[Rama Set]

Carney's organisation works with an evangelical law firm called ADF International whose London spokesperson Lois McLatchie has been interviewed by Scottish media saying the buffer zones "ban legitimate offers of help and silent prayer."

"Women have the right to hear about these options at the point of need and it is patronising of the government saying women don't want to hear this," McLatchie told BBC Scotland in a recent interview.

Excuse me, what? "Legitimate offers of help and silent prayer"? How exactly are these protests "helping" women?

You are kind of burying the lead:

an evangelical law firm

How the fuck is anyone supposed to take them seriously if this is on their business card?

[WTF_Seriously]

..... justify the personal irresponsibility of women.

Of course you meant, once again, to say the irresponsibility of men.  Either that or you're simply a sexist who thoroughly enjoys the patriarchy that the U.S. has always been and seems to be heading even further to being.

Men are already responsible. If a woman decides to have the baby, the man is responsible to support it by law and can't walk away. The man is sentenced to 18 years of labor to support the child. When a man complains the societal response is "Your fault, pay up!"

If the woman decides not to have the baby, she can do so without repercussion. She is not held to the same standards to be compelled to support her baby and can choose to kill it and escape responsibility.

Care to actually discuss what you said.  You were 100% blaming the woman for being "irresponsible" and getting pregnant.  It had nothing to do with legal responsibilities afterward.  Your statement was wholly to say that it is the woman's fault she's  pregnant.  This isn't the first time you've said it.  Nice try at deflecting and trying to say it was about something else.

[Lord Dave]

Carney's organisation works with an evangelical law firm called ADF International whose London spokesperson Lois McLatchie has been interviewed by Scottish media saying the buffer zones "ban legitimate offers of help and silent prayer."

"Women have the right to hear about these options at the point of need and it is patronising of the government saying women don't want to hear this," McLatchie told BBC Scotland in a recent interview.

Excuse me, what? "Legitimate offers of help and silent prayer"? How exactly are these protests "helping" women?

Here is how I was explained Prayer:
If enough people pray for something, and God is ok on changing his mind on that thing, he will. 

Like: if little Jimmy is dying of cancer and enough people pray hard enough, God might allow Jimmy to live instead of killing him.  But you can't know how many people is needed or if God is willing to change his mind.  So its a crap shoot.

[xasop]

Here is how I was explained Prayer:
If enough people pray for something, and God is ok on changing his mind on that thing, he will. 

Like: if little Jimmy is dying of cancer and enough people pray hard enough, God might allow Jimmy to live instead of killing him.  But you can't know how many people is needed or if God is willing to change his mind.  So its a crap shoot.

Isn't God supposed to know what everyone is going to do before they do it? In which case he should already know whether they would pray and make the situation different from the start so they don't need to.

[Lord Dave]

Here is how I was explained Prayer:
If enough people pray for something, and God is ok on changing his mind on that thing, he will. 

Like: if little Jimmy is dying of cancer and enough people pray hard enough, God might allow Jimmy to live instead of killing him.  But you can't know how many people is needed or if God is willing to change his mind.  So its a crap shoot.

Isn't God supposed to know what everyone is going to do before they do it? In which case he should already know whether they would pray and make the situation different from the start so they don't need to.

He does.  But he still wants them to do it before he does anything.

Basically: if ya don't beg, he won't consider making things better.

[Action80]

..... justify the personal irresponsibility of women.

Of course you meant, once again, to say the irresponsibility of men.  Either that or you're simply a sexist who thoroughly enjoys the patriarchy that the U.S. has always been and seems to be heading even further to being.

Men are already responsible. If a woman decides to have the baby, the man is responsible to support it by law and can't walk away. The man is sentenced to 18 years of labor to support the child. When a man complains the societal response is "Your fault, pay up!"

If the woman decides not to have the baby, she can do so without repercussion. She is not held to the same standards to be compelled to support her baby and can choose to kill it and escape responsibility.

Care to actually discuss what you said.  You were 100% blaming the woman for being "irresponsible" and getting pregnant.  It had nothing to do with legal responsibilities afterward.  Your statement was wholly to say that it is the woman's fault she's  pregnant.  This isn't the first time you've said it.  Nice try at deflecting and trying to say it was about something else.

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

[Iceman]

..... justify the personal irresponsibility of women.

Of course you meant, once again, to say the irresponsibility of men.  Either that or you're simply a sexist who thoroughly enjoys the patriarchy that the U.S. has always been and seems to be heading even further to being.

Men are already responsible. If a woman decides to have the baby, the man is responsible to support it by law and can't walk away. The man is sentenced to 18 years of labor to support the child. When a man complains the societal response is "Your fault, pay up!"

If the woman decides not to have the baby, she can do so without repercussion. She is not held to the same standards to be compelled to support her baby and can choose to kill it and escape responsibility.

Care to actually discuss what you said.  You were 100% blaming the woman for being "irresponsible" and getting pregnant.  It had nothing to do with legal responsibilities afterward.  Your statement was wholly to say that it is the woman's fault she's  pregnant.  This isn't the first time you've said it.  Nice try at deflecting and trying to say it was about something else.

