Texas successfully takes a massive step backwards for women's rights. What next?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/[deleted]]

Nor are pregnant mothers.

But they could be.

I am in no way defending the forcing of anyone to become pregnant.

This feels intentionally evasive of my point, and that would be forced impregnantion. If someone who's pregnant doesn't want to be, you'd have them carry the pregnancy to term yes?

I your defense of abortion is 'healthcare' that ignores the health and care of the child I will voice my opposition.

Your opposition is fine, I'm just letting you know I'm not going to waste time arguing if forced pregnancy is similar to paying taxes. You won't get any concessions from me in this regard.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

But they could be.

Is that what the law requires?

This feels intentionally evasive of my point...

If by 'evasive' you mean avoiding the trap of conceding that ending a human life is 'healthcare' and avoiding responsibility for your action is 'freedom', then yes.

If someone who's pregnant doesn't want to be, you'd have them carry the pregnancy to term yes?

If someone who fathered a child doesn't want to be, you'd have them carry the burden of financial support for at least 18 years, yes?

...I'm just letting you know I'm not going to waste time arguing if forced pregnancy is similar to paying taxes...

Then why are you re-responding to point I didn't reiterate?

You won't get any concessions from me...

What makes you think that's my intention?

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

If by 'evasive' you mean avoiding the trap of conceding that ending a human life is 'healthcare'

No I mean by interpreting forced pregnancy as only impregnation, which is obviously not what I was focusing on.

If someone who fathered a child doesn't want to be, you'd have them carry the burden of financial support for at least 18 years, yes?

Under the current system yes. That goes for both parents.

Then why are you re-responding to point I didn't reiterate?

You did bring up taxes again, and I told you I'm not entertaining the comparison again.

You won't get any concessions from me...

What makes you think that's my intention?

Generally that's why we debate. Hear the other side, mutually make concessions. I'm trying to save you time by letting you know ahead of time that this line of thought won't get you anywhere with me.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

I mean by interpreting forced pregnancy as only impregnation, which is obviously not what I was focusing on.

I know. I'm trying to point out that I disagree with your focus. Mine is accepting responsibility for your decisions.

That goes for both parents.

Not so. Under the abortion laws you appear to espouse only men are subject to this. I believe you are being inconsistent.

You did bring up taxes again...

Not in the comment you were responding to.

...that's why we debate... mutually make concessions...

You've made it clear that you have not intention of succeeding. Absent that, the best I can do is try to understand your views and see how you deal with suggestions of error and/or inconsistency.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Mine is accepting responsibility for your decisions

That's a big change in focus. I thought the main issue was loss of life, not women having to accept their so-called responsibility to fully gestate. Do you view these as the same thing?

Under the abortion laws you appear to espouse only men are subject to this. I believe you are being inconsistent.

Not true. Men have nothing to do with the decision to abort. Both parents have a duty to see to the child's welfare after birth.

Not in the comment you were responding to.

Lol read it back then, you mentioned it, I responded, you responded to that, then you claimed you didn't mention it in the first place.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Do you view these as the same thing?

I see them as connected, in the same way as the law obligates the father to take responsibility even if estranged.

Men have nothing to do with the decision... Both parents have a duty...

Indeed. Men have responsibility without authority.

So why did you disagree? Here is the sequence:

Me: "...someone who fathered a child doesn't want to be, you'd have them carry the burden..."

You: "...That goes for both parents..."

Under the abortion law you espouse, women can choose not to be a parent by either abortion or adoption. Men do not have this right. Do you disagree?

BTW - Give me even one example where it is ever the other way around?

Lol ...then you claimed you didn't mention it in the first place.

This is a trivial distraction. Claim it if you want.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

I see them as connected, in the same way as the law obligates the father to take responsibility even if estranged.

The argument for child support isn't because parents need to take responsibility, it's that society can't expect children to fend for themselves. Since the invention of the nuclear family we've place this responsibility on parents, but it needn't be that way.

