Why don't pro-abortionists tell women, who want abortions, that they should have "kept it in their pants?"

Question

You know, the whole, "you should have thought about that before you had sex" argument, or, "if you play, you pay."

They use these arguments against guys who complain about paying child support, all the time, but I never hear them say that to women who want an abortion.

AND I AM IN NO WAY DEFENDING MEN WHO REFUSE TO PAY FOR THEIR CHILDREN!!!

I just wanted an answer to the hypocrisy, thanks.

Last time I checked, a woman's vagina was located between her legs, which is covered with clothing, like I don't know, pants maybe. If the pants are on, the vagina is inside the pants, if the pants are off, you guessedit, the vagina is not inside the pants.

Also, I used the term pro-abotionist because I believe the term pro-choice relates to both sides of the argument, which, by the way, I have not stated my preference for. Either you choose to have a baby, or you choose to not have a baby; pro-not abortion or pro-abortion. Or, would you rather me use pro-life and pro-death. I think that sounds a little over the top, don't you?

Answer 1

C'mon now. How can we expect to have a completely degenerate hedonistic hollywood society with thinking like yours?
Get with it man. Everyone should have the right to get prego and then have the rest of us pay for either, keeping and raising the kid, or, aborting the (thing)
And while we're at it, the kids should be provided with their own attorneys so the Parents can not violate their civil rights.

Have you not read "It takes a 'Village' to raise...."
It's frightening when you expect the 'people' to be responsible for their own acts.
Gottal go, Oprah is coming on.

Answer 2

First off, I don't believe "Pro-Abortionists" is the right word. For example, I am personally against abortion in my own life and believe in most circumstance its wrong; however, I feel I don't have the right to make choices for all mothers around the country, as i am not aware of there circumstances. There for I am "pro-choice". I believe the only people who are truly "pro-abortion" are very very few and far between.

That aside, in many cases it is probably true that most couples who choose to have abortions should simply have been smarter about their lives. However, in many cases it's not that simple. For example, rape victims, mothers who's lives are indangered by the prenancy, ect. But besides these generic reasons people should have the personal choice for abortions are some very complex ones. Hypothetically, imagine that a married couple have a predisposition to have a sick child due to genetics, say, mental retardation and progeria for example's sake. Now one day, they make love, but disaster strikes and the condom breaks. Now the wife of the couple is pregnant with a retarded child with progeria that won't live more then a few months in which will be excruciatingly painful for the child, the mother ,and father as well. However, they can't get a abortion becuase the laws against it have been past. That is why we can't just simply ban-abortion.
And we can very well tell a married couple they aren't allowed to have sex either. Who are we to tell other people what they can and can not do. I understand there are instances when we must, but to make a law that say we will everytime regardless of the of the situation is ignorant and moraly wrong.

Answer 3

Hypothetically, let's say that two people had consensual intercourse without any type of birth control. Then yeah, most pro-choice people would think that the man and woman were behaving pretty foolishly. But there are stupid people everywhere.

Now let's say that she was on hormone birth control, he was in that testing group for male hormone birth control (it is a hormone that prevents sperm from being able to latch onto an egg to dig in, it currently has over 99.99% success when observing sperm--i.e. they couldn't find any sperm that wasn't made into a retarded digger), and they used a condom correctly. And say that there was one super sperm that managed to get to the egg and dig in and the egg managed to implant in the uterus, were they irresponsible?

Proper condom use is like 90% effective (so 10% chance), spermicide is another 95% (plus, so 5%), female birth control is 98% (plus, 2%), and male birth control is 99.99% (it just hasn't been FDA approved yet). That is a 0.000001% chance of conception (actually less than that). That is like 1 in 10 million.

Was that second couple irresponsible? No. Just ultra fertile and despite heroic efforts still conceived.

But in a free country that offers services can't just offer them to one group and not another (assuming both can afford it). So if we are going to allow abortions for incidents of rape and women that can't survive pregnancy, we can't deny them to other women that don't want to raise a child.

The main reason pro-choice groups exist is because if these services didn't exist, the only people getting safe abortions would be those that are wealthy enough to travel to other countries to have it done, those same groups also tend to have better access to birth control and are more educated on its use, so they have less need for it.

Those that couldn't afford to travel and pay for these operations would have to rely on worse treatment plans.

Whoopi Goldberg said it best when she explained why she carries around a coat hanger: "Women have a choice between abortion centers and coat hangers." Or something like that.

I think a better question is, "Why is France doing research on male birth control and not the USA?"

Answer 4

Unfortunately, the argument of losing a living organism and human life should be sufficient enough for anyone responsible to consider before having an abortion. In the case of rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother, some times, abortions may become necessary. The only one to draw the judgment line is the One who Created all life to decide. It's much more complex than just to tell someone to "keep it in their pants". It's a moral issue that goes way beyond politics.

Answer 5

When men start having babies, then we will tell women to keep it in their pants! Men who father children out of wedlock or not any worse than the woman who conceived it. They were both equally to blame for their actions. Most women do not elect abortion. But, men, in general, disappear into parts unknown, deny paternity, and other such actions leaving women to raise the child. I am not speaking financially, even though she does do that too -- she can get help from gov. or family etc. I am talking about sitting up with a sick child, taking it to school, helping with homework, answering 1000's of questions on top of the woman losing her freedom to be single again while the man just keeps on doing his thing and making more babies and spreading more disease.

ps Now you know why there are so many single women out there. They had to grow up fast and become independent thanks to the baby and "baby daddy".

Answer 6

I'm sure in the plethora of abuse heaped upon Pro-CHOICE people, your argument of abstinence has been used. It certainly is a gentler, although still rude, argument than a pipe bomb that kills people. Why are people so adamantly in favor of life, so quick to kill people in order to prove their point? There is no answer to hypocrisy when it's all a matter of opinion, circumstance and societal factors. More than likely, you just wanted to offend or stir up things by this question anyway. I hope it doesn't work.

Answer 7

Probably because women don't have equipment to keep in their pants. They should have kept their legs closed would be the statement your going for.

But I think the question is, why are there pro-abortionists in the world anyway? Does anyone think people who believe in abortion have something worth saying?

Answer 8

No body is pro-abortion, i am a guy, but i dont think that women get together and say, "hey, i got an idea, lets have an abortion party!!" By saying they are pro-abortion that means that they like to and want to kill thier babies, that is wrong. Its called pro-choice!!!!! The right to chose what they want to do.

Answer 9

Keep in pants argument weak when trying us pro choicers we shouldnt allow abortion for one factor pregnancy can be life threatening and women still die in this day age in child birth .
And hate break to you pregnancy does have complications.
And no matter how put forcing woman to birth is cruel and inhumane to force her risk her health the pain labor is torture and form of slavery since you forcing her to birth you forcing her to be breeder slave someone who doesnt have say over body and what risk it is to her body and life all because she got pregnant think about that one. And one reason we dont tell women to keep in their pants is because dont veiw sex as only for reproducing we see sex also for pleasure .

Answer 10

When are you Capitalists going to grow up and realize that money is not the only thing in life especially not for children. Women in your sick society are left with nothing but a very needy growing young human being. They do not vanish when men walk out or simply disappear. Note with your stupid political beliefs you will have placed a price on love, freedom, responsibility, ....
Your question is obviously meant to be offensive to anyone who has got pregnant without marriage. As for your angle on which gender is to blame, I have never heard a woman say "look at the cock on that", everywhere I go I hear men say "look at the **** on that". Why not castrate the men ? Judge not others least you be judged yourself. There are a million acceptable reasons for abortion and all of them despite their necessity are regretable.