Take a guy, he has sperm in his testes. Does he own it? When he ejaculates the sperm, does he still own it? If he has sex with a female or male and he ejaculates, who owns his sperm? Does he have a right, a choice over the ownership of his sperm, even when he has ejaculated it?
I'd argue that when a woman's eggs combine with sperm from a man she invited in there, she no longer owns the result.
She never took his sperm away from him without his permission. He GAVE her his sperm willingly thereby renouncing his ownership of it. Possession is 9/10ths of the law.
Inserting it into her is not quite the same thing as signing it over to her. Unless you believe the woman signs over rights when she gets pregnant.
Actually it is exactly that! If HE wanted to retain possession he should have worn a condom. Failure to do so is a de facto renunciation of ownership given that he actually inserted it into her willingly and knowingly.
If she didn't want to carry a pregnancy she should have used a diaphragm. I thought pro-choicers keep telling us condoms are not 100% effective?
Related thread that may be of interest, on the topic of ownership of sperm: women who steal sperm to get pregnant without the man's permission
Shifting the goalposts again because YOU can't refute the legality of possession? Of course you are! HER responsibility is IRRELEVANT to the OP topic. The OWNERSHIP of the sperm is the actual topic! HE needs to understand that condoms are not 100% effective and take additional precautions if he wants to maintain possession of his sperm which HE can do by having a VASECTOMY.
If you persist in trying to move the goalposts you will disqualify yourself from any further meaningful responses as far as I am concerned.
Which part of the OP are you having difficulty understanding? The OP topic is about OWNERSHIP of SPERM! What a woman does with it is IRRELEVANT! Go to your other thread if you want to discuss HER actions. It is HIS sperm as long as he retains POSSESSION of it! When he willingly gives it away it is no longer his sperm. You can't prove otherwise.
You don't own your own body? In which case who does own it? Your bank? Your boss? Your health insurance?
I stated you don't own it just because it is inside your body. You tried to turn that into you don't own your body. Maybe another way I could state it is just because it is inside of your body doesn't mean it is part of your body.
It is all a matter of the Free Market supply and demand, it appears there is less demand for mans sperm that has led to an over supply, therefore the question of ownership becomes a mute point when so many men are prepared to give it away free!
There are usually special papers a woman has to sign when she goes to a sperm bank, exempting the man from child support. In some countries, a woman is not permitted to receive sperm from a sperm bank unless she is married or has a long term partner. Also, a man who chooses to make such a donation is doing so with the explicit intention of a woman using that to get pregnant and have a baby. It is even foreseeably possible that the man could put a stipulation into the contract barring the woman from abortion, unless it were for life-threatening reasons. A man who just offloads his seed into the woman has not done so with the explicit intention of the woman laying claim to that sperm or using it for some nefarious purpose. Pro-choicers don't believe a woman consents to pregnancy when she consents to sex, so why should the man be consenting to giving up his seed when he has sex? I don't think the woman can just do whatever she wants to do with that.
You made an unqualified statement where "it" referred directly to "my body". Semantic SQUIRMING on your part does not alter that fact. So what you are saying is that the SPERM manufactured by HIS body is NOT "part of his body" therefore he does not own it? Great job at destroying your own position!
