View Single Post
Old May 17th, 2013 (8:37 PM). Edited May 17th, 2013 by Belldandy.
Belldandy's Avatar
Belldandy Belldandy is offline
Ice-Type Fanatic
  • Crystal Tier
  • Crystal Tier
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Age: 25
Gender: Female
Nature: Timid
Posts: 3,995
I mean, if a man takes advantage of a woman who's, say, unable to give consent then it's rape and no woman should be forced to carry a pregnancy caused by a rape.
Of course not. That was part of the big exception list I had written in my very first post (including unable to finance a child, mental health problems, physical risks involved in the pregnancy (mother may die), abusive environment (drugs, violence, assault), etc.)

The only reason you shouldn't be allowed to abort really is if you were irresponsible. What constitutes irresponsible? Not using birth control methods, esp. condoms (when they are readily available at clinics for free). That's pretty much saying, "I might get pregnant, but whatever. I'm consenting to sex and I know what may happen." The risk is acknowledged when birth control is not used; the woman then acknowledges the risk and should take responsibility for what happens because of those risks i.e. conception and giving birth. Adoption is always an option after that point.

And for Livewire, the "hook" is a small insert that some women choose to use long-term. It's inserted into the uterus where, to my understanding, it removes the lining where an embryo would otherwise implant itself. This causes even fertilized eggs to disintegrate because they cannot latch onto the side of the uterus. It is not painful, from what I've heard, and few people experience complications from the implant itself. The name itself is very crude for the topic, though. Just think of it as disrupting the lining, thus disabling pregnancies to occur. Kinda like how pills disrupt hormone levels and reduce the chance of becoming pregnant; same idea, but the "hook" lasts long-term.

I already acknowledged, too, that some of these methods cost a bit, but if you can't afford it, you should be reassessing sex altogether. That said, telling teenagers to not have sex is like telling bees not to collect honey or the waves not to crash and disturb the sand. It's going to happen anyway. That's where the government should come in and reassess how they finance birth control for teenagers, young adults, etc. and make it more accessible so that abortions do not have to occur due to being irresponsible (at least, not as often).

Also, the two parties involved - male and female - are responsible for their actions, and as I've mentioned before, if one or the other doesn't want to use protection properly, a) the act should not be committed, b) whoever is being immature needs to grow up before engaging in sex, or c) if none of the above, maybe reconsider the relationship altogether.

IMO a woman or a man who is not honest about birth control or who purposefully avoids it / does not want to use it, and they know that it is not the time to become pregnant / father a child or that the other individual does not want to be pregnant / father a child, then whoever is thinking of being irresponsible by avoiding contraceptive - the man or the woman - has no respect for the other person in the relationship.

I've heard of men who don't use contraceptive on purpose and the woman falls pregnant. That's a common story, but there's the other side of the coin: the woman wants to get pregnant but the man doesn't want to father a child. I have a family member who pulled a stunt on her significant other, saying she was on the "pill" but wasn't, and she got pregnant against the other person's wishes. Why should he be responsible for it when he was but a sperm donor, really? All these stories about "Boohoo daddy's not paying support." My mother never paid my dad support for her four kids - two were his, and two were my mother's (one the result of cheating)! It's an uncommon story, a single father raising the kids, but it should still receive the same attention. I hate all this "victim" stuff some moms pull. Like someone else said, I think the matter is extremely sexist and biased in favour of the mother. The father has no rights / is of no importance.

Anyway. Maybe roaming a bit off-topic.

Basically, both men and women need to take responsibility for their actions. There are methods of contraceptive out there, some of which are free. School, the Internet, youth groups, etc. are sources of information, if needed. A woman has 100% the right to abort if she was raped, cannot financially support the child, is under eighteen years of age (hand-in-hand with finances, really), is homeless, is mentally unfit, or the pregnancy risks to hurt or kill the mother during the term / at birth. The government should protect the foetus' rights in the case where basically, the woman or man decided to not use contraceptive and conceive, looking to abortion as a last-minute contraceptive. They should be held responsible and accountable for their actions in these cases, unless they fall under the above categories (not a legal adult (<18), unfit, homeless... Read list ^).

Also, I don't find any of this to be rude, impolite or offensive. I'm not a man instructing women how to use their bodies; I am a woman who shares a common viewpoint about it, even lenient about circumstances. You (& your significant other) didn't use the information given / use contraceptive / visit the clinic for free condoms. You (& your significant other) screwed up. You and your significant other are responsible for the result. On a perhaps unscaled point, if you fail a test because you didn't study, then sucks to be you; deal with it because you're at fault for that. You didn't ask questions, study, or do your homework. The two scenarios are incomparable in "degree," but hold the same moral at the end: if you mess up, take responsibility. Doesn't matter what it is. You're accountable. Just a hard way to learn a life lesson.

Also, tossing this in there: I don't judge women who choose to abort. I have no right to judge them. I can have my own opinion, and I can voice it (not to her face particularly, because it might hurt her feelings). I'd be friends with anyone, pro-choice or whatever. Doesn't matter to me. It won't change how I feel about the topic lol and I won't try to change their standpoint because they have every right to their opinion, just as you guys do. All I'm doing is explaining how I see it and in no way am I preaching or targeting anyone, telling them they're bad people or w/e because of their choice / having aborted / anything I just have a strong opinion that conflicts with others', and that's OK.

Just proves my point from earlier that there can never be abortion laws or "limits" that appeals to or pleases everyone.
Reply With Quote