Male's right to abortion.

[thanatos144]

These conversations are absurd because pro abortion people always speak of women as if they can't control their libido

tapatalk post

 

[Luddly Neddite]

These conversations are absurd because pro abortion people always speak of women as if they can't control their libido

tapatalk post

Good point.

That's exactly what professional nutcase, Limbaugh said. But then, there's really no reason to think he knows much about women.

Bottom line is still the same. Men don't get pregnant so men don't have a "right" to abortion.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is not just the males responsibility, females can get snipped as well, yes and avoid 'choice'?

yes but as a male i can only be 100 percent sure of not fathering a child

by

1- refraining
or
2 getting fixed

absent a medical record there is not a 100 percent surety

of not fathering a child because a female claimed to be snipped


If a woman has sex with a man, she knows full well that pregnancy is a possible outcome.

the male should assume that is a possibility as well

IF men have equal responsibility, they should have equal rights. A choice.

they do

the choice is either to refrain or take precaution it insure there

will not be a pregnancy

or roll the dice

If you read back, my argument is about men who have taken responsibility and a pregnancy has happened after using protection and or men who have been "tricked" into pregnancy, which does happen at times.

Women have an abundance of methods at their fingertips, abortion, condoms, RU486, the morning after pill, surgical sterilants, safe haven, adoption, etc. In fact there is a big problem with Utah as we speak who strip fathers of their rights when women decide to adopt a child out where a man has explicitly said he wants to father this child. Google it, it's pretty crazy, but I digress. It just seems to me, men and their feelings are disregarded, too easily and their choices are not as diverse as females are.

Men should have a choice, especially if in a relationship where they have taken precautions and or expressed they do not want children.

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

tapatalk post

Tell it to the dead beat dads.

Yes, there are dead beat mothers too but no where near as many. Way too many men believe they have no responsibility to support their own children.

 

[thanatos144]

If you read back, my argument is about men who have taken responsibility and a pregnancy has happened after using protection and or men who have been "tricked" into pregnancy, which does happen at times.

Women have an abundance of methods at their fingertips, abortion, condoms, RU486, the morning after pill, surgical sterilants, safe haven, adoption, etc. In fact there is a big problem with Utah as we speak who strip fathers of their rights when women decide to adopt a child out where a man has explicitly said he wants to father this child. Google it, it's pretty crazy, but I digress. It just seems to me, men and their feelings are disregarded, too easily and their choices are not as diverse as females are.

Men should have a choice, especially if in a relationship where they have taken precautions and or expressed they do not want children.

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

tapatalk post

Tell it to the dead beat dads.

Yes, there are dead beat mothers too but no where near as many. Way too many men believe they have no responsibility to support their own children.

How little you think of women of disturbing.

tapatalk post

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

tapatalk post

Tell it to the dead beat dads.

Yes, there are dead beat mothers too but no where near as many. Way too many men believe they have no responsibility to support their own children.

How little you think of women of disturbing.

tapatalk post

It wasn't me who wrote this -

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

 

[thanatos144]

Tell it to the dead beat dads.

Yes, there are dead beat mothers too but no where near as many. Way too many men believe they have no responsibility to support their own children.

How little you think of women of disturbing.

tapatalk post

It wasn't me who wrote this -

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

Lol thanks for making my point for me

tapatalk post

 

[Walt]

You have a right to not put the unwanted baby there in the first place.

If the woman did not want a baby she has the same responsibility not to get pregnant. The only correct, equal and just way is to give BOTH the choice. As it is if a man wants the child he has no choice about the woman getting the abortion. So it is only fair that if the woman wants the child and the man does not. He should have the choice to not be responsible for a child. Same as the woman has.

I mean, what the heck is going to deter a guy from getting 50 women pregnant? The deterrents on the female side are obvious (they'd have to face pregnancy/birth, or a horrible abortion), but what about men?

Even today, with laws that make dads pay for their children we still have an epidemic of Deadbeat dads (especially in poor, urban areas). How will your proposal affect this situation?

What deters a woman from doing the same? What deters a woman from having sex and getting pregnant with multiple men to get support? Women have just as much responsibility NOT to get pregnant as the man does. It is only equal that if a woman can choose she is not ready for a child. Without the consent of a man {and I agree}. A man should have the same right. That is equality. It is just as wrong holding the man emotionally, mentally and financially responsible. When they do not want a child. As it would be a woman. Have you heard about these insane stories? This is how idiotic it is getting.