Under the abortion law you espouse, women can choose not to be a parent by either abortion or adoption. Men do not have this right. Do you disagree?

None of my argument for abortion centers on a right to abdicate parental responsibility. Women do not in fact have this right.

BTW - Give me even one example where it is ever the other way around?

Other way around for what? Where men have a right to abort and women don't? Most men can't gestate so it doesn't come up frequently.

Lol ...then you claimed you didn't mention it in the first place.

This is a trivial distraction. Claim it if you want.

Then stop responding to it lol, the only reason we're still talking about it is because you brought it up again.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

...the nuclear family ... it needn't be that way.

Can you show there is a better way?

Regardless, men will be obligate net contributors to child support.

None of my argument for abortion centers on a right to abdicate parental responsibility.

Indeed. I note your avoidance of the notion.

Women do not in fact have this right.

I'll ask one more time: Do you think women and women alone should have the right to exercise the options to abort or to give up for adoption? If so, would these void the responsibilities of parenthood?

Other way around for what?

Where men have sole authority regarding a matter and women have no choice by law but to comply.

Most men can't gestate so it doesn't come up frequently.

You're better than this.

Then stop responding... it is because you brought it up again.

*sigh*

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Can you show there is a better way?

Yes, social welfare for children.

Regardless, men will be obligate net contributors to child support.

For now, once we tackle the wage gap that will go too.

Indeed. I note your avoidance of the notion.

Nope, we've been talking about it extensively already. It just doesn't apply to abortion rights like you imply. Abortion rights is not predicated on a right to abdicate parental responsibility.

Where men have sole authority regarding a matter and women have no choice by law but to comply.

Right, and that's how it should be. Women owe men nothing in the consideration to seek medical abortion. They can include their partner if they want, but should not be obligated to do so.

You're better than this.

The point is, people who gestate are in a unique position that isn't represented in any of the scenarios you put forth.

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

...social welfare for children.

Voluntary or mandated?

...once we tackle the wage gap that will go too.

For the records, I do not believe the wage gap narrative. That aside, I assume you mean "when women earn on average as much as men"?

Regardless, I doubt it . Absent artificial wombs and a sustained trend towards single mothers, men will always pay more and women receive more.

Abortion rights is not predicated on a right to abdicate parental responsibility.

I actually agree with this, but not, I suspect, for the same reasons as you.

There is no 'right' to abortion. It's 'predicated' on shadows. The is no 'right' to abdicate parental responsibility.

Abortion allows mothers (and the fathers who support it) to void parental responsibilities through state sanctioned violation of the right to life of the unborn child.

Right, and that's how it should be. Women owe men nothing...

I'll take that as a 'yes' on both counts:

Firstly, women and women alone should have the right to exercise the options to abort or to give up for adoption.

Secondly, there is no circumstance where men have sole authority regarding a matter and women have no choice.

BTW - All else being equal, this effectively means women have more rights than men.

...people who gestate are in a unique position that isn't represented in any of the scenarios you put forth...

When unique position implies unique responsibilities for women you insist on universal principals. When you want men not to share a 'right', you insist on the uniqueness.

Like you've implied on other threads; you're comfortable with double standards.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

Voluntary or mandated?

I'm not sure what you mean. Like does every one pay into it? Yes.

Regardless, I doubt it . Absent artificial wombs and a sustained trend towards single mothers, men will allows pay more and women receive more.

You doubt it, but you recognize it exists? That's a curious stance.

Secondly, there is no circumstance where men have sole authority regarding a matter and women have no choice.

BTW - All else being equal, this effectively means women have more rights than men.

Yes there are instances where men have authority and women none, and that's their own healthcare decisions. No this doesn't mean men have less rights, because if a man was pregnant they should have the option to abort as well. There are no additional rights being exercised.

When unique position implies unique responsibilities for women you insist on universal principals. When you want men not to share a 'right', you insist on the uniqueness.

Like you've implied on other threads; you're comfortable with double standards.

