consent to insemination = consent to impregnation

A woman walks into a sperm bank. She takes a turkey baster and squirts sperm up her hole.

Would anyone try to argue this woman has not consented to getting pregnant?


So why then do I hear so many pro-choicers make the claim "Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy" ?

When a woman spreads her legs and consents to getting inseminated, that's sort of the same thing as consenting to get impregnated, isn't it?

 

First you'll have to show proof that women ""takes a turkey baster and squirts sperm up her hole""

WHERE does that happen? NO where.

And if you don't know the word for vagina, it's vagina.

Because she hasn't.

"So many" ? How many?

Consent to one act is not consent to any other act.

No, it isn't....consent to one act(sex) is not consent to any other act (becoming pregnant).

BTW, as you've been told, women cannot "consent" to get pregnant...they either do or don't, consenting doesn't get them pregnant.

 

Because consent to sex isn’t consent to pregnancy? None of your crudely presented examples are relevant to that statement.

Pregnancy isn’t an act a person consents to (or not) at all, it’s a potential outcome, one which both parties involved can seek to reduce (or indeed increase) the chances of. There are plenty of valid questions around the use and timings of the various methods (most of which you’ve demonstrated zero interest in) but none of those specific questions lead back to any kind of generic implied consent to conceive, be pregnant or give birth (or have an abortion for that matter).

 

no

 

I always make them swallow..

 

Should a woman go to a sperm bank, use some sperms to get pregnant, and then later on, decide she does not want to keep the pregnancy, that's fine. I very much doubt she would make that choice "for convenience", she would likely have very real reasons for deciding to do the opposite of what she initially and purposefully set out to do, which is to become pregnant.

Consent to sex is consent to sex. Consent to pregnancy is consent to pregnancy. But in most cases of sex, consent for the pregnancy is not the chief issue, it's desire to BE pregnant. Do I want to be pregnant or is that not a good idea for me and my family right now because of ________. Sex is not consent to carry a baby 9 months to birth, it's an act which may or may not lead to a pregnancy which a woman then makes a separate but no less deserving decision about in the event of a becoming pregnant. It's sort of like trying to argue that using the internet is consent to getting ransomware. Yes, you used the internet and yes, getting ransomware is a potential risk of being on the internet, but you don't then let the ransomware run it's course where you eventually pay someone a bunch of money. You get rid of it without the need for things to progress that far whenever possible.

Two separate choices, not combined into one for the ease of an anti-abortion argument still trying to find logical legs to stand on after all these years.

 

But what if I had to kill someone to get rid of this ransomware, and knew this all in advance before I decided to start using the internet?
That's really the issue here.

 

Intercourse has an inherent risk of pregnancy. If a person engages in intercourse, then they accept the risk and have to live with the outcome.

Its like driving. Driving has an inherent risk of an accident, you can try to minimize the risk but it is still there, and by driving you accept the risk and the outcome.

In both cases, there is implied consent.

 

Accepting a risk isn't the same as consent and even if it was consent to (the risk of) conception, it wouldn't impose any implicit restriction on their response to that consequence.

 

Yes, THEY have to live with the outcome that's why ONLY they have a say in whether to have an abortion or not.

If you risk an accident by driving you do NOT consent to being left in a ditch because you had an accident.


If you take a risk mountain climbing you do not forfeit your right to medical attention if you fall.


Consent to one act is NOT consent to any other act.

 

Personal responsibility is anathema to them.

 

Will you take personal responsibility if you force a woman who has been rapped to carry to term and she dies of complications? Are you willing to be put to death as she was to prove you are "responsible"?

And stop with the "rape is different" - either the fetus is a child or it is not.

 

How do you figure that bit of flamebait?

Pro-Choicers WANT women to have the responsibility of deciding for themselves if they want a kid or not.


Anti-Choicers want that "personal responsibility" taken away from pregnant women..,.

 

Yes yes, let's concentrate on the 1% of pregnancies that, combined, come from rape and incest.

Womp womp.

 

So if YOU aren't part of the 1% you don't give a crap if the woman dies or not?

Gee, where's that respect for LIFE!??????

 

Either it is a child or it is not. You don't get it both ways. Are you willing to accept the dead mother's fate if you force her to carry to term and she dies of complications? Will you accept responsibility?

Didn't think so.

 

Maybe we can go over immaculate conception pregnancies while we've got the microscope and violin out.

 

Like I said - you're not willing to accept the responsibility of death of the mother. Your argument is the classic definition of hypocrisy. I'm not impressed.

 

Please please don't make me laugh in your face so hard by saying stuff like that.

You're just proving my original post correct.

She got herself pregnant, so unless I'm the one who got her pregnant in your hilariously myopic 0.0002% scenario, no, I'm not taking responsibility for her getting pregnant.

Neither is she, apparently.

 

I take it you are Pro-Choice then?

If a pregnancy is all the woman's responsibility why do Anti-Choicers butt in and want to make her decisions theirs?????????

 

It seems you have a very different idea of what responsibility is.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
If a pregnancy is all the woman's responsibility why do Anti-Choicers butt in and want to make her decisions theirs?????????

Well, it sure isn't YOUR idea …

The pregnant person decides for herself what is her responsibility, not you, not me, not anyone else...


You may have your own idea of what personal responsibility means but you have no right to force that on anyone else...


Or would you like some stranger telling YOU what your personal responsibilities are????


NOW, why don't you answer my question: FoxHastings said: ↑
If a pregnancy is all the woman's responsibility why do Anti-Choicers butt in and want to make her decisions theirs???

 

As I've told you a million times before, that's exactly what a pregnant woman is doing when she chooses to terminate.

 

What is? It is HER taking personal responsibility..... do you know what "personal" means? Means it's HER responsibility and not yours...

BTW, saying something untrue a million times does not make it true.



Why couldn't you address the ENTIRE POST ? Stuck for answers?

Well, it sure isn't YOUR idea …

The pregnant person decides for herself what is her responsibility, not you, not me, not anyone else...


You may have your own idea of what personal responsibility means but you have no right to force that on anyone else...


Or would you like some stranger telling YOU what your personal responsibilities are????


NOW, why don't you answer my question: FoxHastings said: ↑
If a pregnancy is all the woman's responsibility why do Anti-Choicers butt in and want to make her decisions theirs???

 

You assume responsibility only involves the assignment to make choices. You purposefully ignore the other side of the coin. That is, what happens when the individual with responsibility makes the wrong choices.

What do you think the word "obligation" means? Is it just a fuzzy word that involves an emotional feeling?