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

60% of the time, it’s her fault every time

[Rama Set]

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

mEn JuSt CaN't CoNtRoL tHeMsElVeS!!!!!!!!1111111111111

[AATW]

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

78.3% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[Lord Dave]

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

mEn JuSt CaN't CoNtRoL tHeMsElVeS!!!!!!!!1111111111111

Nah.  Its women.  They release pheramones that make men super horny.  They are mind controlled into having sex.  Otherwise all men would be celebet.

[BillO]

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

5% of the time you post something that is not this ridiculous.

[Tom Bishop]

Men are already responsible. If a woman decides to have the baby, the man is responsible to support it by law and can't walk away. The man is sentenced to 18 years of labor to support the child. When a man complains the societal response is "Your fault, pay up!"

If the woman decides not to have the baby, she can do so without repercussion. She is not held to the same standards to be compelled to support her baby and can choose to kill it and escape responsibility.

Care to actually discuss what you said.  You were 100% blaming the woman for being "irresponsible" and getting pregnant.  It had nothing to do with legal responsibilities afterward.  Your statement was wholly to say that it is the woman's fault she's  pregnant.  This isn't the first time you've said it.  Nice try at deflecting and trying to say it was about something else.

We are talking about abortion. Women can escape responsibility by choosing to end life legally and men can't. This makes women responsible for abortion. A woman's right to choose makes them responsible. Adoption is an option, as is having the baby and utilizing child support/welfare/family support. The man is legally on the hook for the child and does not get to escape responsibility like with the options the woman has.

[BillO]

This makes women responsible for abortion.

Yes, if they have the choice and choose to take that option without consulting the father.

However, they do not bear 100% responsibility for getting pregnant.  That at best is only 50% women's responsibility and sometimes 0%.  So men must be at least 50% responsible for unwanted pregnancy.

[Tom Bishop]

This makes women responsible for abortion.

Yes, if they have the choice and choose to take that option without consulting the father.

However, they do not bear 100% responsibility for getting pregnant.  That at best is only 50% women's responsibility and sometimes 0%.  So men must be at least 50% responsible for unwanted pregnancy.

Sometimes it's 100% if the woman chooses to drug and rape a man or go to a sperm donation bank.

But the responsibility for getting pregnant is irrelevant. We are talking about the responsibility to the child after pregnancy has already occurred. At this stage the man is legally responsible (maybe not if he was raped or donated sperm) and there is nothing he can do about it at that point. The law says he is responsible to the child. The woman can escape responsibility to her child by killing it. The woman has more options to escape responsibility than the man has.

[Rama Set]

This makes women responsible for abortion.

Yes, if they have the choice and choose to take that option without consulting the father.

However, they do not bear 100% responsibility for getting pregnant.  That at best is only 50% women's responsibility and sometimes 0%.  So men must be at least 50% responsible for unwanted pregnancy.

Sometimes it's 100% if the woman chooses to drug and rape a man or go to a sperm donation bank.

But the responsibility for getting pregnant is irrelevant. We are talking about the responsibility to the child after pregnancy has already occurred. At this stage the man is legally responsible (maybe not if he was raped or donated sperm) and there is nothing he can do about it at that point. The law says he is responsible to the child. The woman can escape responsibility to her child by killing it. The woman has more options to escape responsibility than the man has.

The man can kill the woman or the baby.  He has twice as many options.

[rooster]

We are talking about the responsibility to the child after pregnancy has already occurred.

Nope. You were talking about how women need to have higher standards and wait until marriage. Why would women need to do that if they get child support from the man regardless? You were absolutely blaming women for being sexually active and were placing no blame on sexually active men even though it's their sperm that causes all the problems.

[markjo]

95% percent of the time, it is her fault.

That's right.  If she didn't dress like a slut, then she wouldn't have gotten raped.

[stack]

Sometimes it's 100% if the woman chooses to drug and rape a man or go to a sperm donation bank.

Less than 1% of abortions occur to rape; you are attempting to use an extreme example to justify the personal irresponsibility of women.

[BillO]

Sometimes it's 100% if the woman chooses to drug and rape a man or go to a sperm donation bank.

But the responsibility for getting pregnant is irrelevant. We are talking about the responsibility to the child after pregnancy has already occurred. At this stage the man is legally responsible (maybe not if he was raped or donated sperm) and there is nothing he can do about it at that point. The law says he is responsible to the child. The woman can escape responsibility to her child by killing it. The woman has more options to escape responsibility than the man has.

Sorry Tom.  In the case (A) of the woman going to the sperm bank 1) the man is off the hook and 2) the woman did nothing immoral and 3) if she went to the sperm bank she would not be likely to looking for an abortion a few weeks later.  Your other case is ridiculous.  A drug strong enough to knock a man completely out like that would make him impotent and is completely unnecessary given the availability of case (A).

All that aside you seem to be having trouble with simple logic here, the cases where the woman wants to "escape responsibility" are those cases where she did not want it in the first place or the situation was forced on her.  The man has the very same set of responsibilities when the pregnancy is due to a coupling.  He can also escape them by the means you suggest for the woman.  By being a moral little boy, keeping his dick in his pants and waiting until marriage.  If he takes the worm out for a spelunking, then that is the point where he has crossed the line and bears responsibility.

The real difference in why the woman should have one further chance to opt out is that Loverboy does not face the same harsh realities the woman does in going forward with the unwanted pregnancy.  All he has to do is toss them few measly dollars once in a while.

[markjo]

Guys being promiscuous: boys will be boys.
Girls being promiscuous: sluts that had it coming.