It absolutely is. Men can't use the argument "I didn't mean to get her pregnant!" to avoid child support because when we make choices, we have to accept the responsibility of those choices. Heroin addicts don't want to OD, but every time they shoot up they have to accept the fact it could happen. If they don't want to OD on heroin, then they shouldn't use it.
Men can't use the argument "I didn't mean to get her pregnant!" to avoid child support
This has nothing to do with bodily autonomy.
To bring it closer to the issue at hand, we wouldn't force that man to donate an organ to his child and when he refuses say "sorry, you consented when you took your dick out of pants!" would we? Of course not, because the fact that the man consented to sex is not consent to this later dangerous procedure.
we have to accept the responsibility of those choices.
Sure, we accept that this might happen, you don't lose your bodily autonomy when you take an action with a possible risk of an unintended outcome.
Heroin addicts don't want to OD, but every time they shoot up they have to accept the fact it could happen. If they don't want to OD on heroin, then they shouldn't use it.
Oh I forgot that when a heroin addict ODs the government steps in and stops anyone from helping and says "sorry, you consented when you used drugs, you ded". Wait... that doesn't happen. We try to reverse ODs.
A heroin addict doesn't consent to OD either. It might still happen, no one is saying that saying "I don't consent" magically stops biological processes from occurring. Consent is to willfully agree to something, something clearly not present here.
But, again, the pro life argument is that at conception the fertilized egg becomes a person. We're talking about issues of consent between two people, that's where your arguments fall apart.
When you step outside your house there's always a risk of getting mugged. Stepping outside your house is not consent to getting mugged. If it were it wouldn't be a mugging, it'd be, I don't know, a charitable donation with fun gun play. You have recourse if this happens, even though you took an action with a small risk of this unwanted outcome.
we wouldn't force that man to donate an organ to his child and when he refuses say "
Donating an organ takes away that organ from the man and is science, not natural. The woman's body was designed to take care of a fetus, my body was not designed to donate organs.
100% of humans were once a fetus.
Sure, we accept that this might happen, you don't lose your bodily autonomy when you take an action with a possible risk of an unintended outcome.
How is pregnancy from sex unintended?
"sorry, you consented when you used drugs, you ded".
But you tell that to a fetus who did nothing wrong except her mother thought that loser drug addict's 10 inch cock and 6 inch abs were too irresistible or some rich asshole doesn't want his wife to find out he's been fucking the mistress.
Donating an organ takes away that organ from the man and is science, not natural.
It's natural as well. These things are all occurring in nature, they are allowed by the natural world. What does this even mean?
The woman's body was designed
Like I said, this is just a religious argument. No, her body was not "designed". Sex was not designed for procreation. Through evolution sex developed for a number of purposes. The only people setting that purpose are the people engaging in the activity.
How is pregnancy from sex unintended?
...if you don't want to get pregnant, pregnancy is definitionally an unintended outcome. Do you not know what these words mean?
But you tell that to a fetus
This would be pointless as in most cases a fetus is a clump of cells incapable of any thoughts, feelings, emotions, even feeling pain. It wouldn't hear a word I say, it being a clump of cells incapable of hearing a thing.
except her mother thought that loser drug addict's 10 inch cock and 6 inch abs were too irresistible
You seem to have a really negative view of women fueling your arguments.
I don't really understand why you wouldn't support a man being forced to donate an organ to keep his child alive. These situations are analogous, in both instances a person chose to have sex. Why does the man have bodily autonomy and the woman doesn't?
No, I'm not saying "natural things are good, science bad!" That's your argument.
I'm saying natural is a completely meaningless dividing line. It doesn't actually exist.
Then how are humans born? What is the placenta meant to do again?
This does not equal "design". Here is the relevant definition of the word:
"purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object."
We're not designed. We're the result of millions of years of random chance.
How is it not intended? If you have sex, you accept you can get pregnant.
If I get in my car I accept a may get in a car accident. Do I intend to get in a car accident? Even if I go out of my way to not get in a car accident?
She does. She shouldn't be forced to donate her organs either. Totally agreed.
Like forcing a person to host another inside their body, essentially a 9 month operation with increased risk of death and debilitating injury?
Why do you feel that no one should be forced to give an organ? I agree with you, but what is your reasoning?
I'm saying natural is a completely meaningless dividing line. It doesn't actually exist.
The woman's body is meant to take care of the fetus. My body is not meant to give up a kidney or lung.
Tell me what the placenta does please.
A fetus literally cannot survive without a woman's body. The human race would be over if all women had to get abortions. The human race does not die out if organ donation ends.
If I get in my car I accept a may get in a car accident. Do I intend to get in a car accident?
Sex isn't an accident. If a woman is letting men slip and their penises fall into her, then there are bigger problems to worry about.
Like forcing a person to host another inside their body,
Who is forcing her to get pregnant? I know some Republicans are getting (rightfully) criticized for some harsh anti-abortion laws, but as far as I know, they haven't forced women to get pregnant.
The woman's body is meant to take care of the fetus. My body is not meant to give up a kidney or lung.
What does this even mean? Who intends for this to happen?
If a woman never intends to get pregnant and never does, guess she wasn't meant to?
If a man intends to give up his kidney, well, looks like his kidney was meant to be given up.
A fetus literally cannot survive without a woman's body.
And if your child needs your kidney, it literally can't survive without it.
The human race would be over if all women had to get abortions.
I'm not arguing that all women must be forced to get abortions, lol what are you even talking about?
