guess based on my interest in this topic what other ways i have been involved on this issue.
I would be a serial killer if i didn't have such a strong distaste for manual labor
Originally posted by Weasel:
<STRONG>You lost me at the last part, but I can see where the difference in our opinions is at.
It's in the definition of when a fetus is a human. I can only go on what doctors say. (My belief is it's a child when it's not part of the mother anymore) The doctors say ?(I believe the 9th week, I will have to check) Being they are doctors, they would know more than I would.</STRONG>
To all, not just to Weasel; I'm just using his post as a general reference
See, it's like I said before: I don't care when the fetus DOES "become" a human person; to me that is immaterial. The important thing that I think everyone overlooks or doesn't understand or won't accept is that the fetus is MEANT to "become" a human person at some point in time. IMO no one has any "right" to stop that process of developing a fully human life. An embryo or fetus is not like a double chin or unshapely nose that is to be gotten rid of with cosmetic surgery because it is causing an annoyance.
All I've been trying to do here is to present the minority view in a logical manner, because as I've said before, it's not often seen. And while I don't expect anyone to share this viewpoint, I hope I have encouraged people to understand and respect it a bit more, by representing it in a bit of a better way than the usual method of marching and preaching
It seems to me that the original question in this post was about the rights of fathers when a mother conceives a child he didn't want.
First, if you guys are not using condoms, you should. Not only do they help to prevent pregnancy, but they also prevent STD's and are safer for the woman. Birth control pills are not 100% effective. If the woman takes them properly, which means at the same time every day, they are 98% effective. Few people are able to follow a medication regimen that perfectly. The effectiveness drops quite a bit when the pill is taken at different times, or a day is missed. A lot of women get pregnant on the pill. Also, the pill is known to cause many medical problems (for me the possibility of having a stroke, since I got migraines on the pill every single day), not to mention increased cancer risk, and other serious problems. I ask the men on this board--if the condom was known to cause testicular or prostrate cancer, would you ever use it? Of course, condoms are not 100% effective, either, but if you are sleeping with someone, there is always a risk of unplanned pregnancy. You pays your money and you takes your chances.
Second, in the USA, if a man gets custody of a child, the woman will have to pay child support. So the idea that the man will have full financial responsibility for a child that the women does not want is not accurate. I agree that the courts are probably still biased in regards to awarding custody, but financial responsibility falls under the same set of rules for both parents.
Third, I am a child of divorce. My father regretted his deadbeat actions later on (after we were grown up and it didn't matter anymore), but he deliberately moved to other states where my mother could not get him to pay child support. Or, if she succeeded in trying to get some support, he would quit his job, so that he had no income to take it from. The damage he did to our family is immense, and my little brothers are still paying a heavy price. The laws that have been enacted in the last few years came too late for us, and were enacted only because so few fathers willingly took the minimal financial responsibility for their children. I have so many friends who grew up in similar circumstances, and I can honestly say that none of them had mothers who abandoned them, though I'm sure the exceptions to the rule exist. However, I think it is more rare, because our culture is very unforgiving of women who fail to live up to their roles as mothers--the disgust that a woman would face who willingly abandoned her children is far greater than for a man. An extreme example of this is when you look at cases where someone kills their children. It seems to me that just about every week you hear about a divorced man who goes and kills his wife, her relatives, and his own children. But, it's the cases like that women in North Carolina who drowned her kids that get a universal public outcry.
Last, I think that arguing the abortion debate on here is a waste of time. Everyone has strong feelings one way or the other, from which they are unlikely to change their minds. However, I do recommend reading Margaret Atwood's book, The Handmaid's Tale, if you would like to experience a dystopia where women are forced to bear children for others.
“I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity.” - Edgar Allen Poe
actually...my main focus wasn't on people payign for their children, of course they should, i don't think there are many who think otherwise.
my main point was on whether or not the child is half mine or all hers?
I would be a serial killer if i didn't have such a strong distaste for manual labor
See--but then you're getting into the abortion issue again.
I think there are two ways that people view life.
On the one side are what I've heard called "Essentialists"--that is, they believe that a person is born with a soul, and everything is downhill from there. In other words, if a person is born with a soul, then the act of living and making mistakes will only defile it. Therefore, no creature is more perfect than a baby. No life is more valuable.
On the other side are "Existentialists", and by this I mean that they believe you create your own soul. In this point of view, the living person with experiences and a history is more valuable than a baby.
The two points of view cannot be reconciled. The issue of the "mother's body" is an attempt to reconcile opposing viewpoints. If the fertilized egg could be removed, grown in a jar and given to the man that wants it, then maybe none of this would matter, but the fact is a woman has to carry the child. Pregnancy always carries the possibility of complications, including death, and it doesn't seem possible to find a fair way to force a woman take all that risk for a child she does not want--plus there's no guarantee that the father will actually assume responsibility when the time comes, since people are so unpredictable.
The bushpeople of the Kalahari practiced infanticide. They used similar reasoning to ours--they said that if the child never took a first breath, it was never really "alive." Therefore, smothering it was not murder. They had to practice infanticide because they are hunter-gatherers who walk many miles each day, and if the woman got pregnant before her other child was 5 years old, she would not be able to carry around two children or provide milk for both of them, and both would die.
Sometimes there are necessary evils. Deep down, I believe that human life should be considered sacred, but if you adhere to that wholeheartedly, then not only would abortion be illegal, but also the death penalty, police, the military, and war.
“I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity.” - Edgar Allen Poe
Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG> IMO no one has any "right" to stop that process of developing a fully human life.</STRONG>
IMO no one has any "right" to tell another person what they can and cannot do.
I will stop here because I believe this will just go around and around.
Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG> I hope I have encouraged people to understand and respect it a bit more, by representing it in a bit of a better way than the usual method of marching and preaching
</STRONG>
I will say you are one, if not the only one, to ever admit to me that the usual method of marching and preaching is a waste of time.
And I do respect your veiws. If I didn't I would be two-faced. " no one has the right to tell you what to do." You see what I mean?
"Vile and evil, yes. But, That's Weasel" From BS's book, MD 20/20: Fine Wines of Rocky Flop.
)
