Kay17:

@TV01 I'm not trying to be sneaky, rather trying to admit you to my side. Human rights are recognized for the sanctity of life and personhood, so such rights are inalienable especially for reasons like sacrifice. So if a foetus has a real right to life, it would be adverse to the mother's life also. So one must admit that women just have a natural right which they can easily enforce over the foetus.

Besides the foetus is as much potential as egg and sperm. Nonetheless please see my arguments as being without malice or deceit.

Kay17:

@TV01 I'm not trying to be sneaky, rather trying to admit you to my side. Human rights are recognized for the sanctity of life and personhood, so such rights are inalienable especially for reasons like sacrifice. So if a foetus has a real right to life, it would be adverse to the mother's life also. So one must admit that women just have a natural right which they can easily enforce over the foetus.

Besides the foetus is as much potential as egg and sperm. Nonetheless please see my arguments as being without malice or deceit.

Kay17: 1. But it is still an argument.

2. So wouldn't the rights be distributed differently?

MrAnony1:
No it isn't. It is merely an unfounded claim


Not necessarily

Kay17: @TV01 I'm not trying to be sneaky, rather trying to admit you to my side.

Kay17: Human rights are recognized for the sanctity of life and personhood, so such rights are inalienable especially for reasons like sacrifice. So if a foetus has a real right to life, it would be adverse to the mother's life also.

Kay17: So one must admit that women just have a natural right which they can easily enforce over the foetus.

Kay17: Besides the foetus is as much potential as egg and sperm. Nonetheless please see my arguments as being without malice or deceit.

What the West will be concerned about in the next years will be the rights of fathers if Western men decide to stand up for their rights. This will only turn into a mass movement if they will feel the need to do so.

TV01:
I understand your side, but I also have a clear grasp of what the issues and principles are in this discussion. Your basic premise is; "a woman has the right to terminate the life of her unb0orn child at any time and for any reason". I disagree.

TV01: Further, trying to base that on the rare instances where being pregnant may jeopardise the life of the mother is, in my opinion, disingenious

And I believe this sanctity of life and personhood is equally applicable to the unborn. And to deny them the same is to violate their "inalienable" rights.

Joshthefirst: last paragraph is wrong actually. A blatant lie.

The foetus IS a developing human, a conceived and developing one.

The egg or sperm is not.

Kay17:

The natural progression of a spermotazoa is definitely in the path of a full human.

Kay17:

So why do you say the rights for both sexes were necessarily equal?

MrAnony1: It is also interesting that you believe that the society gives men more responsibilities and duties but you don't consider it to be gender discrimination against men seeing that one gender is required to do more of the work than the other because of their gender. I didn't fail to notice that you were more concerned about the "greater rights of men" than the "greater duties of men".
Finally, I don't think it is wrong in any way to give more rights to the person who has more duties.

MrAnony1: I agree that IF a society gives a person more duties and responsibilities, it is only fair that it gives him more rights (with respect to his/her duties) but what I don't see is how it makes the people unequal in essence which is what you seem to be suggesting.

For instance; I believe it is only fair that the breadwinner of the family makes the decisions concerning the best use of the resources he/she is providing. In Nigeria it is often the man who plays this role, therefore it is only fair that his decisions carry more weight than the woman who isn't contributing as much as he is. In families where it is the woman who is the breadwinner, you find that she is likewise the one one who calls the shots.

Kay17: So wouldn't the rights be distributed differently?

MrAnony1:
Not necessarily

Kay17:
So why do you say the rights for both sexes were necessarily equal?

MrAnony1: The fact that men and women are viewed differently by the society does not necessarily imply that they don't have equal rights
I don't understand the point of this question. Please show where I said what you claim that I have said.

Kay17:


In the light of the above quotes, we arrived at the point where the society creates a gender picture of the value of the sexes and then distributes the rights in accordance with the social roles it has created for the sexes. You Anony1 accept such stratification and further accept that such distribution of rights is fair. YET you still insist absurdly that the rights distributed are equal!!

Kay17:

The natural progression of a spermotazoa is definitely in the path of a full human.

Kay17:

https://www.nairaland.com/1835324/adichies-feminism-vacuums-fallacies-gonzaga/23#25475698


In the light of the above quotes, we arrived at the point where the society creates a gender picture of the value of the sexes and then distributes the rights in accordance with the social roles it has created for the sexes.

MrAnony1: It is also interesting that you believe that the society gives men more responsibilities and duties but you don't consider it to be gender discrimination against men seeing that one gender is required to do more of the work than the other because of their gender. I didn't fail to notice that you were more concerned about the "greater rights of men" than the "greater duties of men".
Finally, I don't think it is wrong in any way to give more rights to the person who has more duties.

Kay17: You Anony1 accept such stratification and further accept that such distribution of rights is fair.

MrAnony1: I agree that IF a society gives a person more duties and responsibilities, it is only fair that it gives him more rights (with respect to his/her duties) but what I don't see is how it makes the people unequal in essence which is what you seem to be suggesting.

For instance; I believe it is only fair that the breadwinner of the family makes the decisions concerning the best use of the resources he/she is providing. In Nigeria it is often the man who plays this role, therefore it is only fair that his decisions carry more weight than the woman who isn't contributing as much as he is. In families where it is the woman who is the breadwinner, you find that she is likewise the one one who calls the shots.

