Abortion / "Rape" question

[mal]

Could you give me an example? I'm just not grasping what you are saying.

The text of the Equal Rights Amendment

"Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Based on this, if abortion is a right, how do you deny the right of a man to abort a fetus that is partly his without violating his right to equality of rights based on sex? You may have a "possesion" way out of it, but I guarantee a court case would be filed almost immediately.

Furthermore things like child support and custody would no longer favor the woman, because in doing so you would be denying equality of rights.

If you're right about the first part, I'd wager that the court(s) would quickly set the precedent that a man cannot legally force a woman into an abortion.

As for the second part, good, child support and custody matters should give equal consideration to both parents.

It's amazing to me that if a Woman "Chooses" NOT to Kill her Inconvenient Child that she can then Force a Man to Pay for it...

Yet he has NO Say in his own Child's Life be Terminated.

That's not Equality.



peace...

 

[manifold]

The text of the Equal Rights Amendment

"Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Based on this, if abortion is a right, how do you deny the right of a man to abort a fetus that is partly his without violating his right to equality of rights based on sex? You may have a "possesion" way out of it, but I guarantee a court case would be filed almost immediately.

Furthermore things like child support and custody would no longer favor the woman, because in doing so you would be denying equality of rights.

If you're right about the first part, I'd wager that the court(s) would quickly set the precedent that a man cannot legally force a woman into an abortion.

As for the second part, good, child support and custody matters should give equal consideration to both parents.

It's amazing to me that if a Woman "Chooses" NOT to Kill her Inconvenient Child that she can then Force a Man to Pay for it...

Yet he has NO Say in his own Child's Life be Terminated.

That's not Equality.



peace...

It's not amazing at all to me. It's also no equality.

Some things simply cannot be subdivided equally, and decision making authority over the life or death of a fetus is one such thing.

 

[mal]

If you're right about the first part, I'd wager that the court(s) would quickly set the precedent that a man cannot legally force a woman into an abortion.

As for the second part, good, child support and custody matters should give equal consideration to both parents.

It's amazing to me that if a Woman "Chooses" NOT to Kill her Inconvenient Child that she can then Force a Man to Pay for it...

Yet he has NO Say in his own Child's Life be Terminated.

That's not Equality.



peace...

It's not amazing at all to me. It's also no equality.

Some things simply cannot be subdivided equally, and decision making authority over the life or death of a fetus is one such thing.

And I disagree. Ultimately it's a Life that can only Exist because of a Man and a Woman.

The Woman can't be the Punisher in ALL cases.

Right now she is.



peace...

 

[manifold]

It's amazing to me that if a Woman "Chooses" NOT to Kill her Inconvenient Child that she can then Force a Man to Pay for it...

Yet he has NO Say in his own Child's Life be Terminated.

That's not Equality.



peace...

It's not amazing at all to me. It's also no equality.

Some things simply cannot be subdivided equally, and decision making authority over the life or death of a fetus is one such thing.

And I disagree. Ultimately it's a Life that can only Exist because of a Man and a Woman.

The Woman can't be the Punisher in ALL cases.

Right now she is.



peace...

So when the mother and father can't agree, who breaks the tie?

 

[mal]

It's not amazing at all to me. It's also no equality.

Some things simply cannot be subdivided equally, and decision making authority over the life or death of a fetus is one such thing.

And I disagree. Ultimately it's a Life that can only Exist because of a Man and a Woman.

The Woman can't be the Punisher in ALL cases.

Right now she is.



peace...

So when the mother and father can't agree, who breaks the tie?

Life.



peace...

 

[manifold]

And I disagree. Ultimately it's a Life that can only Exist because of a Man and a Woman.

The Woman can't be the Punisher in ALL cases.

Right now she is.



peace...

So when the mother and father can't agree, who breaks the tie?

Life.



peace...

That's not equality either.

 

[manifold]

If I understand your argument correctly mal, you're saying that both parents should effectively wield veto power over the choice to abort. Practically speaking, that would mean a woman cannot get an abortion without getting an approval signature from the father.

Do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

 

[FA_Q2]

First off, the actual law. A man who is raped _is_ liable for child support. Women found guilty of statuatory rape have successfully sued for child support. If an anonymous sperm donor could be identified, that anonymous sperm donor can be sued for child support. Circumstances of conception are not relevant to child support law.

Now, how _should_ the law be? IMO, of course ...

First, no man or person of any sort should ever be able to force a woman to have an abortion.

Men, however, should be able to opt out of paternity, given that it is the woman's choice to give birth. Woman tells man she's pregnant, he has to say "yes" or "no" within a very short time frame. If he says "yes", he's the legal daddy, and he pays. If he says "no", he has zero claim of any sort on the child, but is not liable for anything.

Married couples would not use this rule, as marriage would be considered prior consent by the man to accept paternity. If a woman wants a guarantee ahead of time, she needs to marry the guy.

