[Rich]

And regardless of how you want to interpret equality, it is a biological fact that cis women carry fetuses inside them, and due to that fact, they are the ones who ultimately have the decision.

You're not one of those bigots who say that trans women can't have babies are you?

[Nonsense]

[quote="Drlee"]Nonsense. If a woman wants an abortion in the first trimester I have no problem with it. Maybe somewhat later is OK. That is up to the woman.

But I said and you ignored:

Driee- Do you not see, that, by supporting a woman's 'right' to abort, is effectively giving any woman the 'right' to kill, unquestionably, that is WRONG in any society, but, particularly under any system based upon equal rights for all under the law.

This is the point, it is WRONG, because women are being exempted from the law as it applies to everyone else, it matters not one iota that it is an 'abortion', it is summarily killing a living human being.

As I have posted, what appears as a highly questionable 'victory' for any woman seeking to exercise that 'right', is at the expense of the life of another human being that is denied any 'right', in order that it's mother can exercise her choice without any responsibility.
In a society where the law applies equally to all, it is a democratic principal that equality is seen to be practised without prejudice to one or all, including the unborn & equivocating is not acceptable in any shape or form.

[Albert]

@Stormsmith
@snapdragon

The fact that conception happens within a woman's body does not mean the child belongs solely to her and she can do to the child as she wishes.

A father also goes through a lot of pain and labour taking care of a woman during her pregnancy.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Stormsmith
@snapdragon

The fact that conception happens within a woman's body does not mean the child belongs solely to her and she can do to the child as she wishes.

Actually, it does mean that.

Ignoring all the discussion about rights and equality, it is a biological fact that it happens in the woman’s body. This means she could go and get an abortion and never tell the father or anyone else.

So from a factual and practical perspective, it does mean she can do what she wishes.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

She can do what she wants with her body but she does not have the right to do what she wants with someone else's.

[Albert]

Exactly, good point. Technically a child's body is not a woman's body that fosters it. Therefore the argument that prohibiting abortion is also prohibiting women their own self-agency with their own body, does not apply.

[Pants-of-dog]

She can do what she wants with her body but she does not have the right to do what she wants with someone else's.

If you are arguing that people do not have the right to do what they want with the bodies of other people, please note that this means the the fetus does not have the right to do what it wants with the mother’s body.

But from a practical and factual perspective, the mother does have the ability to do what they want with the fetus, and this is because of the biological fact that it is in her body.

—————————

Exactly, good point. Technically a child's body is not a woman's body that fosters it. Therefore the argument that prohibiting abortion is also prohibiting women their own self-agency with their own body, does not apply.

Actually, this post of yours is in direct contradiction of the ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

The fetus doesn't want to do anything.

[skinster]

Men are being completely ignored in decision making as if the father's will does not matter, when it does.

If some guy doesn't want his stupid fetus destroyed, as SS said, he should wear a condom. Otherwise, as has also been stated, tough.

You guys that want to control women and their bodies are so very sad. Stop pretending you care about humans when all you care about is controlling some of them.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

What do you mean by stupid fetus? It's like you have some sort of contemp for unborn babies.

It would almost appear that not only do you support abortion but promote it.

[skinster]

What about the part where I said you should wear a condom if you don't want your precious sperm destroyed? Why don't you take responsibility of your sperm? Why are you forcing it to grow in another person who could destroy it without your consent according to the law?

You need to start taking responsibility for your unborn children, jessup.

[Albert]

The whole legal argument: If it is legal it does not necessarily make it right, as we can see in the case of Tommy Robinson.

Giving men the right to have a say in abortion will bring good sense of responsibility on them. Most surely, I assure you.

[Pants-of-dog]

The fetus doesn't want to do anything.

Yes, the fetus is without volition, intelligence, or survival instinct.

It is as if it were not quite human.

[Ter]

Can i ask what the difference is between a mother aborting her child the day before it is born and the day after it is born?, in terms of morality.

Also i don't think it's legal to have an abortion that late in ANY country, or is it?

It is legal in Canada, according to our honourable poster POD.
He even defends this absurdity, he mumbles something about the female's body integrity, a feminist concept.

The males have absolutely no say in this, except that they have to pay for the child for the next two decades if the woman unilaterally decides to keep the baby.

[skinster]

They can have a say in the matter if they wear condoms or get snipped. You guys need to man up and take responsibility for your stupid unborn babies instead of demanding to control women.

