Posted on 02/03/2014 10:35:02 AM PST by carlo3b
I FINALLY BELIEVE, IT IS THE WOMAN’S SOLE RIGHT TO CHOOSE..
For me, it came down to a matter of nature, and fairness. I thought it through, and in doing so, I made sure that I really thought it all the way through..
After all of my many years of standing on the sidelines and observing, as was what I have been instructed to do, as a man, I have concluded that it should be the ultimate decision of the woman to decide whether she should be a mother..
In balancing, deliberating, and reasoning, there was but one undeniable truth, if it was the genius of our reproductive system, and the female of our species was chosen by design, biologically, to bear the burden of child creation, she alone should carry the decision of whether she wishes to reproduce. As such, she alone carries the burden of who should be the sperm donor, where and when the reproductive act should transpire. FAIR, and EQUITABLE, RIGHT?
We all know, or at least we should take a great deal more into consideration before and after making that decision, about how important it is in choosing to have a child or children, how that child will be raised. But one step at a time..
Can we agree that the choice of becoming a mother carries more than a simple yes or no. Far be it for me to interfere with the dynamics that should be considered in a woman’s priority process, but the requirements in that decision, by nature and necessity, is how and why to choose the potential male donor, for a milieu of reasons. By carrying the SOLE access to the starting point of reproduction, also carries the sole responsibility for the results of that decision, the wellbeing of the resulting baby..
Assuming we are all on the same page, the donor (THE MALE OF THE SPECIES) has a limited, but vitally important contribution in the process, the seed, or sperm. The donor, has decisions to make as well, first and foremost, does he agree with her choice of him as the contributor, and her choice of where and when, and even in some cases, with all of the new technologies, how..
As a summary, how many choices are involved in the decision to reproduce for the woman; • Do I want to reproduce, or will the act be for some other reason that I should take the risk? • What are the criteria for choosing a potential mate, or participant? • Who will be the contributor, or partner, for whatever reason? • What planning, or precautions, if any, should be required before the act? • When and where the act should take place? • What will I do if the act has produced the intended results, a child? • What if the planning went awry and there are unintended consequences? • What if I become pregnant, who else should suffer the resulting consequences? • Are there any limitations on my decisions? • What if I didn’t plan, what are my responsibilities? • What is my last resort?
As we have outlined, there are a list of choices that a woman has with her reproductive activities, and natural tools to consider, all of which she has the ultimate choice to advance, or reject along the way. With all of these options, who should be responsible for her decisions, other than the one that made them?
So, since I had no choice, no rights to contribute to her decisions, and, unless I was the contributor to the act, leave me or anyone else that were forced out the resulting process, out f the problems, RIGHT?
GOOD LUCK, AND GOD BLESS
A man..
Hope I never have to read ignorant garbage like that again.
I’m sorry for you to be put on the spot like that.....with a crowd watching..Carlo had been here a long time and a regular poster.....you gave him ample retraction or clarification courtesy but he foolishly doubled and tripled down
I can’t imagine why a long time regular poster would make a vanity thread saying such notions which appear to blatantly fly in the face of arguably the number one plank of the forum
Its not like it was some newbie doing a suicide flame to run back to KOS and regal librard fellow travelers with his deering do behind the lines
This is a weird one for FRs more bizarre episodes.....
I can’t recall a precedence quite so blatant over infanticide
And he’s Texan....our final redoubt....whew
Its disconcerting....a breach in the ranks where we least expect it
Yet another long term troll on FR.
But FR will not do anything about being inundated with CINOs.
From my home page...
___________________________________________________________________
I would like to see a VOLUNTARY idealogy litmus matrix here on Free Republic, but when I proposed it to Jimrob, he called me a newbie.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: babygene I don’t think he’s all that interested.
To: MHGinTN It doesn’t matter what a FReeper thinks. It’s just a list that they tell us what they think. That way we can tell who we’re dealing with.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: Jim Robinson Hah hah, that’s great. I signed up 2 months after you and I’m a newbie. Back then no one even said, “Welcome to FR”. But yeah, I do think that there are tons of RINOs. To be more accurate, the term would be CINOs.
I’ve been pushing for an idealogical litmus matrix here on FR, not to get rid of RINOs but to expose them.
THE GOP DOESN’T WANT US- SO WHAT’S NEXT?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1965735/posts?page=762#762
***It simply takes too long. Look at this thread alone. I see evidence of RINOism in some of the FReepers on this thread. It takes 700 posts to drill down. We need the matrix posted and available so that we don’t have to drill down on every FReeping thread. They’re wasting our time. Deliberately.
Agreed to a large degree. Perhaps a way to rate members by other members???
762 posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:43:23 PM by roamer_1
130 posted on Monday, December 08, 2008 2:39:20 PM by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
49 posted on Monday, December 22, 2008 7:29:27 PM by Kevmo ( It’s all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies] 48 posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:25:08 PM by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)
___________________________________________________________________
Its disconcerting....a breach in the ranks where we least expect it
***I have come to expect it from every rank.
From my home page:
___________________________________________________________________
I would like to see a VOLUNTARY idealogy litmus matrix here on Free Republic, but when I proposed it to Jimrob, he called me a newbie.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: babygene I don’t think he’s all that interested.
To: MHGinTN It doesn’t matter what a FReeper thinks. It’s just a list that they tell us what they think. That way we can tell who we’re dealing with.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2145065/posts?page=130#130
To: Jim Robinson Hah hah, that’s great. I signed up 2 months after you and I’m a newbie. Back then no one even said, “Welcome to FR”. But yeah, I do think that there are tons of RINOs. To be more accurate, the term would be CINOs.
I’ve been pushing for an idealogical litmus matrix here on FR, not to get rid of RINOs but to expose them.
THE GOP DOESN’T WANT US- SO WHAT’S NEXT?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1965735/posts?page=762#762
***It simply takes too long. Look at this thread alone. I see evidence of RINOism in some of the FReepers on this thread. It takes 700 posts to drill down. We need the matrix posted and available so that we don’t have to drill down on every FReeping thread. They’re wasting our time. Deliberately.
Agreed to a large degree. Perhaps a way to rate members by other members???
762 posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:43:23 PM by roamer_1
130 posted on Monday, December 08, 2008 2:39:20 PM by Kevmo (Palin/Hunter 2012)
49 posted on Monday, December 22, 2008 7:29:27 PM by Kevmo ( It’s all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies] 48 posted on Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:25:08 PM by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)
___________________________________________________________________
It is illegal. It violates the natural law, in the first place, in the worst way possible.
It destroys the most important moral principles of our national charter.
It violates every single clause of the stated purposes of the U.S. Constitution.
It violates the explicit, imperative requirement of multiple amendments to that Constitution that equal protection be provided for the supreme right, the right to live, of every single individual person, in every state.
It also destroys the principles, purposes, and requirements of all of our state constitutions.
Good freaking grief!! Are you SO thick, you can’t see the difference?? geesh....what has happened to FR???
Abortion.....the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of CONVENIENCE!!
It’s infiltrated with libs. Just look at how many demanded we moderate/compromise last election and mocked the hell out of anyone refusing to go along. Some still do.
While it’s true each of us has various things we believe that some may raise a brow over, there are core truths to conservatism. And it’s past time that were enforced amongst ourselves.
Principles matter.
Spectacular! Wonderful post.
What's happened to FR? The truth is that way too many good, smart and thoughtful posters have been banned for stupid shortsighted reasons.
Carlo's post was not pro abortion. It was anti-abortion. There just aren't enough actually thoughtful people left anymore to see it. He was knee- jerked out the door without anyone bothering to read what he wrote and understand it. It too bad and it's our loss, not his.
You'll be missed Carlo. Remember the old days.
Yes, it would be a terrible thing for someone who was so Conservative to run off the rails like that.
Sorry that he was so ill.
I guess you’ve decided to leave the baby out of the process as well. Since you’ve decided that he or she must never has a say in whether they can choose to have their brains sucked out and be torn to shreds or not.
A woman can decide not to be a mother by refraining from sex or by giving the baby up for adoption. No one is forcing her to be a mother.
You argue the man should not have a say by telling us that you would rather men abdicate their responsibility as men and fathers. Women cannot make babies alone. They need something from a male by God’s design. Also by the Lord’s design the male was to be the head of the family. Refusal to take on that responsibility is what has placed so many families and children at risk today. But here you are advocating that very thing — letting these cowardly men get away with running from their responsibilities.
