If men were the ones that got pregnant
This is assuming that men stay exactly as they are, save for the fact that they and not women become pregnant
Would abortion be such a hot topic?
Would religions have such a problem with it?
It'd still be the same
Side Score: 3
|
 |
No.
Side Score: 9
|
|
|
|
|
Abortion's hotness is because of the fact that people are killing fetuses. Nothing to do with the gender. Now, I feel that if men had the ability to get pregnant, I suppose women would just have far less of importance in society itself. This really could make so many other issues of humanity different, but not the issue of abortion. I am very much pro-choice, but that's because of my classically liberal mentality of keeping government out of most issues. I don't know how I feel about allowing people to kill fetuses and if it's consistent with maintaining individual rights, but my Nihilism just takes over and says "w/e, it's not even sentient." Abortion, as much as it would help out liberals to say so, isn't about sexism. And while many religious people are against abortion, many are in support of it (let's face it, most people are religious.) Hell, even embryonic stem cell research is controversial. Side: It'd still be the same
Since you want government out of most issues then I can assume that you are 100% against Obamacare. Afterall, the government should not be involved in a familys finances. Thats government interference. Surely you cant want to keep the government out of the bedroom and let them into the living room. Please dont give me that health care effects so many people and abortion does not. Millions of people would love to adopt but cant because of the waiting list and the huge cost. If abortion were illegal then so many people would not be childless. Side: No.
It's impossible, you can't have a man and a womb, that comes from hormones, if a man had a woman's body and female hormones, they'd be a woman, this debate makes no sense. Abortion is a debate because you're killing "a child" which isn't true at all. Side: It'd still be the same
1
point
Of course it's impossible, jeez, have you ever heard of conceptualising. It's for the sake of discussion. Abortion is a debate because you're killing "a child" which isn't true at all. It pertains to the point that religions and rules are man made, and abortion is seen as bad because men don't have to deal with the issue of pregnancy, childbirth and raring. Side: No.
|
2
points
Men rule the world. That's not a good thing, that's not something I'm proud of, that I'm happy about, but it is true. It's largely due to our tribal origins, where the strongest ruled. In these times, as men were the strongest, they got to write the rules, and unfortunately, these rules have never been rewritten (see religion). Now, men don't understand that pregnancy is very important, and natural. And as such, they do not give women appropriate compensation for the differences between the genders. It is important to note that these differences are not weaknesses. For example, men need more food/calories than women do, and as such, as a man, I would expect to be given more food than a women, in a standardized meal. This is not a form of weakness, simply a difference between the needs of each gender. Therefore, I feel it is perfectly appropriate to give women compensation to try and reduce the negatives of their natural biology. Now, if it were men, they would realise these arguments quickly, and allow easy access to birth control, as well as appropriate maternity leave schemes, and religion would not be so against any of these ideas (as it was written by men). Side: No.
Are you saying then, that since men tend to hold higher positions that this debates would actually be resolved in a different way, with most likely a different outcome? If that were the case, then I'd imagine that abortion wouldn't be so much up for debate, except by a few, and birth control would be paid for more easily. Side: No.
0
points
Essentially, yes. Many men are happy are happy to stick to their (irrational) morals, as long as they aren't the ones who lose out from this. Make men the ones who would be restricting their own rights, and I'm quite confident that many would walk off of their perceived moral high ground. It would end up being a non issue. Side: No.
See, at very ancient times, men worshipped women because they gave birth. Primitive men considered this sacred and divine because it was something different. Hence women became the centre of all, many old religions worshipped women. Also, sufi people have their god "female". All around the world god is male. sufi people address "O my beloved, my love" to their god. Thus, EVEN GOD AND RELIGION WORD ARE OF MALE DOMINANCE. Now when pregnancy became common, MAN made women's greatest power their (male) advantage and hence tried to establish power. When civilized society stopped wandering stooped and cultivation began, man started making property of land. In this way, women became property of man. Hence, I would say, If male were pregnant, women would dominate. Side: No.
1
point
|