Kay17: YET you still insist absurdly that the rights distributed are equal!!

Kay17: So wouldn't the rights be distributed differently?

MrAnony1:Not necessarily

carefreewannabe:

Brilliant!

MrAnony1: You really haven't been paying attention. Remember that I asked you to show where I said that the rights for both sexes are necessarily equal.


Did we really arrive at this point or did you think we did because of your bias? Read my statements carefully:






Is this really what I said? Please read my statements carefully.


If you were paying any attention to what I was saying, you would have noticed that I wasn't "distributing" rights based on gender rather it was based on function....i.e. whichever sex - male or female - that bears the responsibility deserves the rights that accompany the responsibility. This is fair. Or don't you think it is?


Again this is precisely what I asked you to show me saying. I didn't fail to notice that you didn't actually show me saying anything similar to this rather you once again assumed that I said so which is strange especially because we had this exchange.


How you can jump from this to the conclusion that I insist that the rights are necessarily distributed equal beats me. Is it that you don't understand the meaning of "not necessarily"?

Kay17: Thank you for the understanding, however you undermine your own position that the right to life of the foetus is inalienable by asserting the mother's life over it. As i said earlier that the point of the right to life.

Kay17: It is a dilemma for you to resolve, because my position already prioritises the mother over the foetus, so I don't suffer that dilemma. you on the other hand, say they are equal.

Kay17: You have to concede that the right to the foetus is not alienable, since in the special circumstances when the pregnancy endangers the mother, the foetus would be de-prioritised to the mother.

TV01: Morrin' Kay17,

you are not making any headway here. I nfact you are unpicking your own position !

First you claim I said this;


then in the very next sentence you claim I said the opposite?


And here you just scattered the whole thing?

Surely saying "is not alienable" is the same as saying is inalienable". If you want to make my point for me, please, be my guest !

This sounds like you are either stuck, lost, or attempting to use sophistry to make your point. So for the last time;

The sanctity of human life applies to all humans without fear or favour. A baby is a human at inception. Where a pregnancy may endanger the life of the mother, we do all we can too keep both alive. We do not kill one in order to save the other. Yes, one may die, but we do not purposely kill anyone - geddit? Killing is never the answer to the dillema of death. I have no personal dillema, my position is clear.

And finally, rare instances such as the one we are discussing do not morally or intellectually lead one to conclude that women should have the right to kill thier unborn babies - under the guise of equality, rights and autonomy - at any time and for any reason.

Once again I offer terms .


TV

Kay17: YOU ARE THE ONE that holds those two conflicting positions and I was tryying to point that out to you!!

Kay17: And you have to stop this denial business, when a pregnancy endangers a woman's life the option is an abortion -- killing more or less.

TV01: Morrin' Kay17,

This sounds like you are either stuck, lost, or attempting to use sophistry to make your point. So for the last time;

The sanctity of human life applies to all humans without fear or favour. A baby is a human at inception. Where a pregnancy may endanger the life of the mother, we do all we can too keep both alive. We do not kill one in order to save the other. Yes, one may die, but we do not purposely kill anyone - geddit?Killing is never the answer to the dillema of death. I have no personal dillema, my position is clear....

Kay17: @tv01

I think I misunderstood you.

Are you saying when a pregnant woman is quarter to death because of her pregnancy, and your solution is to wait, watch probably eat popcorn and wait for who to die first?!

Kay17:

@mranony1 you blow hot and cold at the same time. Nobody is talking about equality, rather equal rights is the focal topic. Now, it is either you support equal rights across the board or rights proportionately weighed to duties and responsibilities. It can not be both AND through out this thread, you have switched from one position to the other whenever they seem favourable.

You have claimed both sexes have equal rights and asked me to contradict same AND at the same time openly said the bolded.

Amd finally, Society stratifies along gender lines. Women have their set social roles same with men, even though reality says otherwise.

The expectations from men is different from women etc.

pickabeau1: kay17 is such a twister

i wonder why u guys bother

she is an advocate of abortion n choice n believes personhood is at birth... no need for the long debate

MrAnony1:
I have not contradicted myself in any way.

- I hold the position that men and women have equal rights under Nigerian law.

- I hold the position that certain duties and responsibilities naturally have certain rights attached to them.

- I hold the position that men and women in Nigeria are free to play whichever of the roles they choose and as a result possess the accompanying rights.

mranony1: Please name some of these gender roles that society has set for men and women.


Please mention some of these expectations that are different for men and women.....and don't forget to tell us who it is exactly that have these expectations.

pickabeau1: kay17 is such a twister
i wonder why u guys bother
she is an advocate of abortion n choice n believes personhood is at birth... no need for the long debate

Kay17:
I'd assume that's all you have to say.

MrAnony1:
Really? You seem as one who is so easily impressed.

Kay17:
So you mean to say that men and women in Nigeria freely and are capable of freely moving between the gender roles?! Anony that is a blatant lie!

And these "certain duties and responsibilities" constitute rights above the equal rights distributed, right? Because at the end of the day, those with the "certain duties and responsibilities" will have more rights than others.

In case you forgot the meaning of Gender, here is assistance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

I'd assume that's all you have to say.

carefreewannabe: Not with you though