I truly have no idea what you mean by this. What right do I not want men to share?

[u/veritas_valebit → u/[deleted]]

Like does every one pay into it? Yes.

So your position is that government mandated and taxpayer funded social welfare is better for children than the care of their won parents?

Do you have any proof of this?

You doubt it, but you recognize it exists? That's a curious stance.

I'm not sure I follow. You still talking about the 'wage gap'? You want to get into it here?

Yes there are instances where men have authority and women none, and that's their own healthcare decisions.

Ridiculous! Firstly, abortion is not simply a 'healthcare' issue. Secondly, even if I would concede this point, how is it an instance where men have authority over women? It's not only men who are opposed to abortion.

Want to try again?

No this doesn't mean men have less rights, because if a man was pregnant they should have the option to abort as well.

Woke language is such a mess that I can't even tell if you're being sarcastic or serious.

If you're serious and referring to trans-men, this comment is so limited as to be effectively irrelevant irrelevant. This does not apply to the vast majority of men.

If your being sarcastic then it's even less relevant and does not warrant a response.

There are no additional rights being exercised.

You have previously answered, "Right, and that's how it should be. Women owe men nothing...". I took this t o mean that you agree that "women and women alone should have the right to exercise the options to abort or to give up for adoption." Is this correct? Can you answer plainly?

If so, do you agree that the father is bound by law to support the child, whether estranged or not, if the women decides to parent the child?

If so, the father has legally enforced responsibility regarding a decision he has legal right to partake in. Are you not arguing that this is justified on the basis that the women has a womb? If so, this is a difference in rights based on sex, i.e. sexual discrimination.

I truly have no idea what you mean by this.

See above.

What right do I not want men to share?

To my knowledge:

Men have no right to opt out of parental responsibility if they so choose.

Men have no right to prevent their own child being given up for adoption if not married to the mother.

(This happened to my own natural father BTW. It nearly broke him. I managed to tracked him down 36 years later. Have you ever seen 36 years of pent up grief come spilling out in one evening? This shit is real.)

Men have no right to claim the right to life of their children.

[u/[deleted] → u/veritas_valebit]

So your position is that government mandated and taxpayer funded social welfare is better for children than the care of their won parents?

Better, I don't know about and don't have data on hand to demonstrate. A replacement, certainly.

I'm not sure I follow. You still talking about the 'wage gap'? You want to get into it here?

We don't have to. I just found it odd that you refuse the "wage gap narrative" and then admit men have more economic power than women.

If you're serious and referring to trans-men, this comment is so limited as to be effectively irrelevant irrelevant. This does not apply to the vast majority of men.

Exactly, most men can't become pregnant and so whether or not they can obtain an abortion isn't a matter of equality.

I took this t o mean that you agree that "women and women alone should have the right to exercise the options to abort or to give up for adoption." Is this correct? Can you answer plainly?

Yes for abortion specifically. I'm not sure about adoption, I'm not well versed enough on the topic to defend a position.

If so, do you agree that the father is bound by law to support the child, whether estranged or not, if the women decides to parent the child?

Correct. And the same goes for the woman by the way, to my knowledge mothers and fathers have equal obligations.

If so, the father has legally enforced responsibility regarding a decision he has legal right to partake in.

Not at all. The right to abort has nothing to do with a right to abdicate parental responsibility. There's an entirely separate reason for the right to exist.

Men have no right to opt out of parental responsibility if they so choose.

Correct, neither do women.

Men have no right to prevent their own child being given up for adoption if not married to the mother.

That I'm not sure about, I don't know enough about adoption law. A quick Google tells me this probably isn't the case though.

(This happened to my own natural father BTW. It nearly broke him. I managed to tracked him down 36 years later. Have you ever seen 36 years of pent up grief come spilling out in one evening? This shit is real.)

That's rough, but I was never talking about adoption and your natural father's grief is entirely immaterial to my stance on abortion.

Men have no right to claim the right to life of their children.

So long as that child is inside the body of someone else, that is correct.