Support NeoGAF

[Kazerei]

It's a shame you think this way. The other side thinks the same way, only championing different values. "Women get to have the final say over their bodies, end of discussion," versus, "No one is allowed to deny life and opportunity on an innocent, end of discussion."

When you fail to realize and acknowledge how complicated the issue is, no wonder you don't see any progress. Both sides are in gridlock and not giving an inch. The current administration, whatever it is at the given moment, attempts to reflect only their values when a sensible solution is completely possible and practical.

What would you consider "progress"? What discussion is there really? The arguments you're presenting aren't new. Roe v. Wade was pretty clear way back in 1973.

 

[Metalingus5150]

It's really a shame how much some people in the country hate women.

 

[Armaros]

Even if we were the reach the point the fetus could be teleported outside a pregnant person into some incubator harmlessly, you can bet there will be a "pro-uterus" movement or whatever to keep the baby inside the person as some kinda housing/tenant rights for the fetus in order to control women anyway.

The argument would probably be about how it's unnatural and an affront to God to 'give birth' to children that way.

 

[badblue]

No you're just saying a man should be allowed to force a woman to go through that because of his feelings

Feelings are a powerful thing. Almost every thing we do is because of feelings. And I know that standing there, while a woman that is carrying my child, a child that I want to raise goes to abort it, would be one of the worst things in my life. And to have that discounted with a "to bad, so sad" is fucking despicable.

I would love to see you list another thing, with a higher fatality rate, that is involuntary.

If you honestly believe that ZERO women should be forced to lose their lives, then you should be against a law that allows men to prevent an abortion. Because abortions are fourteen times safer than childbirth. Childbirth does pose a risk of death. And it is guaranteed that if a law like the one articulated in Arkansas exists, women will eventually die as a direct result from it. Even if the chance of dying in childbirth is small, it would only be a matter of time, before a death results.

Even if the chance of dying in abortion is small, it would only be a matter of time, before a death results. So I guess we should not allow it then, right?

 

[A Link to the Past]

Feelings are a powerful thing. Almost every thing we do is because of feelings. And I know that standing there, while a woman that is carrying my child, a child that I want to raise goes to abort it, would be one of the worst things in my life. And to have that discounted with a "to bad, so sad" is fucking despicable.



Even if the chance of dying in abortion is small, it would only be a matter of time, before a death results. So I guess we should not allow it then, right?

The law forces women to do something more dangerous.

 

[Kazerei]

Even if the chance of dying in abortion is small, it would only be a matter of time, before a death results. So I guess we should not allow it then, right?

This is an illogical refutation. The previous argument was not "there's a chance of dying in pregnancy, therefore don't allow pregnancy". So your retort, "there's a chance of dying in abortion, therefore don't allow abortion" does not follow.

Ultimately everyone should be allowed to choose what risks they take with their own health and wellbeing.

 

[Irnbru]

Feelings are a powerful thing. Almost every thing we do is because of feelings. And I know that standing there, while a woman that is carrying my child, a child that I want to raise goes to abort it, would be one of the worst things in my life. And to have that discounted with a "to bad, so sad" is fucking despicable.



Even if the chance of dying in abortion is small, it would only be a matter of time, before a death results. So I guess we should not allow it then, right?

Why is it so hard for you to understand it's not YOUR body. You do not have unliateral control over a women's body and the choices over her body. And using straw man arguments ain't going to help your case. A women should have a choice over what happens in her body. Just becuase you stuck your dick in a woman doesn't give you rights or monetary rights over her, it's fucking draconian. Yes, it's bad feeling, this is why you should have open communication with your spouse, etc to understand her feelings and your own feelings. Ultimately, it's her body, not yours, this is the fundamental basis of being pro-choice. A women has the right to do with her body as she damn well pleases.

 

[badblue]

Why is it so hard for you to understand it's not YOUR body. You do not have unliateral control over a women's body and the choices over her body. And using straw man arguments ain't going to help your case. A women should have a choice over what happens in her body. Just becuase you stuck your dick in a woman doesn't give you rights or monetary rights over her, it's fucking draconian. Yes, it's bad feeling, this is why you should have open communication with your spouse, etc to understand her feelings and your own feelings. Ultimately, it's her body, not yours, this is the fundamental basis of being pro-choice. A women has the right to do with her body as she damn well pleases.

I know very well, that it is not my body, and that it is not my say what she does with her body. But that is my child. And I should get a say with what happens with my child, is there something wrong with that? Because it's pretty shitty that a woman could legally give away a child out of her fathers arms.