IMO if a man willingly puts his penis inside a woman he accepts the consequences, whatever they may be.

Then if a woman willingly allows a penis inside her, she gets to accept the consequences, whatever they may be. Whhops, that arregument works both ways and is false on its face.

Siply put, abortion cannot be illegal because the woman has rights over her body but for some reason you think that a man has no rights over his wallet. The concept is rather dumb IMHO.

The man has no say in an abortion. A fact due to biology. However, the woman should have no say in the support of a child through the father. In the same manner that she can avoid responsibility by ‘disposing’ of the inconvenience, he can avoid responsibility as well.

 

[mal]

If I understand your argument correctly mal, you're saying that both parents should effectively wield veto power over the choice to abort. Practically speaking, that would mean a woman cannot get an abortion without getting an approval signature from the father.

Do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

A Mother shouldn't be able to Terminate a Father's Child and be able to make him pay for it if she decides to keep it...

It's Inherently Wrong.



peace...

 

[manifold]

First off, the actual law. A man who is raped _is_ liable for child support. Women found guilty of statuatory rape have successfully sued for child support. If an anonymous sperm donor could be identified, that anonymous sperm donor can be sued for child support. Circumstances of conception are not relevant to child support law.

Now, how _should_ the law be? IMO, of course ...

First, no man or person of any sort should ever be able to force a woman to have an abortion.

Men, however, should be able to opt out of paternity, given that it is the woman's choice to give birth. Woman tells man she's pregnant, he has to say "yes" or "no" within a very short time frame. If he says "yes", he's the legal daddy, and he pays. If he says "no", he has zero claim of any sort on the child, but is not liable for anything.

Married couples would not use this rule, as marriage would be considered prior consent by the man to accept paternity. If a woman wants a guarantee ahead of time, she needs to marry the guy.

IMO if a man willingly puts his penis inside a woman he accepts the consequences, whatever they may be.

Then if a woman willingly allows a penis inside her, she gets to accept the consequences, whatever they may be. Whhops, that arregument works both ways and is false on its face.

Siply put, abortion cannot be illegal because the woman has rights over her body but for some reason you think that a man has no rights over his wallet. The concept is rather dumb IMHO.

The man has no say in an abortion. A fact due to biology. However, the woman should have no say in the support of a child through the father. In the same manner that she can avoid responsibility by ‘disposing’ of the inconvenience, he can avoid responsibility as well.

I understand the logic, but I still think it's a terrible idea to allow men to carelessly impregnate women without suffering any consequences. For starters, you'd see a marked increase in abortions across the board if such a policy were to be legislated. It would also increase welfare rolls and necessitate higher taxes.

 

[manifold]

If I understand your argument correctly mal, you're saying that both parents should effectively wield veto power over the choice to abort. Practically speaking, that would mean a woman cannot get an abortion without getting an approval signature from the father.

Do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

A Mother shouldn't be able to Terminate a Father's Child and be able to make him pay for it if she decides to keep it...

It's Inherently Wrong.



peace...

So you're not saying that the father has any say in the abortion decision, but that men should never be forced to pay child support.

Again, do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

 

[midcan5]

MTC - The woman is the person who has made the decision to impregnate herself. She is the person who must carry and presumably raise the child. Responsibility resides with her. The sperm donator, while an unwilling participant in the act, would I think according to the law have no say in this matter as there was no contractual agreement. She did not (could not) rape the man as there was no force or consent involved. Suppose she stole the sperm from a sperm bank, only birth could confirm the father and then could the father decide to kill the child? I think not. Suppose instead a woman was raped by a sibling, would the sibling have any say in her decision. Again the decision is with the women as force is involved. Rape is control not theory. In this analogy it is the woman who was the agent.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...luding-late-term-abortions-2.html#post5858288

 

[mal]

If I understand your argument correctly mal, you're saying that both parents should effectively wield veto power over the choice to abort. Practically speaking, that would mean a woman cannot get an abortion without getting an approval signature from the father.

Do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

A Mother shouldn't be able to Terminate a Father's Child and be able to make him pay for it if she decides to keep it...

It's Inherently Wrong.



peace...

So you're not saying that the father has any say in the abortion decision, but that men should never be forced to pay child support.

Again, do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

Nope... not what I said.



peace...

 

[manifold]

A Mother shouldn't be able to Terminate a Father's Child and be able to make him pay for it if she decides to keep it...

It's Inherently Wrong.



peace...

So you're not saying that the father has any say in the abortion decision, but that men should never be forced to pay child support.

Again, do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

Nope... not what I said.



peace...

Obviously I'm having difficulty in understanding exactly what you think needs to change and how it should be different, specifically.

Feel free to explain yourself, I'm willing to listen.

