my views are unrelated to the question and differ from everyone here to begin with, I'm just asking an interesting question that made both sides think in my class today. question is pretty simple, should women have the right to choose if they get pregnant?
again..help me with why that's relevant? there are rape laws in this country...don't they cover that? not trying to be argumentative...i just don't understand how it's relevant.
Everytime a woman engages in sex, the possibility exists that she will become pregnant (unless it is medically impossible), regardless of what type of prevention is being used. In the same vein, the man is taking the risk as well. Knowing that there is no 100% safe method of birth control, each person should know that their act may result in pregnancy, therefore, I would think it is implied consent that their act may produce a pregnancy.
I used to say that too. But sex ed should involve much more that how. It also should involve why and when. A lot of girls also need to understand that having sex is not a way to be loved. I think that should be a big part of it. But a war against hormones and insecurity is a hard one to fight. (Especially in a materialistic society that teaches you are what you have or don't have). This society talks out of both side of it's mouth and expects miracles.
I don't understand how the rape laws cover this...? They cover non-consensual sex (unless I'm wrong), but I'm talking about non-consensual pregnancies, do you see the distinction?
that's correct and I agree, there is an assumption of the risk, however, one point is that there are also many other things in the world where there is indemnification if the unintended should occur. but I'm not asking if they 'can' choose, I'm asking if they should have the right to choose if they get pregnant?
no. if a woman wishes not to get pregnant, she should not have sex...or use birth control. are you talking about when birth control fails? one can't force pregnancy on a woman without forcing sex...right???? just trying to understand your point. i'm reading even your posts after this and not getting it. are you insinuating that right now women don't have a right to or not to get pregnant??? how about a practical example illustrating what you mean??
Perhaps he means when married/partnered women are forced to have sex? If they are truly forced, then it is rape. Being married matters not, as far as defining rape, as far as I'm concerned.
well, obviously women don't choose when they get pregnant, but should they have a choice? when a woman consents to sex, does she also consent to pregnancy? obviously many think that when one consents to sex, they also consent to pregnancy, but is that fair? I'm not insinuating if they do or do not have a right to get pregnant, I'm asking if they should have that right. (also not insinuating if this is even physically possible). Can is easy to answer, should is a little more abstract.
I think the woman, and the man, consent to the possibility of the woman becoming pregnant, if they think about that at all. Many do not, and the younger you are, the less thought generally goes into the whole process, if you get my drift. That's one of the worst things about the policies of the Administration regarding sex education... policies that affect millions over the world. (see "constrictions on foreign aid," for example) Keep D&D Civil!!
yes, good response, i think that's something we all agree on that there is always a chance, but it doesn't answer the question. Ok, to clarify, the reality is that women do not have a choice in whether or not they get pregnant, they can play with the percentages, but they don't have a choice in the end. However, should they be allowed to make that choice if it was possible?
This seems fairly easy to me. I think a woman should have the right to choose to have sex for purposes other than procreation. I think that a woman should have the right to choose to use contraception. And I think that a woman should have the right to make choices that affect her life, body, and well-being. So from that, I guess it follows that a woman should have the right to consent to or refuse consent to a pregnancy.
nyquil -- this is like arguing in the abstract. under the law...under the sun...we all know that our actions have consequences, even if they're undesired. so if my wife gets pregnant after having sex with me, who does she take up her grievance with?? God?? Nature?? it's part of creation or evolution..it just is. if you stick a fork in your eye, you might lose your sight. do you have a right to see?? who is affording you these rights?? where are these rights coming from?? i understand your argument if you say the woman was raped...but a natural occurrence from sex is a child. it just is. you can intervene and try to prevent it...or after the fact you can seek to remove it...but it just is. have we gotten to a point where we are arguing for rights contrary to nature?? i ate brocolli...but i have a right to not eat foods i don't like. huh??? it does not surprise me in the least that this thought emanated from a law school classroom. not in the least. but the world isn't an abstract bubble. when i cut myself, i bleed.
I feel your hot breath on my neck with that line.... lay off the Viet Namese food okay! In the story you told, that was not a cavalier decision, but would you deny that many such decisions are in fact cavalier? A lot of the cavalier attitude is brought on by a lack of comprehension of the magnitude of the decision which often arrives later, sometimes years later. I'm not into banning abortions but I am for severely limiting them-- very severely.
My stats for the 1% after 20 weeks comes from a Christian Pro-life website, though they do not disclose their sorce. It seemed to jive with a few other sites I looked at quickly, so take it for what it's worth: http://www.christianliferesources.com/cgi-bin/home.pl?statsGeneral The 1 in 400 (I think I said 1 in 4000 earlier, which is a math error on my part) is an extrapolation of the 1% statistic above and the abortion rates found on the page below. There seems to be a concensus that the approximate abortion rate is 1 in 4 pregnancies. 1% of 25% is .25% or 1 in 400. I'd be very interested in seeing statistics for abortions between the 20th, 24th, and 28th week, and after the 28th week. http://www.pregnantpause.org/numbers/us1996.htm You seem to be arguing strongly for the enforcement of Roe V Wade. I'll be the first to admit that my knowlege is lacking on the legal history of abortion. I need to talk to my friend who took Weddington's class up here at UT. If what you say is true, I disagree that we need to enforce Roe as it was written. I see softening Roe as good, so your argument isn't terribly persuasive.
Mmmmm... Vietnamese! I knew you would show up here, giddy, like the sun rising in the East, like the dog taking a dump in the backyard, like the... I have no doubt that some women, like some men, are just as dumb as a post, and go tripping down to a clinic like they were going to Sunday school. You can't legislate away stupidity. Other than that, no, I don't believe the decisions are cavalier. I personally know some women, several, if you include those I've met over the years, who had abortions, and I can't think of a single one who did it "cavalierly." Keep D&D Civil!!
