Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The rights of a woman.
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 1 of 21 (365347)
11-22-2006 9:18 AM


In another thread, that I d o not wish to turn into the abortion thread, crashfrog attempts to point out that woman have rights, and the unborn child does not. I rebuttal that with "yes the woman has rights, she has a right to not have sex" Chiroptera claims this:
She also has the right to have intercourse, and to alleviate any undesired complications that might result from it.
I want to know why.
What gives a woman the right to have sex and not have to deal with the consequences of those actions.
I don't want to talk about abortion, or when life starts. I am also not talking about if a woman gets raped. I am also not talking about an unhealthy child.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminWounded, posted 11-22-2006 9:37 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 6 by AdminPD, posted 11-26-2006 6:23 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 3 of 21 (365398)
11-22-2006 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminWounded
11-22-2006 9:37 AM


I'm also not quite sure how you are going to be able to have this discussion without talking about abortion. Do you want to focus on adoption?
Because I am not talking about abortion as much as I am speaking about the rights of a woman. My specific question was, what gives the right to a woman to willfully have intercourse, and not expect to carry through on pregnancy. That's dealing with it. Having an abortion is not dealing with it. It is a way out of something that you started, but do not want to finish.
I can try an re-word it, but I am having trouble expressing myself clearly on this one I guess. I am open to suggestions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminWounded, posted 11-22-2006 9:37 AM AdminWounded has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by AdminSchraf, posted 11-22-2006 8:01 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 5 of 21 (366003)
11-25-2006 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by AdminSchraf
11-22-2006 8:01 PM


then it seems rather clear that you aren't interested in listening to anyone else.
I don't think that is for you to decide, even as an admin. I clearly asked a question. As an admin you should not be debating with me.
That is not the essence of the arguement.
Chiroptera claimed that is was a right to have intercourse, and abort. I am talking specifically the two events combined.
I don't see it as a right, I see it as a moral decision that plays games with life. What gives a woman the right to create something she is not going to finish? How is that a right? I am not talking about what is law.
People have rights to privacy, rights to protection, and many other rights, that make perfect sense to me. I don't see how being allowed to create life, and abort it is a right. I see it as a quick fix for a bad decision. (not even a mistake).
The discussion is more about rights, than abortion itself.
Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AdminSchraf, posted 11-22-2006 8:01 PM AdminSchraf has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by AdminSchraf, posted 11-26-2006 8:55 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 9 of 21 (366218)
11-27-2006 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by AdminSchraf
11-26-2006 8:55 AM


That is not quoted from my op.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by AdminSchraf, posted 11-26-2006 8:55 AM AdminSchraf has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by AdminPhat, posted 11-27-2006 1:11 PM riVeRraT has not replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 10 of 21 (366221)
11-27-2006 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AdminPD
11-26-2006 6:23 AM


If that is what you are wanting to discuss, I suggest you word your OP better, less emotional.
Well, I would like to word it better, but emotional?
Are you sure you aren't the one emotional abou tit, I do not feel I was emotional.
What gives her the right to knowingly engage in sexual intercourse, which has the sole purpose of reproduction, but terminate the reproductive process once it has begun?
Yes, this sounds good.
and I think I will add this:
Does a man have the right to engage in sexual intercourse, which has the sole purpose of reproduction, if he does not truly wish to reproduce?
But replace the word reproduce with "support the child." ??
Should I propose another topic, or edit this one? I would not like to see all the current responses as part of the thread.
http://EvC Forum: A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore -->EvC Forum: A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore
is the link where it started. Starting at msg 55.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AdminPD, posted 11-26-2006 6:23 AM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by AdminWounded, posted 11-27-2006 8:33 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 12 by AdminPD, posted 11-27-2006 8:41 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 18 of 21 (366378)
11-27-2006 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by AdminPD
11-27-2006 8:41 AM


Re: Revise OP
How about reproduce and support the child.
Ok.
I think you need to work the word healthy into it also, to avoid that pitfall.
Ok.
Same for the statement on men. If yes, what gives him that right?
I don't know how that applys, because a man cannot get an abortion.
Unless we are talking about the mans opinion only.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by AdminPD, posted 11-27-2006 8:41 AM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by AdminPD, posted 11-28-2006 5:21 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 20 of 21 (366753)
11-29-2006 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by AdminPD
11-28-2006 5:21 AM


Human Rights
In the thread A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore
Michael Moore makes a pledge from liberals to conservatives (of which I am neither):
8. We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is your business. We will continue to count your age from the moment you were born, not the moment you were conceived.
My reply to that was
quote:
Does this mean they won't stick up for my unborn child should someone intend to do harm to him/her/it. Or is it just trash?
Then everyone started getting concerned that I was not concerned about the rights of a woman. My reply to that was:
quote:
I never said the woman doesn't have any rights, she has every right in the world not to have intercourse. Unless she is raped against her will, then she should have the right to remove the baby, IMO.
Chiroptera responds
She also has the right to have intercourse, and to alleviate any undesired complications that might result from it.
So I asked her why that is a right.
Being that birth control is not 100% full proof, or natural, I can't see how this is a right for two consenting adults. The same goes for the man, as he is part of it, and can be an influence on the woman’s decision to get an abortion. (of which I am guilty of).
When I think of human rights, this is what I think of:
Human Rights
As I read that, I really don't see anything that could be applied to what is claimed by chiroptera and others.
The obvious answer is because you can get an abortion, that makes it a right. But there was a time when you couldn't, and they are fighting to remove that option. So I will not accept that answer. It doesn't fully describe why it is a right. A starving child has a right to food. The child has done nothing to put himself in harms way.
If a woman gets raped, then I feel she has a right to an abortion.
But the combination of the two events, consensual intercourse, and abortion together, I feel is just not a right, and I would like to hear arguments as to why it is.
In this thread we are not going to talk about abortion. Abortion is legal. I also don't want to talk about when life begins in the womb. Those two subjects have been beaten to death already.
So this is the question, and the topic,
Why is it a right for both a man and a woman to have consensual sex, AND get an abortion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by AdminPD, posted 11-28-2006 5:21 AM AdminPD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by AdminPD, posted 11-29-2006 1:30 PM riVeRraT has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024