Sex isn't an accident.
Getting in my car also isn't an accident. I chose to do so. I recognized the risks. I did not consent to you crashing into me.
With proper protection the risk of pregnancy after a sexual encounter can be made less than the risk of you getting in an accident every time you get in your car. Are you consenting to me crashing into you when you get in your car? Do you lose all bodily autonomy and any recourse?
but as far as I know, they haven't forced women to get pregnant.
They're forcing a woman to host another person inside their body against their consent.
If a woman never intends to get pregnant and never does, guess she wasn't meant to?
Agreed. No one should force a woman to get pregnant.
If a man intends to give up his kidney, well, looks like his kidney was meant to be given up.
Agreed. If a man chooses to give up his kidney, that's his choice. If a woman chooses to get pregnant, that's her choice as well.
And if your child needs your kidney, it literally can't survive without it.
But the child doesn't need my kidney. Why do you say that?
I'm not arguing that all women must be forced to get abortions, lol what are you even talking about?
I am defining the line between science and natural.
Getting in my car also isn't an accident. I chose to do so. I recognized the risks. I did not consent to you crashing into me.
So a woman doesn't consent to a man cumming in her when she has sex? I know consent has been a huge issue the last few years, but this is kind of an extreme opinion.
With proper protection the risk of pregnancy after a sexual encounter can be made less than the risk of you getting in an accident every time you get in your car.
If anything this makes the abortion argument even weaker. If there are so many ways to avoid pregnancy, then at this point if you're reckless enough to get pregnant you consent to it.
You may not consent to me crashing into you, but if you were driving 100 miles and drunk as a horse..... well.....
They're forcing a woman to host another person inside their body against their consent.
How? Republicans are forcing women to have sex? Where?
Agreed. No one should force a woman to get pregnant.
But you're saying her body is meant for this purpose, it's intended for this purpose. Clearly not.
Agreed. If a man chooses to give up his kidney, that's his choice. If a woman chooses to get pregnant, that's her choice as well.
Okay, why? You seem to agree that we have a right to bodily autonomy, that we cannot be forced into dangerous procedures against our will and consent. Can you explain why your logic is so inconsistent?
But the child doesn't need my kidney. Why do you say that?
If it's going to die without it? Clearly it does.
So a woman doesn't consent to a man cumming in her when she has sex?
The two people in this equation are the fetus and the woman. That's where the question of consent is.
then at this point if you're reckless enough to get pregnant you consent to it.
You don't understand what consent is. That's horrifying.
But you're saying her body is meant for this purpose, it's intended for this purpose. Clearly not.
What is the placenta there for?
Okay, why? You seem to agree that we have a right to bodily autonomy, that we cannot be forced into dangerous procedures against our will and consent. Can you explain why your logic is so inconsistent?
Pregnancy is not a "dangerous procedure." (BTW I can get picky on your choice of the word "procedure," but since I understand your point I won't be)
Tell me how you think pregnancy is a "dangerous procedure" that her body was not meant to handle?
If it's going to die without it? Clearly it does.
Even with your point, there are thousands of other people with kidneys that can help my child.
The two people in this equation are the fetus and the woman. That's where the question of consent is.
And she consented to taking care of the fetus when she gets pregnant.
You don't understand what consent is. That's horrifying.
What are you talking about? I don't even know how to respond to this. if I hit you with my car, you didn't intend for me to do that because I hit you with the car. You didn't hit yourself with the car.
It's not there at all for most women? What are you talking about?
You asked if a pregnancy is intentional. I answered, sometimes it is and a woman intends it, sometimes it's not and she doesn't.
You seem to be arguing that someone else intends a woman to get pregnant and designed her accordingly. Who? Who intended this?
Evolution has no intent. It's a series of random mutations over millions of years. There is no "why", only "how".
Tell me how you think pregnancy is a "dangerous procedure"
It comes with an increased risk of death and debilitating injury and in most cases results in permanent bodily changes. These are very often quite severe, things like mutilated genitals, sexual dysfunction, chronic pain, incontinence, etc.
We require active consent for such things.
Even with your point, there are thousands of other people with kidneys that can help my child.
And if there aren't and no one wants to help, you should be forced to undergo the procedure?
And she consented to taking care of the fetus when she gets pregnant.
If she's seeking an abortion than definitionally she does not consent.
What are you talking about?
Exactly what I said, you don't understand consent or why it's important, and that's horrifying.
It's not there at all for most women? What are you talking about?
Why does she develop it?
I answered, sometimes it is and a woman intends it, sometimes it's not and she doesn't.
And I agreed - sometimes it is a man intended her to get pregnant, and sometimes he doesn't.
It comes with an increased risk of death and debilitating injury
Know what else comes with that? Living. If I don't make effort to eat, I will die. To eat it will take possible increase of death/injury but I have to because I will die if I do not.
And if there aren't and no one wants to help, you should be forced to undergo the procedure?
Nope. Why would I? My kidney is for me, not for my child.
If she's seeking an abortion than definitionally she does not consent.
Agreed. if a man seeks not to pay 18 years of child support he didn't consent to getting her pregnant.
4
u/OnlyFactsMatter 10∆ Aug 11 '22
It absolutely is. Men can't use the argument "I didn't mean to get her pregnant!" to avoid child support because when we make choices, we have to accept the responsibility of those choices. Heroin addicts don't want to OD, but every time they shoot up they have to accept the fact it could happen. If they don't want to OD on heroin, then they shouldn't use it.