 

[mal]

So you're not saying that the father has any say in the abortion decision, but that men should never be forced to pay child support.

Again, do you honestly believe that's a good idea?

Nope... not what I said.



peace...

Obviously I'm having difficulty in understanding exactly what you think needs to change and how it should be different, specifically.

Feel free to explain yourself, I'm willing to listen.

Father's have Equal Rights and Authority over a Child they were 50% the Creation of...

That's my Opinion... And it's based in what's Right.

I also don't Support Abortion so I don't Think either the Mother or the Father should be able to Abort a Baby.



peace...

 

[manifold]

Nope... not what I said.



peace...

Obviously I'm having difficulty in understanding exactly what you think needs to change and how it should be different, specifically.

Feel free to explain yourself, I'm willing to listen.

Father's have Equal Rights and Authority over a Child they were 50% the Creation of...

That's my Opinion... And it's based in what's Right.

I also don't Support Abortion so I don't Think either the Mother or the Father should be able to Abort a Baby.



peace...

I understand your generalized opinions just fine. What I'm not grasping is exactly what you would like to see change, legally speaking. Based on your last sentence, I'd conclude you think abortion should be completely outlawed, but again, I can't draw any specific conclusions without putting words in your mouth, which I'm painstakingly trying to avoid.

As for child support responsibilities of the father, a previous post implied that you think such responsibilities ought to be abolished, but then in a subsequent post you rejected any such implication whatsoever. So under what circumstances should the father be on the hook for child support, and under what circumstances should he be allowed to skate?

 

[mal]

Obviously I'm having difficulty in understanding exactly what you think needs to change and how it should be different, specifically.

Feel free to explain yourself, I'm willing to listen.

Father's have Equal Rights and Authority over a Child they were 50% the Creation of...

That's my Opinion... And it's based in what's Right.

I also don't Support Abortion so I don't Think either the Mother or the Father should be able to Abort a Baby.



peace...

I understand your generalized opinions just fine. What I'm not grasping is exactly what you would like to see change, legally speaking. Based on your last sentence, I'd conclude you think abortion should be completely outlawed, but again, I can't draw any specific conclusions without putting words in your mouth, which I'm painstakingly trying to avoid.

As for child support responsibilities of the father, a previous post implied that you think such responsibilities ought to be abolished, but then in a subsequent post you rejected any such implication whatsoever. So under what circumstances should the father be on the hook for child support, and under what circumstances should he be allowed to skate?

I don't Think Abortion is Justified in ANY Case and I Think that Deadbeat Fathers should be put in Prisons where they Work to Pay for their Children.

Rapists should be Castrated and Raped on a Daily Basis in places like Rikers while they also Work to Pay for their "Children".

And I started a Thread that is going to be Avoided:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/242225-how-many-pregnancies-a-year-are-due-to-rape.html

I am looking to see if anyone has any numbers on the Pregnancies Caused by Rape in America and how many were Aborted.



peace...

 

[martybegan]

Could you give me an example? I'm just not grasping what you are saying.

The text of the Equal Rights Amendment

"Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Based on this, if abortion is a right, how do you deny the right of a man to abort a fetus that is partly his without violating his right to equality of rights based on sex? You may have a "possesion" way out of it, but I guarantee a court case would be filed almost immediately.

Furthermore things like child support and custody would no longer favor the woman, because in doing so you would be denying equality of rights.

If you're right about the first part, I'd wager that the court(s) would quickly set the precedent that a man cannot legally force a woman into an abortion.

As for the second part, good, child support and custody matters should give equal consideration to both parents.

I agree on the not being able to force a woman into an abortion, as Ravi agreed with above, the possesion aspect of it would be a deciding factor.

What you would have to watch out for would be a "legal" abortion. If a woman can deny parental responsibility via an abortion, shouldnt a man, once again assuming an in place ERA as stated above, be able to rescind parental responsibility as well? Remember under an ERA if one can do it, the other has to be able to do it too.

 

[Avatar4321]

Lets assume hypothetically that a woman 'rapes' man and gets pregnant. To avoid getting side-tracked on the feasibility aspect, lets further assume that she knocked him out and bound him naked to a bed, then she milked his prostate, collected his sperm in a turkey baster and proceeded to inseminate herself.

Does the man have any right to demand an abortion and why?

No. But then I dont think anyone has the right to demand an abortion.

 

[manifold]

A Mother shouldn't be able to Terminate a Father's Child and be able to make him pay for it if she decides to keep it...

I don't Think Abortion is Justified in ANY Case and I Think that Deadbeat Fathers should be put in Prisons where they Work to Pay for their Children.

I'm having tremendous difficulty reconciling these two sentiments. To me they seem mutually exclusive and wholly contradictory. Unless perhaps you do not think the mother should be able to force the father to pay, but it's ok for the state to do so, which is an academic hair not worth splitting IMO.