[Pants-of-dog]

It is legal in Canada, according to our honourable poster POD.
He even defends this absurdity, he mumbles something about the female's body integrity, a feminist concept.

How does one mumble on the internet?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada

Abortion in Canada is legal at all stages of pregnancy,[1] and is governed by the Canada Health Act.[2] While some non-legal obstacles exist, Canada is one of only a few nations with no legal restrictions on abortion.[3][4] Regulations and accessibility vary between provinces.[5]

Prior to 1969, all abortion was illegal in Canada. In 1969, the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968–69 legalized abortion, as long as a committee of doctors signed off that it was necessary for the physical or mental well-being of the mother. In 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. Morgentaler that the existing laws were unconstitutional, and struck down the 1969 law. Without legal delays, most abortions are done at an early stage.[6]

In 2005, 97,254 abortions were reported in Canada; it is estimated that this number "represents approximately 90% of all abortions performed in Canada involving Canadian residents".[7] This number has been decreasing since at least 1998.[7]

....

In a landmark decision, the Court declared in 1988 the entirety of the country's abortion law to be unconstitutional. The court noted that "[f]orcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction, to carry a fetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations" and that the law "asserts that the woman's capacity to reproduce is to be subject, not to her own control, but to that of the state" were essentially a breach of the woman's right to security of the person, which is guaranteed under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

So the laws were struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) and were never replaced.

The males have absolutely no say in this, except that they have to pay for the child for the next two decades if the woman unilaterally decides to keep the baby.

Or you could be a dad to the kid and give your child actual time and love. Then you do not mind the financial cost (which is actually lessened by spending time with the kid) because you are engaged in one of the most beautiful things a person can do.

This is, of course, a risk you take every time you engage in heterosexual penetrative intercourse.

[Ter]

Abortion in Canada is legal at all stages of pregnancy

That is exactly what I was saying.
Up to the last day of the pregnancy.

Or you could be a dad to the kid and give your child actual time and love.

Of course, yes.
But a lot of recreational sex happens without any commitment from either party.
In case of pregnancy, the woman gets to decide on her own to keep or to abort the baby but the biological father can be made to pay for the upbringing even if he has no relationship wit the mother (except for the ten minute copulation on a drunken night somewhere)

[Pants-of-dog]

That is exactly what I was saying.
Up to the last day of the pregnancy.

My real question was about mumbling in text format.

Of course, yes.
But a lot of recreational sex happens without any commitment from either party.

Yes, and laws allowing abortion recognise this.

In case of pregnancy, the woman gets to decide on her own to keep or to abort the baby but the biological father can be made to pay for the upbringing even if he has no relationship wit the mother (except for the ten minute copulation on a drunken night somewhere)

Is this supposed to be a comparison of sorts?

[Ter]

My real question was about mumbling in text format.

This is classical POD, avoiding the issue.
The question of @Seeker8 was "are there countries where abortion is legal up to the last day of the pregnancy?"
And my answer was : Yes, Canada.
Whereupon you paste a text which says the same thing but in legalese.

Is this supposed to be a comparison of sorts?

Yet another attempt at side-stepping the issue.
My issue was : women get to decide, on their own, to abort or keep the baby
but the biological father can be made to pay for the upbringing even if there is no other relationship with the mother and baby.

I withdraw my remark about "mumbling" because you seized on it to divert the conversation.

[Pants-of-dog]

This is classical POD, avoiding the issue.
The question of @Seeker8 was "are there countries where abortion is legal up to the last day of the pregnancy?"
And my answer was : Yes, Canada.
Whereupon you paste a text which says the same thing but in legalese.

Well, you did accuse me of mumbling.

I wanted to e-nun-ci-ate.

Yet another attempt at side-stepping the issue.
My issue was : women get to decide, on their own, to abort or keep the baby
but the biological father can be made to pay for the upbringing even if there is no other relationship with the mother and baby.

Again, are you comparing or contrasting these two situations? It seems you are.

You seem to be saying that the woman gets to decide all by herself in the first situation, and in contrast, the man does not get to decide all by himself in the second situation.

You are then also implying that this is an unfair situation where the sacred idea of equality has been besmirched and is unjust.

I withdraw my remark about "mumbling" because you seized on it to divert the conversation.

It was refreshingly original.