The journey from there to here
Published on January 20, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Politics

A few years ago, a friend of mine, after his third child, decided it was time to get snipped. So, he spoke with the doctors about it, and found out something interesting:

In the state of Wisconsin, at least, a married man MUST have his wife's permission to have a vasectomy!

Contrary to a statement on a recent blog, it is not required (in Wisconsin, at least) for a woman to receive her husband's permission to have an abortion. There's an obvious double standard here that I just don't get.


Comments (Page 4)
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 
on Jan 21, 2005

Interesting view of children.
However, when you think about it, the mother was a child once. That means she too is a parasite. In fact, since everybody is a parasite, anybody who supports the right of humans to exist is pro-parasite.


Very Insightful.

on Jan 21, 2005
However, when you think about it, the mother was a child once. That means she too is a parasite. In fact, since everybody is a parasite, anybody who supports the right of humans to exist is pro-parasite.


So? That's not really the point. I don't see why it's the father's decision whether or not to abort. All he did was knock the woman up. There's no real suffering required on his behalf. But the price of pregnancy is quite high, both emotionally and physically. Should people have to experience it for a single mistake? It's nothing like a vasectomy, where the only real effect is that you might not be able to pass on your genes.

They is you.  They are the ones that believe a baby is an evil parasite.  They are the ones that believe a baby is not a baby until it walks and talks.


Oh. In that case, what does PBA mean? Pro bonum addendum or something? I'm not familiar with it. And I don't recall saying babies are evil. They simply have the potential to be, and therefore must be raised with care. A responsibility that is not inherent in vasectomies, and one that only rarely involves the father. I say this because most married couples and those in serious relationships will consult about an abortion automatically; they don't need legislation. Those who aren't in such a relationship might not be thrilled to have their own opinion overruled by absentee partners.

I think it's better to let the individual choose in both circumstances, but then I believe to a certain extent in the liberal creed of universal human rights, so take that how you will.
on Jan 21, 2005

Reply #42 By: cactoblasta - 1/21/2005 5:26:45 PM
Even tho they spout about a womans rights to choose, and it is a zygote, the difference between some zygotes and a baby is 2 inches. PBAs.


Who is they? The evil corporation? The evil government? Those evil women?

You can talk about the sanctity of human life as much as you like, but a pregnant woman is still carrying a parasite that is fully capable of killing her and everyone she has ever known. If she and/or her partner doesn't raise it right there's no knowing what it could be capable of. That's a big responsibility, and personally I'd rather the incompetent abort rather than leaving the child to the cruelties of the adoption schemes and the harsh realities of foster parents.


She/they should have thought of that when they had unprotected sex.

There's no real suffering required on his behalf.


If you believe this then you've never been on the wrong side of a child support case.
on Jan 21, 2005
So? That's not really the point. I don't see why it's the father's decision whether or not to abort. All he did was knock the woman up. There's no real suffering required on his behalf. But the price of pregnancy is quite high, both emotionally and physically. Should people have to experience it for a single mistake? It's nothing like a vasectomy, where the only real effect is that you might not be able to pass on your genes.


No, all I'm saying is that I agree with you that all humans are parasites and that anybody who supports the right of humans to exist is pro-parasite.
By the way, isn't the price of abortion also quite high mentally and physically, or is it all lollypops and candyland?
And yes, vasectomies aren't like pregnancy. They're like abortion, in that it's to prevent the birth of a child.

And I don't recall saying babies are evil.


No, you called them parasites capable of killing the mother and everybody she loves. When you think about it, humans need to be snuffed before it's too late.
on Jan 22, 2005
And yes, vasectomies aren't like pregnancy. They're like abortion, in that it's to prevent the birth of a child.


Ah, now I see what you mean. I imagine you're against condoms and birth control as well. That's all right. Neither of us are going to be capable of viewing the other's views as sensible, so I won't bother with any more unnecessary discussion.

No, you called them parasites capable of killing the mother and everybody she loves. When you think about it, humans need to be snuffed before it's too late


Personally I don't consider parasites as innately evil. There's nothing evil about locusts, yet they're parasites. I don't think they stroke cats and have lazy eyes (or at least, they don't do it where I can see...) Why do you? Babies do have that potential, and in the womb they exist through taking sustenance from the flesh of their mother. Sounds like parasitic behaviour to me. And of course they can kill. I've heard of lots of serial killers who had "troubled childhoods". Is there a link? I'd rather not find out if it's fine with you.

It should be the mother's choice on abortions and the man's choice with vasectomies, particularly as they will be the ones it affects most.
on Jan 22, 2005
She/they should have thought of that when they had unprotected sex.


Unprotected sex (or sex where the protection has failed) is inevitable. Very few people are strong enough to resist the biological imperative, and it is impossible to determine who had failed protection or simply didn't bother at all - unless of course you require the broken condom to be surrendered at the abortion clinic, which I imagine would be embarrassing in the extreme to all concerned, as well as highly unsanitary.

If you believe this then you've never been on the wrong side of a child support case.


I'm sorry for you that you couldn't follow your own advice, but surely if a strong willed man like you cannot resist the urge then weaker people are nigh on helpless?
on Jan 22, 2005
Well the hell happened, I thought we were talking about vasectomy and histerectomy?
on Jan 22, 2005

Reply #51 By: cactoblasta - 1/22/2005 2:21:32 AM
If you believe this then you've never been on the wrong side of a child support case.


I'm sorry for you that you couldn't follow your own advice, but surely if a strong willed man like you cannot resist the urge then weaker people are nigh on helpless?


You want to stop putting words in my mouth? I never said this was me now did I?


Reply #51 By: cactoblasta - 1/22/2005 2:21:32 AM
She/they should have thought of that when they had unprotected sex.


Unprotected sex (or sex where the protection has failed) is inevitable


It's only inevitable for the ignorant.
on Jan 22, 2005

So? That's not really the point. I don't see why it's the father's decision whether or not to abort. All he did was knock the woman up. There's no real suffering required on his behalf. But the price of pregnancy is quite high, both emotionally and physically. Should people have to experience it for a single mistake? It's nothing like a vasectomy, where the only real effect is that you might not be able to pass on your genes.

Ooh!  Cacto!  Very good!  And so by extension, the man has nothing to do with the baby either! So get your grimy paws out of his back pocket!  It is her body and her decision, and her consequences!

See?  Pure logic at work.

on Jan 22, 2005
That is really crappy. Men should be able to do what they want. Women should do what they want....
on Jan 22, 2005
Reply #55 By: alison watkins - 1/22/2005 4:35:49 PM
That is really crappy. Men should be able to do what they want. Women should do what they want....


Allison, I usually don't agree with anything you write. But this time you get an insightful.
on Jan 23, 2005
I don't think men should have the right to veto whether a woman obtains a legal abortion or not.  Similarly, I don't think women have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed.
on Jan 23, 2005
don't think men should have the right to veto whether a woman obtains a legal abortion or not. Similarly, I don't think women have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed.


Agreed!

Even though women should not have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed it seems they never stop trying to fix a man. But that's a whole other thing.
on Jan 24, 2005

but a pregnant woman is still carrying a parasite that is fully capable of killing her and everyone she has ever known.

Wow, a baby called a parasite. I hate to say it, cacto, but I lost a lot of respect for you from that response.

on Jan 24, 2005
Using cacto's logic, it should be perfectly legal to kill a baby before its tollder years, when it is capable of feeding itself, as it is dependent on some other to provide its sustenance, and is thus a parasite.
5 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5