So they are only good for child support money, right?
Wait - you just defended the ANTI-ABORTION or ANTI-CHOICE position. So that means that you want every woman to carry the child to term and deliver them and have a child. So if the woman has no choice and has to have the child, why then does the man not have to pay child support??
You are mixing up the argument that if a man doesn't want the baby and the woman does then should he have to pay child support - in that case, the man is PRO-ABORTION.
See, the problem with men wanting to be in control of women's uteri is that you want her to have the baby no matter what, but once it's born she shouldn't bother the poor man who was just having a fling for any sort of support, or ask the government for any help if she wasn't financially or emotionally ready to have the baby, but was forced to because of PRO-ABORTION people.
Which one is it. Or do men just get to screw whomever they want, pass laws on women's bodies and then not have to be responsible for any DNA they may have dropped into said women.
Sorry for losing thread integrity but his post felt like he had dropped a bomb. That's my defense.
I’m not mixing up anything. I am saying to say what it really is. Don’t distort vocabulary to suit your needs.
What the hell are you saying - it makes no sense. Please re read your post and fix it so it has some sort of meaning.
I’m not suggesting that evil men be in control of a woman’s uterus and I haven’t seen that ever discussed, well anywhere I have been.
I am also not going to go back and explain it all for you because if you came to that whole men in control conclusion with what I said then I can’t possibly explain it in any other way that would clear it up since that was never a thought in my head nor has it been.
I’m not mixing up anything. I am saying to say what it really is. Don’t distort vocabulary to suit your needs.
What the hell are you saying - it makes no sense. Please re read your post and fix it so it has some sort of meaning.
I’m not suggesting that evil men be in control of a woman’s uterus and I haven’t seen that ever discussed, well anywhere I have been.
I am also not going to go back and explain it all for you because if you came to that whole men in control conclusion with what I said then I can’t possibly explain it in any other way that would clear it up since that was never a thought in my head nor has it been.
I am trying to understand you but you aren't making any sense. Distorting vocabulary to suit my needs - what does that even mean??
Comments
if you plant a flower in my yard, I get to decide if it grows.
www.headstonesband.com
You are mixing up the argument that if a man doesn't want the baby and the woman does then should he have to pay child support - in that case, the man is PRO-ABORTION.
See, the problem with men wanting to be in control of women's uteri is that you want her to have the baby no matter what, but once it's born she shouldn't bother the poor man who was just having a fling for any sort of support, or ask the government for any help if she wasn't financially or emotionally ready to have the baby, but was forced to because of PRO-ABORTION people.
Which one is it. Or do men just get to screw whomever they want, pass laws on women's bodies and then not have to be responsible for any DNA they may have dropped into said women.
Sorry for losing thread integrity but his post felt like he had dropped a bomb. That's my defense.
www.headstonesband.com
I am also not going to go back and explain it all for you because if you came to that whole men in control conclusion with what I said then I can’t possibly explain it in any other way that would clear it up since that was never a thought in my head nor has it been.
www.headstonesband.com