add Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 There is so much diversity in the feminist movement itself right now that sometimes they are in disagreement with themselves. I am a feminist and I do believe that if a man and a women do the tango and make a baby, the male should have the right to a say in that baby's future. Of course not withstanding he is a creep, drug user, cray-cray, or whatever else. I dunno so much about the grandparents, I mean, if something happened to the child's direct mother and father, then yeah, you should look for the next immediate relative. I dont think anyone is going to fight you for the paternal father having a say...I think its more in the instance of a male approaching a complete stranger and trying to discuss his overall plan to have a say in her private choices. In which case, that guy should be punched in the mouth. Way to skirt the issue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) What issue? Youre asking if a father has paternal rights to his biological child. Yes. Anything else? Edited July 28, 2014 by CrossCuT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
add Posted July 29, 2014 Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 What issue? Youre asking if a father has paternal rights to his biological child. Yes. Anything else? How? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
add Posted July 29, 2014 Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 What issue? Youre asking if a father has paternal rights to his biological child. Yes. Anything else? Unless there is some sort of a legal marriage, the male parent has no rights, whatsoever. What rights do you speak of? Adultery is a ugly thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 I always laugh when pro-abortion women yell and hiss when a man expresses pro-life views. Because, as they reason, men have no say in this matter. But then they cheer when another man agrees with them. And they encourage this man to speak out. Wut. And when a pro-life woman speaks out against abortion, she's decried as some kind of traitor to her sex. Apparently, only pro-abortion views are legitimate. In the rad-fem world, a pro-abortion man is a champion of women (even if he's a chronic womanizing creep and probable rapist, such as Bill Clinton, or the late Ted Kennedy), while a pro-life woman is an anti-woman self-hater. Gotta love progressivism, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Well I mean, we Joe Shmoe politician to dictate our medical care but we want them to pay for said care right? I know Catholics view womens health care as this satanic catch phrase, but in reality, we all do similar things. I dont really want the brainless politicians voting on things that would dictate medical care for my specific conditions, but at the same time its the governments duty to care for their citizens. If the bleedin' hearts were really for the "right to choose what to do with our own bodies," they'd be fighting this Obamacare monstrosity, and let people decide for themselves what kind of health insurance to have. Treat citizens as adults capable of making their own decisions, rather than as helpless drones of an all-encompassing nanny-state. Yeah, a radical concept, I know. The line about government "caring for its citizens" can be used to justify virtually any kind of tyranny. But who am I to talk? Big Brother always knows best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 I would say for a lot of women (and men) it's about keeping the government out of your own personal decisions and rights. Reproductive rights are just that, rights. The pro-life movement think people are foaming at the mouth to get their buy 1 get 1 free abortion and it just doesn't exist. Killing an innocent human being is not a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
add Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) Freewill is God given right, with consequences, of course There is consequences with every choice. Call it karma if you will Pro-choice pro-consequences The ramifications of consequences Edited July 31, 2014 by add Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Therese Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 It has about the same "right" status as killing your next-door neighbour because he parked his car in a spot out on your street that inconvenienced you. If you believe that its a right to kill a child who may inconvenience you in some way, well, then it holds that you also believe you can pick off your neighbour with a shotgun from the second storey window if he inconveniences you. Any other conclusion is logically incoherent and ethically indefensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Catholic Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 It has about the same "right" status as killing your next-door neighbour because he parked his car in a spot out on your street that inconvenienced you. If you believe that its a right to kill a child who may inconvenience you in some way, well, then it holds that you also believe you can pick off your neighbour with a shotgun from the second storey window if he inconveniences you. Any other conclusion is logically incoherent and ethically indefensible. Lol I'm glad you feel children are just a matter of "inconvenience." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 It has about the same "right" status as killing your next-door neighbour because he parked his car in a spot out on your street that inconvenienced you. If you believe that its a right to kill a child who may inconvenience you in some way, well, then it holds that you also believe you can pick off your neighbour with a shotgun from the second storey window if he inconveniences you. Any other conclusion is logically incoherent and ethically indefensible. I prefer a crossbow, since it's silent and will not wake up the neighbors I do like. I wouldn't want them to be inconvenienced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Lol I'm glad you feel children are just a matter of "inconvenience." I don't believe she thinks this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Therese Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) Lol I'm glad you feel children are just a matter of "inconvenience." That would be an interesting inference if it weren't such a blatant non-sequitur. :hehe2: Edited to add an emoticon - seemed fitting somehow! Edited July 31, 2014 by Catherine Therese Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Therese Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 I prefer a crossbow, since it's silent and will not wake up the neighbors I do like. I wouldn't want them to be inconvenienced. :cupid: That's a cherub's weapon of choice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Treat citizens as adults capable of making their own decisions, rather than as helpless drones of an all-encompassing nanny-state. Yeah, a radical concept, I know. WE AGREE! LET THEM MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now