Men Abortion and Choice

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Here it is. Ah, good times.

Lady Sidhe sure did know how to start a controversial thread.

I see a lot of problems with this law:
- If a man has the final say in whether or not to abort the baby, as someone else stated above, what is to keep some of them from abusing this law to control a woman or to "punish" her? I won't believe that this would be a small minority of situations. Many people cannot handle responsibility, so they use it to control another person. This happens already in so many other ways.

He only has a say, with my suggestion, if he wants full custody of that child, no other time... and if he could carry the child (which they were looking at for a time) sure, I have no issue with it.
The revenge problem is a possibility, as is the preferential treatment of women by the courts today. But, he has a baby that is his and only his out of it.
I just don't see a male using this as something to harm someone because they end-up with more of the burden and problems than she does in the long run. But, this is a good point.

- Once the child is born, what of him/her? Can you honestly say you believe that all fathers are going to be supportive, loving, whatever for that child? What portion of those children do you suspect will end up in the state cycle, unwanted? Who pays for these services already, and whose taxes will increase as a result of further "strain" on the system? I hate to put it this way, but it is a factor.

He wants the baby.
How is that different than the mother deciding she wants to keep the baby?
There is none, that is the point.
I do not accept the assumption that women are better parents.
The risks of the child being unwanted are the same with the female parent.

- There are ways around this law for pregnant women, too. "I don't remember who I slept with. Here's a list, but he might not be on there."

In-vitro DNA.

- Who needs more laws to control us? If the man is not considered in the decision about the life of a fetus and he has a problem with that, perhaps he should have considered his partner's perspective on that ahead of time and used a condom? Or, perhaps he might have determined his partner's perspective on having children, before he started having sex with her? Same goes for the woman. If she didn't want to get pregnant, perhaps she might have taken precautions? Both parties have responsibility in this, but once a woman gets pregnant, she has full physical responsibility for that child. Only she can eat right, not lift really heavy things, etc. to take care of that child while in the womb. If she chooses to abort the baby, obviously she isn't prepared for the responsibility. The man has no physical obligation to the child, so naturally his perspective is going to be different.

I agree with the first part, but we are talking about once it is too late.
No physical responsibility? It is half of him, physically. That is the point.

- What about situations where the man makes the woman keep the baby and she later decides she wants to be a mother? I have heard of this happening in situations where the intent is to give the baby up for adoption.

That is really OT for this, will but up to the courts to decide. She signed her rights away. I hope that he would retain primary custody as long as he is a good parent.
She wanted to kill the kid... not sure how I feel about that after the fact. But, people change... guess it would depend on the individual case.

[jinx]

The revenge problem is a possibility, as is the preferential treatment of women by the courts today. But, he has a baby that is his and only his out of it.

It is half of him, physically. That is the point.

If it's half him, it's half her, and can't ever be his and only his.
What if he changes his mind? What if decides to tell the kid who mom is for whatever reason? What if he dies?

[DanaC]

It is half of him, physically. That is the point.

No...it isn't. It is half him, half her. It is not half of him, he is half of it.

It is however, physically a part of her. It is physically contained within and joined to her body. He is not half of her, therefore he has no right to make decisions about her body. He has a right to half the decision making about the child...but only if he can exercise that right without also imposing his will onto another sentient human's body.

Originally Posted by jinx

If it's half him, it's half her, and can't ever be his and only his.
What if he changes his mind? What if decides to tell the kid who mom is for whatever reason? What if he dies?

All of that is true of her as well.
I was talking about custody, nothing more. When a woman takes care of a child alone, it is only sole custody and all of those what ifs are still accurate.

[DanaC]

Nope. You are not just talking about custody. Long before anybody takes custody there's the pesky matter of pregnancy and labour.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Funny, I see my opinion as equality and your's as matriarchal.

Can you explain that further because I do not see how I am being matriarchal?


Lets pretend we don't have any laws and are in a completely neutral society for a second. If a woman wants to have an abortion she can have one without a man's permission. That is about as natural as you can get. That means the woman has the natural say on the issue so right now we do not have a patriarchal or matriarchal society since neither gender is powering over another.

You are saying that a man should have a right to force a woman to go through pregnancy. That means you are saying the man should have an unnatural amount of say on the issue, making it patriarchal.

[wolf]

What's unnatural is pretending the only one person, the woman, is responsible for the pregnancy. "My body my choice" is just rhetoric from the pro-abortion side.

[piercehawkeye45]

Stop changing what I am saying. It takes two people to get pregnant but only one has to deal with it.

And I see it as the man has as much right to the fetus as the womans as it is half his.
Your view is matriarchal because you feel the woman should have sole choice in the matter.
You are saying the woman should have the right to force the man to allow his child to be aborted with no say.
For you it is all for nothing, I am not saying that.
I am saying if the man states he is willing to accept full custody, and only then, he can take responsibility for the child.
Can a man force a woman to have an abortion if he does not want a child?
Why not? By your logic, if someone does not want a child they should not be FORCED to have it in the world.
Same thing.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

I am saying if the man states he is willing to accept full custody, and only then, he can take responsibility for the child.

But he can't. It's in her body. He can't take custody.

By your logic, if someone does not want a child they should not be FORCED to BRING it inTO the world.
Same thing.

I fixed the quote. Neither the man nor the woman should be forced to carry the fetus to term, if they don't want to.

[wolf]

The woman can force the man, even if not the biological father, but just the named one, to provide financial support up to the age of 18.

By your logic, no man should ever be forced to take any responsibility for their children in any way.
Edit:
Creepy wolf... same time.

[DanaC]

I don't actually think men should be forced to take responsibility for their child.

I do, parents are parents.
Make a child, they are yours for life.
Men and women are equal.