I’ve rarely seen such a monocratic, poorly thought out argument. You need to get your mind back from whoever has hijacked it.
A lot of people say they're pro-life, and hold that a baby is a baby from conception. Rather fewer follow that thought to its logical conclusion.
If someone saw a woman stabbing her three year old son, because she had decided he was inconvenient, the witness would be justified in using deadly force to stop her. There is a high level of agreement about that.
If a woman told a doctor she wanted to kill her one year old baby, and he passed her some cyanide pills to do it with, they both would face charges of first-degree murder, and both would face either life in prison, or execution.
There is pretty-much universal agreement that the killing of a young child should subject the killer(s) to the penalties for murder. There is somewhat less agreement that third-trimester abortion should be penalized as murder, although there is high agreement that it should be banned.
There is somewhat less agreement that first trimester abortions be banned. There is even less agreement that the "morning after" pill or IUD devices (which work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus) deserve banning.
So here's the thing: to be philosophically consistent, someone who believes that a fertilized egg is just as much a baby with rights as a post-birth baby, should be in favor of treating a woman who aborts at any stage as a murderess.
While a majority may feel pro-life, I think the numbers shrink dramatically if the question becomes "Should a woman who gets an abortion be imprisoned for murder, along with her doctor?" And I think a large percentage would be in favor of locking up anybody who proclaimed he would use deadly force to prevent abortion from occurring.
This is the reality of society. Is anybody here, who believes himself pro-life, really in favor of life-imprisonment for women who get abortions? Does anybody here think that life-imprisonment for women who get abortions is a position with widespread support?
The fact that question exists is testament to how little people think about issues they hold opinions on.
For me, Yes. Murder is murder. My belief is that it should be criminalized. And it logically follows that criminals pay for their crime. Lines have to be drawn. Lines define the difference between civilization and anarchy. Today/inn the modern era, the left has placed it’s line and we either accept it or move it through the political/legal process and public opinion. Not long ago, women who aborted were publicly shamed for their actions. A line existed. And it had existed for a long time Then libs moved that line. It can be moved back and further IF enough people decide to.
But before people decide anything, they have to put more thought into it than emotion.
“The problem is, the women demand sole right to the choices, but ALSO demand that men ensure that the woman’s negative consequences for her decision are minimized.”
Not just men, but everyone else has no choice, including other women. So like you wrote, on the one hand the pro-aborts say no one has a right to tell women what to do, but on the other hand, she has the right to demand that other people either pay for her abortion (via Obamacare) or take care of the child after it’s born. It’s a very illogical position, but pro-aborts aren’t known for their logic.
“Some people think he went crazy because this post is out of character for him, but it’s too late to ask him now.”
Which saddens me, because I wanted a chance to understand carlo3b’s point. I don’t think he meant what the initial post seemed to say. He appeared to be making a logical argument against abortion, saying the pro-aborts were illogical to say it’s a woman’s right to choose, but everyone else has no choice in whether or not to pay for her abortion or to raise the child via welfare for example.
It should go without saying that this is a privately owned site, and the owner makes it clear that he has zero tolerance for abortion. However, carlo3b—in a subsequent post—clearly said he was 100% opposed to abortion and would end it today if he could. I think he was claiming the pro-aborts won’t let us do that directly, so we have to use other means to slowly walk back abortion until we reach a point where we can outright ban it.
The libertarian arguments to respect a mother’s liberty fall apart as soon as a child is conceived. Then it’s no longer just the liberty of the mother. The child has its own rights to life and liberty.
Rather than there being a line sitting in isolation, I think there is a spectrum of viewpoints, and the position of the line is determined by the point on the spectrum where there is a balance of fervor on either side.
In other words, if you can get a sufficient majority of voters to declare that partial-birth abortion is an abomination, then you have a chance to make it illegal (no matter what the judges say). Within that spectrum of pro-life opinion, you may have some who are OK with first trimester abortion, and some who think that women who get first trimester abortions should be imprisoned, but as long as a majority can agree that they all think that partial-birth abortion should be banned, then that's all that counts.
Conversely, if you have a majority which is fine with first-trimester abortion, or anti-implantation methods like the morning-after pill or IUD devices, then you will have difficulty in restricting those methods.
Progress on the issue all comes down to changing the culture, to shifting the spectrum of opinion, and thus where the line is drawn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.