Birth Control: Sharing the responsibility

It's not in her body once born either. They both share responsibility for that which they both made.

 

It never belonged to him.
Her grunting it out doesn't change that.

 

Unless it can be shown that she stole sperm from him, by trick or force, the offspring is as much his as hers. If she could get pregnant without him, then you would have a point. But the offspring only occurs because of both their actions, directly or indirectly (e.g. sex or IVF)

 

Nope, her body.
It belongs to her, unless of course you'd like to argue that it's not her body

 

If you want fair then require women to have their tubes tied.

This was a stupid political stunt. But if you want to force sterilzation I would remind you the last group that did that.

 

Alright, let's back track a little bit. Her body, her responsibility to do what/for what?

 

Don't know, don't care.
But it certainly has never been his body.
Nothing downstream from her has any bearing on him.

 

Aside from the possibility that you are probably conflating unrelated things, if you can't articulate the logic behind your argument, then you have no argument.

 

Then let's force women to get their tubes tied.

 

From the time of its existence it is "her body".
Expulsion from her vagina does not magically make it his.

 

Correct. The shared genetics makes it his. Just like her genetics in the child makes it hers even if it was gestated in a surrogate's womb. Or are you telling us that if a man and woman use IVF to created an embryo and it is placed in a surrogate's body, suddenly that child is the surrogate's and no one else?

 

Shared genetics makes it a carrier of his genes. Nothing more.
It belongs to her. It's "her body", remember?

 

Since the government already has their hands in my pockets, why not grab some bawls while they are there. The gov should never have the power to tell us what to do with our bodies. For those cheering for gun laws, higher taxes, and more government in our lives, you should just get the vasectomy or give birth. The government knows what is best for you.

 

You still haven't shown how that is an argument to the shared responsibility after birth and the corresponding responsibility to take action prior to conception of one doesn't wish to take on said responsibility after birth.

 

I don't prove nothing exists.
You must prove something exists, and you haven't demonstrated he has any responsibility. In fact your argument that the fetus is her body pretty much nullifies any attempt to do so.

 

Both the man and the woman engage in an activity to create the offspring. Both are responsible for creating it, thus both are responsible for rearing it to adulthood once born. Whose body the gestation occurs in is irrelevant to that fact.

To deny that one is responsible for the consequences of their actions would mean that both are not responsible for the consequences of their actions.

Since you failed to answer the question previously, I will ask again: If a man and woman use IVF to created an embryo and it is placed in a surrogate's body, suddenly that child is the surrogate's and no one else?

 

You have offered no proof as to why creation obligates responsibility. Other than just saying, you have not demonstrated it.

But you have confirmed that it is her body.
One has no authority over any other's body, nor does one have any responsibility to it.

 

Dodged the question again. I guess you realize it will counter your assertions?

If a man and woman use IVF to created an embryo and it is placed in a surrogate's body, suddenly that child is the surrogate's and no one else?

 

There is such a thing as legally binding contract, entered into willingly by both parties

 

And yet the surrogate can legally abort the child at any time and the genetic mother cannot give up her legal responsibility any more than the father can.

And strange how you bring up legality in this situation but ignored how it was point out in the prior one. More hypocrisy of position. And still failure to answer the question.

If the responsibility is on the genetic mother when the offspring is in her own body and no one else's responsibility, does that mean that the responsibility is is on the surrogate when the offspring, not genetically hers, in in her womb and not the responsibility of anyone else? The responsibility that you can't seem to detail.

 

You have not demonstrated why anyone has responsibility for anything.
You're just regurgitating your interpretation of the law. Using the law to support a philosophical position is intellectually void.

 

because 'a pregnancy' is a baby, and calling it 'a pregnancy' does not deny that fact. Abortion on demand, especially after the unborn child has developed a heart beat, is murder.

In this day, why on Earth would anyone need this? Use a condom. Use birth control. Get a BC implant. Use the morning after pill. But why in the world would you need to kill the child?

Once the baby gets to a certain stage of development, it is no longer about the woman's rights. It is about the child's right to be born.

Women are not gods who can decide the fate of an unborn child. Do the right thing, and prevent the pregnancy in the first place. It isn't that hard to do.

 

So by this logic, the woman has no responsibility either, correct? For that matter using the law of contract to support one's responsibility to adhere to the agreed terms is also intellectually void as well.

 

No.
Responsibility is not voluntary contractual obligation.

You are attempting to define why one party is obligated without offering any philosophical argument other than the party is compelled by law

 

Since the whole thread is about the law, nothing more is needed.