‘Rape Culture’ Is A MYTH | Change My Mind

[EricHiggin]

Torillian said:

Qwark said:

Not voluntarily giving up a kidney and willingly killing a consious human being because its inconvenient are not even remotely the same. As for leaching the life out of someone. You do realise the female body is biologically designed to carry a child. It normally doesn't cause inreparable medical damage to a woman. Unlike abortion which is definitive.

You can't give someone the right to kill another human being once its consious. Unless said person chooses so. If you don't want to raise a child totally fine, plenty of people who. would want to adopt a child. Luckily where I live abortion after 22 weeks is actually forbidden by law. Since even if the woman wants to get rid of it the medical procedure is forbidden to execute by a doctor, unless there are very compelling nefical reasons. Although I guess you could cut it out after that periode and lay it in a couveuse. 

A foetus is an exsisting person just because it is in a womb and you can not see it doesn't mean it is non existant. A consious foetus is a lot more than just a bunch of cell that are building a person. A featus is in fact a developing human being and that person has the right not to be killed. The fact that you would regard a consious festus as a parasite and something that has no value at all, is pretty disturbing if you ask me. 

you're missing the point. If someone had failed/failing kidneys, do you think the government could conscript someone to put that person on dialysis until a donor came around? Because the person with kidney issues is certainly a conscious human being, but I think most would say that the government should not be able to force someone to take that burden on their body even if it's for the betterment of another. 

While I don't really like the idea of abortion at all, I would be willing to compromise if the system were designed in a certain way. This is just my personal opinion.

If the woman is not an adult, or is raped, or the man wants nothing to do with it, and she doesn't want it either, she should be able to choose to abort.

In the same scenario's, if the woman does want it, she should be able to choose to give birth and accept full responsibility of that child (with adult approval if she's not).

If however they are both consenting adults, and they both agree the point of the act is to create a life, if she changes her mind and no longer wants the child, but the man does, then she should have to give birth. The way I see it, that man owns the rights to his 'product' and therefore the rules that go along with that should basically be contractual. If he requires what comes of that 'product', a child, is to be given life, then it should be granted, or the contract would then be broken, and she should have to pay a price. That price should be enough that she has to think twice before trying to abort. The man would also need to accept 100% responsibility of that child.

This way woman should get their way the large majority of the time and in those cases shouldn't really hurt anybody else (but the unborn potentially). While there would need to be much more to this, as I most certainly haven't covered absolutely everything, I think it would please many more people than simply allowing woman to make the choice no matter what. I realize it's their body that holds the unborn, but that being wouldn't exist without that man's 'product'.