I would not even get a say about it if I did not want the child. But hey, as you said: Sticking my dick in her mean I should not get any monetary rights over her.

She would sure as hell get them over me. No matter what steps I took. Sperm donors can get sued for child support
And even rape victims are forced to pay. He didn't even know he had a child until he was served with papers.


If we can't pay for whatever reason, we can go to jail. We lose liberties. For some men it gets so bad, that they commit suicide because what hope do they have?
(Oddly enough, there doesn't seem to be any official study done on this that I can find. A google search says 21 men a week commit suicide over this though.)

You want to call this a straw man as well, go ahead. This is an area where currently, women get 100% of the say (in western society) and men get 0.

Let's say hypotheticly, this law passes and legally forced her to not have an abortion, she may very well be able to claim exclusive custody 80% of the time. And I might get a weekly visitation. Because really, any woman that had to go through this would probably fight for custody, and probably limit as much as she could the visitations we would get. So while we would have our living child, we would not have won anything more then that.

 

[Llyranor]

Wow the MRA vibes.

Are we comparing the right of a living breathing child's right to get parental support to get its basic needs met vs a man's right to impede on a woman's bodily autonomy? Until technology allows you to transfer the pregnancy into your own womb, any attempt to remove the choice from her is a matter of controlling her and having her rights overridden.

And bodily autonomy is pretty important. It's the same reason civilized society does not harvest organs from criminals without their consent. It's why we can't even forcibly give a blood transfusion to an adult even if it'd save their life.

 

[Angelus Errare]

It's crazy to see people in the case of arguing martial rape men should have a say.

 

[Jenov]

I know very well, that it is not my body, and that it is not my say what she does with her body. But that is my child. And I should get a say with what happens with my child, is there something wrong with that? Because it's pretty shitty that a woman could legally give away a child out of her fathers arms.

I would not even get a say about it if I did not want the child. But hey, as you said: Sticking my dick in her mean I should not get any monetary rights over her.

She would sure as hell get them over me. No matter what steps I took. Sperm donors can get sued for child support
And even rape victims are forced to pay. He didn't even know he had a child until he was served with papers.


If we can't pay for whatever reason, we can go to jail. We lose liberties. For some men it gets so bad, that they commit suicide because what hope do they have?
(Oddly enough, there doesn't seem to be any official study done on this that I can find. A google search says 21 men a week commit suicide over this though.)

You want to call this a straw man as well, go ahead. This is an area where currently, women get 100% of the say (in western society) and men get 0.

Let's say hypotheticly, this law passes and legally forced her to not have an abortion, she may very well be able to claim exclusive custody 80% of the time. And I might get a weekly visitation. Because really, any woman that had to go through this would probably fight for custody, and probably limit as much as she could the visitations we would get. So while we would have our living child, we would not have won anything more then that.

Ugh dude. Child support payments are not for the woman, she isn't getting monetary rights over you, it's the child that is. If she were to die and the child went to another caretaker the child would still be entitled to child support from you, because support belongs to and follows the child. In the meantime, you're demanding rights over a woman's body and quoting half-assed google searches and an article about a legislative adoption loophole that needs fixing. And yeah, very MRA vibes.

 

[ShyMel]

What is the point of discussing a hypothetical women in a good marriage getting an abortion randomly without talking to her husband about it in a thread about RAPE victims potentially getting sued by their RAPIST for getting an abortion? Women get abortions mainly due to birth control failure, not being able to support a child, rape, or the pregnancy possibly endangering their health. We don't get them for fun or to make our husbands upset. Rape victims absolutely like all other women deserve the right to end pregnancies and should not be forced to carry the end result of their trauma.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Republicans America.

 

[Schwowsers]

Guys, this is actual "fake news." Read the act, which is available here, or just check the Snopes write up. First, the woman having or attempting to have an abortion is not liable (page 4, lines 1-4). It targets abortion providers. Second, the act specifically mentions that "civil damages shall not be awarded to a plaintiff if the pregnancy resulted from the criminal conduct of the plaintiff" (page 5, lines 3-4). Third, it only bans "dismemberment abortions" and "does not prohibit an abortion by any other method for any reason, including rape or incest" (page 4, lines 11-12).

These facts don't excuse the law, however. It still bans what is apparently the safest form of abortion even in cases of rape and incest, possibly leading women to choose less safe alternative methods. It could also still allow a rapist husband to sue an abortion provider or to prevent the procedure altogether since it would be difficult to prove the pregnancy resulted from rape.

We should be more mindful of spreading misinformation as it only gives credibility to cries of "fake news!"

 

[Veal]

Fuck this stupid state.