~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | This about sums it up.Well no shit sherlock! I was going for the fact that women are capable of making life-altering decisions, such as whether or not to terminate a pregnancy (via medical procedure, plan B pill, or in many unfortunate cases, illegal abortions or home-done abortions, such as coat hangers or attempting to funnel chemicals into their uterus.) | /r/MensRights | 28/08/11 06:04 AM |
| 1 | This about sums it up.How is being outside the mother cause enough to call the baby a living human with a human's rights as opposed to when the baby is still in her womb? Probably because if a child (already born) is alive, it's a living human with human rights. A baby that is still inside the womb is a fetus (up to a certain number of weeks. There is a reason we have limits on when you can voluntarily have abortions. There are times when late-term abortions are necessary due to medical complications, in order to sav… | /r/MensRights | 27/08/11 04:08 AM |
| 2 | This about sums it up.Because she is the only one capable of carrying a pregnancy to term. Do you think it would be okay if a woman said "I want to get an abortion" and the man that got her pregnant would not allow it? Forced her to carry it and give birth? You can't deny biology. It is what it is. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with the baby. Pregnancy is not only an extremely expensive endeavour (yes, pregnancy. not even talking about a born child yet), but it is dangerous and often forces a woman to be … | /r/MensRights | 26/08/11 08:25 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter