Abortion allows women to kill a man's child without him having any legal recourse to stop it. He is forced to sit idly by while a unique and irreplaceable child that he contributed 50% of the DNA to - his son or his daughter - is murdered with the approval of the state. There is no justice in this. Where is the abortion crowd's concern for the men who are affected by this? What suggestions do they have to end this blatantly anti-male practice? Stepping on men's rights in the name of women's rights is sexism. Not equality.
I do think the question about a father's right to see his baby born is totally justified. I'm not nearly wise enough to contribute any useful answer to it, but I'm curious what kind of opinions will come up.
Gotta love that logic. Same one the racists use- "It's racism to not allow me to be a racist!" - - - Updated - - - Fine...let HIM carry it for nine months.
On the other hand, if he's able to force a woman to carry his baby against her will, that seems pretty unfair.
Maybe he would, if he had the opportunity. That's the problem with biology, it doesn't care much about equality. You either force the mother to carry the child for 9 months - or you force the father to let it get aborted against his will. The kid is not even in that equation as you see.
If anything it’s pregnancy that is sexist. If men were able to become pregnant, it is they who would have the final say on their abortion. A surrogate carrying the genetic material of two other people (including another woman) has the final say over both of them because she is the one who is pregnant. It is being pregnant that is the key factor, not being a woman. That doesn’t mean there should be no concern for the man involved or that he shouldn’t have a voice in the question where ever possible but ultimately a decision has to be made and, after all the voices, opinions and demands, the only person who can make that final decision is the person who is pregnant. The only alternative is to have a situation where a person is forced to give birth (or indeed forced to abort!) against their will and that is hardly a perfect situation either. There is no “right” answer here – if there were there wouldn’t be such a major debate about it. We can only achieve the least worst option in any given situation.
Then a potential kid if you prefer that. I prefer simple language. Just using another word means making it easier to keep some emotional distance. At the end of the day a fetus is a human child in the making. Exactly my thoughts. No matter how you handle the situation, somebody will come off hurt.
Keeping an emotional distance means using the term "fetus" when referring to a fetus which is what is aborted.. It's not a baby or a child or a kid.
You get the impression that some men long for the day when a man "had a right" to slap a woman and say "Don't you sass me, gal!"?
If the husband/boyfriend had to give permission for the woman to have an abortion, he would not be controlling her for the sake of controlling her. He would only be controlling her because she wanted to do something evil and horrible. In ANY normal society, there are laws that control evil actions. - - - Updated - - - what does that have ANYTHING to do with abortion?
If you need permission from someone to do something they ARE controlling you. It makes no difference what the reason is....but you know that, you've been told enough times.
If a man is so concerned of the outcome to his "child" maybe he should work to form a family alliance with the female to make sure both are on the same page as to pregnancy. Even if abortion were not an issue, there is no contract/agreement that the child would be any part of the male's life. The woman could place the child up for adoption or rear the child on her own with no consideration to the male or his rights. The problem is not abortion, it is that most males don't want or fight for thier rights in a case of an unplanned pregnancy. The day more males fight for their rights for an unplanned child, then...maybe then, the courts will begin to consider male rights vis a vis adoption, custody, and abortion.
So again, Sam....you want to control women who DON'T do as you say, but as long as the women DOES do what you say, you "don't want to control her"? You really don't see it, do you? - - - Updated - - - I'm not sure how to explain it to him. Does he truly not see what he's saying?
I've tried the "hat analogy", I think. If I pass a law saying "Everybody must wear a hat because I feel it is IMMORAL for people to show the top of their heads to God"......but you LIKE wearing a hat.....can I claim "My law doesn't control you"?
Which is it Unifier, is it a separate individual person or 50% of the man and 50% of the woman? By your logic if the man contributes 50% then so does the woman, and as such she has every right to do with as she please with her 50% contribution. If it is a separate individual person then the man or the woman cannot maintain ANY ownership of what they contributed, or are you of the opinion that your father still owns 50% of you? As an individual separate person the fertilized ovum HAS to gain separate consent for making the woman pregnant, and please don't try to say that it is the man that makes a woman pregnant because that is factually incorrect. The suggestion I give you is to finance research into allowing men to become pregnant, that way if they want to maintain a pregnancy to birth they can, or not if they choose an abortion. There is nothing sexist in abortion, nothing at all it's just another of those pro-life fallacies.
How about these men do and I did and fight. My Son's Mother considered abortion and I fought and spent a great deal of time assuring her that I would be a great and life long Father. After some time she accepted my position and we have been the proud parents of one of the greatest people I know. We are also very proud grandparents. I'm of the opinion that a woman's right to make this decision is an important one. Those men who want to be responsible fathers sometime have to fight and work to convince woman that we a serious. Let's not forget that the woman carries the baby for 3 trimesters. If she believes in the first trimester that carrying a baby to term is not the right thing, the choice is hers. Let's also not forget that in cases where the Mother and Father are married, the Father must sign off on terminating the pregnancy. None of this is as simple as some want it to appear, it just isn't.
I don't think that's correct. A woman has the sole decision in getting an abortion, not even her husband can force her to give birth. She doesn't lose her rights by being married. I believe women should not be pressured in any way because she may decide to give birth for the wrong reasons(and pleasing someone else is the worst reason for having a child). Just because one man kept his promise doesn't mean they all do.
Pretty sure not even a married woman needs or requires the consent of the husband in order to have an abortion, as far as I am aware the only women who require consent of someone else are those under the age of consent .. and in my opinion that is wrong. I have no problem with a husband/boyfriend trying to convince a woman to not have an abortion .. however under no circumstances should a woman EVER be forced into giving birth or having an abortion and forced birth is exactly what pro-lifers are aiming for. Their intentions may be good but as the saying goes the road to hell is paved with good intentions and personally I look more at what the results of those intentions would be and so far the only results I see are the demeaning of women and making them chattel to the state for 9 months. Banning abortion will not 'save' a single pregnancy, it didn't before and won't now. I've requested numerous times for pro-lifers to give evidence to their assertion that banning abortion would decrease the number of them and all I get is the same old sound bite of after Roe abortions skyrocketed and yet they can give no data on the true number of abortions prior to Roe where as I can give them data to show that even with no restrictions on abortion what so ever regardless of the trimester there is no increase in the number of abortions. I would have more understanding of the position IF pro-lifers as a whole supported comprehensive sex education and free contraception, but they don't.
If this child was so important to the man, he probably shouldn't have gone and put it somewhere it wasn't going to be wanted. There is no equality to be had in a situation that is biologically unequal. Men can't get pregnant, women can. When men can get pregnant, they will make the choices about their own pregnancies just like women do now. Don't blame me though, I didn't design these human bodies, I just drive one.
