I would be more tolerant if any of these stupid questions had anything at all to do with the topic.
Seriously, all you seem to be saying is you should be able to rape a woman as long as abortion is legal.
Printable View
I would be more tolerant if any of these stupid questions had anything at all to do with the topic.
Seriously, all you seem to be saying is you should be able to rape a woman as long as abortion is legal.
Is it legal for a woman to consent? Or is it legal for a woman to slice up your dingle with razor blades concealed in her yoo-hoo? Those are two very different questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
The first of which suggests a horrifying alternative.
Incidentally, as someone with a yoo-hoo, I find it incredibly hard to imagine that anyone could hide a razor blade (let alone razor blades, plural) up there without doing enough damage to herself to threaten the believability of her ruse. Even if the pained wincing wasn't sufficiently noticeable, I'm guessing the massive blood loss would be enough of a sign to any man that they should move on.
Well, off the top of my head, only one of those things involves violent assault.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Or restorative surgery.
I don't think he knows how vaginas work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuckingFunt
I seem to remember either hearing that second hand or maybe in a couple different movies about our troops in vietnam raping women over there and they doing this to protect them?, I can't remember or imagine it either. I refuse to try to google it as I really don't like the thought of me finding out. Hypothetically speaking, if it IS possible, my points being about these two circumstances is how is this different then abortion? The whole "women's body, women's choice" argument I feel needs to be thrown out, now you need to base it on if one feels an unborn child is life or if one half truly equals one.
Chump, I'm married and i've been dumb enough to post that picture with my wife on here so retards like you could see it. I've also talked about my son. I've gotten my fair share. You on the otherhand are very questionable.
Even if your opinion is vaild, your comparisons are really, really stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
You think it's easy and common to stash a razor trap down there.Quote:
Chump, I'm married and i've been dumb enough to post that picture with my wife on here so retards like you could see it. I've also talked about my son. I've gotten my fair share. You on the otherhand are very questionable.
That's about all that needs to be said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Calling you out on that one...........
Where did I ever say that? Are you going to backpedal?
How is either circumstance in any way similar to abortion? Specifically.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
"The whole 'women's body, women's choice' argument" is not some tangential thing that can just be thrown out. Whether one views an unborn child as life, the potential for life, or an over-hyped parasite, the fact of the matter is that its gestation requires nine months spent within the body of a living human being. Women don't become inanimate incubators at the moment of fertilization.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
I don't associate it with abortion in the act itself in any way. I'm defiantly not trying to draw a parallel in that aspect. I'm saying when one uses the reasoning My Body, My Choice, wouldn't it be that choice in my examples, however unlikely and wrong it would be?
It seems as though that reasoning relates more of a feeling of a tattoo or piercing, rather than being a mother.
You were the one comparing it with abortions.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Are you going to backpedal on your comparison now?
So you're inserting the "my body, my choice" argument into a set of circumstances in which it was never intended to be used -- a situation in which the choice being made involves physical assault and willful deception -- and using that as a reason to throw out the entire argument?Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Though in painfully simplified terms, you're talking about a feminist argument that advocates reproductive justice. That is the purpose and sole intention of the "my body, my choice" argument to which you are referring. By removing it from that context and using it to describe the thought process behind various sexual encounters, you're conflating it with a general argument for personal autonomy, which is limited to neither women nor reproductive justice. If a woman's decision to use the sex act as a means to trick a man into either physical mutilation or the contraction of a virus is based on an issue of "my body, my choice," then so is the man's decision to have sex with a woman without first thoroughly checking for cooties or snatch blades. Rather than identify hypothetical situations that are at all analogous to abortion, you have instead made an argument in which female autonomy is necessarily a weapon and male autonomy is inherently reckless and ignorant.
Bravo.Quote:
Originally Posted by CuckingFunt
Edit: rather than reckless and ignorant, I think the subtext is that male autonomy is a victim to its female counterpart.
I never compared it in that sense, ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
LOL, you remember this shifty excuse a while ago? Pretty soon I'll hear you tell me it depends what my definition of "is" is.
I could be using the royal "we" for all you know.
Look, I know your comparison sucked.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Now you do.
LOL, I remember you considered this your greatest internets victory ever.Quote:
LOL, you remember this shifty excuse a while ago? Pretty soon I'll hear you tell me it depends what my definition of "is" is.
I could be using the royal "we" for all you know.
It didn't make your comparison any better either.
[B]you're inserting the "my body, my choice" argument into a set of circumstances in which it was never intended to be used-- a situation in which the choice being made involves physical assault and willful deception -- and using that as a reason to throw out the entire argument/B]
If we use reasoning, can we forget that reasoning when we don't intend to use it? If I say abortion is wrong because every life is sacred, am I allowed to have different reasoning regarding the death penalty because I don't intend for that argument to be used where It does not help my opinion's?
There ISN'T any assault on the unborn child in an abortion??
My point being is that MBMC (I might have just made that acronym up) has all my support in the world, until it involves another person. As a man and a dad, i find it appalling that even though half of that child came from me, I give up all rights and decisions regarding that because its under her skin and not mine? Of course if a woman decides to have it and not include you, suddenly its the man's responsibility. Where's the justice in that?
Is that why you turned tail like a little bitch and never followed my posts around for a week like you normally do?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Where's the justice in pregnancy? You say you've been through it with your wife, so be honest: what did you really contribute to the equation besides the toils of nutting inside her and maybe, if you're a good guy, being supportive?
You were here?Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
That's not reasoning. That's defensiveness.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Also, if you think abortion is wrong but support the death penalty, it's not because you occasionally value all life equally. Rather, it's because you generally value certain lives over others. As well as your ability to act as decision maker when it comes time to assign value. The fact that you advocate the need for a case-by-case basis negates your claim of holding every life sacred.
The question is not whether an unborn child is or isn't assaulted during the abortion process, but whether or not such an assault would be analogous to the genital mutilation of an adult male.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
This doesn't address your conflation of two different arguments or theoretical viewpoints.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
If you're talking about your support of the feminist argument for reproductive justice, in which women are the ultimate decision makers in how/if/when they reproduce, then there are very few situations in which it would not involve another person. If, however, you're referring to the more general argument for personal autonomy, as I believe you are, then that argument doesn't actually have your support. Or, perhaps it does, but it is a blatantly gendered support.
Just as it's impossible to both support the death penalty AND value every life as sacred, it is impossible to support personal autonomy only in cases in which no one else is affected by one's autonomous choices. You've now dropped the element of weaponized female, but have instead put forth an argument in which you support female autonomy ONLY in the event that there is nothing and no one else with a legitimate claim to the use of a woman's body. Female autonomy then is awarded only when she has first determined that no one else wants to make her decisions for her.