[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]Its like a badge of honor to be slammed by PETA lol. Just sorta wish Katy Perry wasnt talentless :(Aljosa23Did you see the above pictures? She's very talented You know, its my bad...I posted before seeing the pics :P I can tell She has ALOT of talent...would love to get to know her...and her talent better.
II_Seraphim_II's forum posts
[QUOTE="Wasdie"]
That's It I Quit School!
sSubZerOo
Fixed.
I feel stupid but it took me a sec to realize what you did there lol.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] I know life isnt fair, that's why in my initial post I said that if we truly want equality and then i went on to explain my point of view. The law states that a man has to pay child support and if, God forbid, I ever have a child with a woman that I dont want, I will pay child support and do my part because that is what the law dictates. My point was that I do not believe the law is just in this regard and was just sharing my views on how it could be amended.HoolaHoopMan
Its a simple concept that keeps flying over your head, so let's break it down.
1) When a man has sex with a woman its implied consent to raise and help any child that may result from the sex. Â This is why he is forced to pay child support by law.
2) Abortion is legal in this country as the bodily rights of the woman supersede that of the growing fetus/embryo.  This is why she can terminate the pregnancy if she chooses to, ITS HER BODY NOT THE GUYS.
Its fairly simple, the man has no say because its not his body, and he must pay child support because he consented to sex in the first place. If the man wants a say then he can come up with a way to take the fetus out of a woman and implant it in himself. Â The fact that the fetus may have half his DNA is irrelevant.Â
You know the way you broke it down did help. Thanks, while I do still feel its a bit unfair, I certainly now do realize the rationale behind the law and I can see where its coming from. Good post.This is what I dont get. Its a cyclic argument. Yes it his child, he created it, yet a woman can unilaterally decide to abort a child. Yes its her body, but its his child too. So I dont understand this double standard. When a woman wants to throw away a child I want its no longer "my child" but when she wants to keep a child I dont want, its suddenly my child. And that spiel about condoms and all that stuff could equally be applied to women. Why did she let this man ejaculate in her and then decide to keep a child if she clearly knew she wasnt capable of supporting the child on her own? You act like having sex is the guys fault. The woman can keep her legs closed too. How about women try sleeping with men who actually want to have children with them? Or atleast insist they wear condoms before intercourse.[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Yes. It is his child. He created it. And frankly dead beat dads are scum.lostrib
it's your child regardless. Life isn't fair
I know life isnt fair, that's why in my initial post I said that if we truly want equality and then i went on to explain my point of view. The law states that a man has to pay child support and if, God forbid, I ever have a child with a woman that I dont want, I will pay child support and do my part because that is what the law dictates. My point was that I do not believe the law is just in this regard and was just sharing my views on how it could be amended.[QUOTE="deeliman"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Simple fact.....reason abortion is legal is because it deals with the woman's body. Hence she has ultimate say. Not the man who isn't going to carry the baby. If you take away the woman's choice then there is no reason for abortion to be legal in the first place. If you don't want a surprise announcement.....avoid sex. Or at least use a condom to lessen the odds. Note: they are not 100%.LJS9502_basicWhat about if the woman decides to keep it but the man doesn't want that? Should he be forced to help raise/pay for him/her? Yes. It is his child. He created it. And frankly dead beat dads are scum. This is what I dont get. Its a cyclic argument. Yes it his child, he created it, yet a woman can unilaterally decide to abort a child. Yes its her body, but its his child too. So I dont understand this double standard. When a woman wants to throw away a child I want its no longer "my child" but when she wants to keep a child I dont want, its suddenly my child. And that spiel about condoms and all that stuff could equally be applied to women. Why did she let this man ejaculate in her and then decide to keep a child if she clearly knew she wasnt capable of supporting the child on her own? You act like having sex is the guys fault. The woman can keep her legs closed too. How about women try sleeping with men who actually want to have children with them? Or atleast insist they wear condoms before intercourse.
My issue is that the woman gets a get out of jail free card. If she wants the baby, she can decide to keep it knowing she is gonna be getting money for it. If she feels she isnt ready for the child she can just abort it and go on with life like nothing happened. A man doesnt get that choice If he wants the child, screw him, the woman can still get an abortion. If he doesnt want the child and doesnt feel ready to take care of a child screw it, the woman can still go on and have the child and force him into the situation. Either way, the woman always comes out on top. Its like she bares less responsibility, as if she had no choice but to open her legs and have intercourse without a condom and let the man ejaculate in her.
[QUOTE="nomsayin"]
 I wonder if all these women-loving, feminist pro-choicers would be cool with late term abortions (not just for health reasons only). After all, it's the women's body, and the big bad government should not be interfering with it.Â
N30F3N1X
I'm not a feminist by any stretch of imagination, in fact if you look back to find a thread about feminist issues you can be 100% sure I'll be posting in it to bash women-lovers, and I'm fine with late term abortions.
This has nothing to do with being women-lovers and everything to do with the fact that I consider a toddler's life worthless.
Wow...Im not that extreme lol. I think you need to be more specific what you mean by "late term" If its like in the 3rd trimester, I dont agree with it. Because at that stage organogenesis has been completed the CNS is pretty much in place and some premature babies at that stage are able to survive. Which means the baby is no longer 100% dependent on the host body for survival. Also, any woman that decides after 6 months to have an abortion has some serious issues. No, I dont have any quotations or special laws to help support my claims, those are just my thoughts on the matter. The only time late term abortions should be allowed is if the mother is at risk.I think having a law this way is the best way to meet both sides at the middle. A woman will still have the right to decide what to do with her body and get rid of the pregnancy but at the same time, after a certain amount of time has passed and the baby has developed to the point that it is able to survive (with a lot of luck and medical assistance) without a host, abortions should be disallowed. I think 6 months is ample time for any woman to decide whether or not she wants to have a child.
[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="The_Lipscomb"] Funny. Spanish and black women are the least attractive to me lol. Spanish being the least.. but you can give me a cute asian any time of the week lol.. My aprreciation for black women is growing though. It's weird, I kind of don't want to hook up with white girls anymore ( my own race ) .. I find branching out to different races exhillirating.PSP107Im black and I find that I dont really date within my race much, in fact, I've only ever been with 1 black girl in my entire life. I will say though, there is somethings special about a cute white girl with a big booty :blush: lol@ both of you Just telling it like it is lol. I tend to like people that are very different from me :P
Log in to comment