Oh bullshit. If one party doesn’t consent to sex, or is unable to consent to sex, any sex that happens after that is rape.
Whether the victim is male or female. Now quit being a sexist fucking asshole and accept it.
Bullshit, because of your agenda, you’re using common usage to distort a specific procedure and biological function. Only you know what your motivation for doing so it.
Try this:
On the news an elderly woman laments that she lost her child.
The child was a 50 year old man. Clearly he was no longer a child; except for the fact that he was once this woman’s child.
It would be dishonest for me to describe this adult as a child, EXCEPT in the specific instance that he was ONCE this woman’s child…but he is not A child; as children are a biological state of being, children are “potential” adults, but until they reach adulthood, they are children.
Or do you think it would be legimate of me to describe 50 year old men, as children? Not acts as children, but are interchangble with 5 year old children; based only on the fact, that they were once children themselves?
Is that logical thinking?
Fetuses are not children, no more than a 50 year old man is a child.
That’s the plain science of the matter. You can stamp your feet, till the earth cracks, but fetuses are not children.
You call abortion the killing of a child, even though you admit that you understand the difference between the two states of development…I have no choice but to assume to do so in an attempt to push buttons…shame on you.
Right, so from the moment that sperm meets egg till he is old and grey he is this womans child.
I didn’t say abortion is ‘killing of a child’ I said ‘abortion is killing YOUR child’. Thank you for proving my point though you put it very eloquently.
Are you always this obtuse?
You don’t have the right to describe my relationship. If I feel, that’s ME, not YOU, that my 50 year old is still my baby, that my choice.
YOU don’t get to describe him as a baby; because he’s not. I do. Not You.
You don’t get to tell me, that having an abortion is killing MY child. Because 1. it’s not a child and 2. It’s not your "child’.
But what if the mother was impregnated, but then abducted by an alien that looks like a giant bee in an all wool jumpsuit? Huh? Put that in your pipe and smoke it!
Make it an ** African** giant bee and see watch the opinions change!
It doesn’t matter how you ‘feel’ towards your offspring it is your child. Referring to it as that is accurate, acceptable and widely used. YOU don’t get to change definitions of words.
Forget all of that. I demand that you stop dodging the Africanized giant bee in the all wool jumpsuit question. Lets try to stay focused on the issues at hand here!
Once that MLIF sees the stinger on that African bee, would she really only want what’s in his wallet?
No wonder she doesn’t want him to leave…
A Bee in a wool jumpsuit? Thats just stupid! Bees don’t jump they fly! It would be a wool flysuit.
Great, so now all I’ve got to hope for is that the media stops using only the term ‘deadbeat dads’ and either includes ‘deadbeat moms’ or goes with the gender neutral ‘deadbeat parents’.
So that’s when she gets the bee drunk, rapes him, gets pregnant, leaves the state for 18 years then hits the bee for back child support?
Hey, I don’t blame her; kids gotta eat…but c’mon, just because the child’s in a black and yellow wool jumpsuit, doesn’t mean he’s a giant bee… looks like a wasp, to me.
18 years of support!? What do you think…pollen grows on flowers?
Hey, remember three pages ago when this thread was about child support, before it turned into the treis-catsix-Diogenes nutjob circle-jerk? That was nice.
Of course, they’re never going to read this as written – better translate it into Crazy so they see it:
“If you eat eggs, how is that different from murdering adopted orphans in Pennslyvania? What if a woman impregnates herself with a turkey baster from sperm she got off the floor of a porno theatre – is it rape if it turns out it came from a homosexual? You said that you support life, so I guess you want more serial killers to be born, huh?”
Well, I found a huge flaw in this:
Except this doesn’t happen all that often. Why? Because the CONSEQUENCES are pretty huge for the woman. She has to clothe and feed and raise a child for the next 18 years (or more) to get those checks. She doesn’t get checks for having sex, you know. She’s not a prostitute. Those checks will (partially) support a new financial burdern in her life—the kid. She will be out a lot of money, resources, energy, etc. herself in order to raise that child. The kid’s going to cost her a lot too.
So unless she really wanted a kid anyway (which happens, but usually women don’t “trick” men into parenthood in such a way), she has no incentive to do that. She can’t lie about being sterile, then ask for checks, and have no responsibility for the kid. A man, however, can lie about being sterile, have his fun, and have NO responsibility for looking after the kid, no financial responsibility, nothing. Sounds like a pretty sweet deal for the guy, doesn’t it? The woman doesn’t have it nearly that sweet.
You mean the woman can’t drop the baby off at a Safe Haven, or put it up for adoption, or get an abortion? Or is it that her life is less sweet if she doesn’t pursue any of these perfectly legal options? The guy who takes off can get his wages garnished or tossed in jail, the woman who does any of the above is off scott free.
Not that people are really out there “tricking” their sexual partners, but women have far more choices than men once the deed is done.
Heh. And apparently, by the same logic, no one would EVER think of having extra children so they could get a bigger Welfare check, because it simply isn’t POSSIBLE to use less than the extra amount to sustain the child in subsistance while enriching oneself. No, that NEVER happens.
She can’t do it and get a check for 18 years. What is her motivation for lying about being sterile (and risking pregnancy), if her desire is to be free of financial (and personal) obligation?
On the other hand, a guy (if he knew he would not be held responsible if he didn’t want the kid) could lie about being sterile, just to avoid using one of those inconvenient condoms. Why would he want to bother? He’s not going to risk getting pregnant, worry about carrying a child to term, worry about possible physical discomfort or complications in abortion or pregnancy. No worries for him. Just say he doesn’t want the kid, and he’s off the hook. Why should he worry about birth control?
We’ve already gone over this. A pregnancy (followed by adoption) or an abortion are not “consequence-free” or “sweet.” Just ask any woman who has given birth to a child or had an abortion.
Might be so, covered that exhaustively already. Just because biology gives women more choices (while they still suffer physical consequences that men will never suffer) doesn’t mean that we should make men’s experience 100% “consequence-free” to compensate.
And you think these women have a consequence-free life? They can just pick up, go anywhere they want, not have to think about getting home to feed the kids, clothe the kids, take care of the kids? La-de-dah, the carefree life of a single mom.
I’m not saying that welfare abuses (etc.) don’t happen, but I can’t imagine that it’s a carefree and consequence-free life of a happy-go-lucky singleton with no responsibilities in the world.