Women Can Now Use Sperm From Oral Sex To Impregnate Themselves & Collect Child Support ? ThisIsYourConscience.com

Judge rules Kansas sperm donor DOES have to pay child support because lesbian couple performed procedure at home without a doctor | Mail Online

 

[KevinWestern]

If the woman did not want a baby she has the same responsibility not to get pregnant. The only correct, equal and just way is to give BOTH the choice. As it is if a man wants the child he has no choice about the woman getting the abortion. So it is only fair that if the woman wants the child and the man does not. He should have the choice to not be responsible for a child. Same as the woman has.

I mean, what the heck is going to deter a guy from getting 50 women pregnant? The deterrents on the female side are obvious (they'd have to face pregnancy/birth, or a horrible abortion), but what about men?

Even today, with laws that make dads pay for their children we still have an epidemic of Deadbeat dads (especially in poor, urban areas). How will your proposal affect this situation?

What deters a woman from doing the same? What deters a woman from having sex and getting pregnant with multiple men to get support? Women have just as much responsibility NOT to get pregnant as the man does. It is only equal that if a woman can choose she is not ready for a child. Without the consent of a man {and I agree}. A man should have the same right. That is equality. It is just as wrong holding the man emotionally, mentally and financially responsible. When they do not want a child. As it would be a woman. Have you heard about these insane stories? This is how idiotic it is getting.

Women Can Now Use Sperm From Oral Sex To Impregnate Themselves & Collect Child Support ? ThisIsYourConscience.com

Judge rules Kansas sperm donor DOES have to pay child support because lesbian couple performed procedure at home without a doctor | Mail Online

How about we do a quick rundown between the two sexes. The deterrents a female has to getting pregnant are:

1.) Being pregnant for up to 9 months, lol, and having to experience all of the fun mood swings, morning sicknesses, expensive doctor appts, weight gain, discomfort, depression, etc.

And, they will have to experience at least one of these:

2.) Giving birth, which can sometimes be dangerous and will almost always be painful/extremely uncomfortable
3.) Abortion, which is extremely emotionally damaging (you're literally killing a part of you that's growing inside of you), intimately disturbing (bloody fetus is removed, etc), and extremely invasive.
4.) Miscarriage. Basically all of the pains you feel in "3", minus some of the guilt hopefully (because you didn't actively make the decision to kill your baby).

But the man?

He can just wake up the next day from the one night stand and (aside from a phone call telling her "I want no responsibility") can forget the whole thing. Maybe he can take a trip to Las Vegas and impregnate 10 more women, I don't know.

There's absolutely no comparison between the male/female deterrents, Walt. None. Even if the woman is nuts and wants to have kids to collect money she can only really have 1 kid/year and it's eventually going to take a major toll on her body. The guy - on the other hand - can literally impregnate thousands of women a year if he wanted to...

 

[Diana1180]

This is not just the males responsibility, females can get snipped as well, yes and avoid 'choice'?

yes but as a male i can only be 100 percent sure of not fathering a child

by

1- refraining
or
2 getting fixed

absent a medical record there is not a 100 percent surety

of not fathering a child because a female claimed to be snipped


If a woman has sex with a man, she knows full well that pregnancy is a possible outcome.

the male should assume that is a possibility as well

IF men have equal responsibility, they should have equal rights. A choice.

they do

the choice is either to refrain or take precaution it insure there

will not be a pregnancy

or roll the dice

If you read back, my argument is about men who have taken responsibility and a pregnancy has happened after using protection and or men who have been "tricked" into pregnancy, which does happen at times.

Women have an abundance of methods at their fingertips, abortion, condoms, RU486, the morning after pill, surgical sterilants, safe haven, adoption, etc. In fact there is a big problem with Utah as we speak who strip fathers of their rights when women decide to adopt a child out where a man has explicitly said he wants to father this child. Google it, it's pretty crazy, but I digress. It just seems to me, men and their feelings are disregarded, too easily and their choices are not as diverse as females are.

Men should have a choice, especially if in a relationship where they have taken precautions and or expressed they do not want children.

What it boils down to is generations of teaching kids men are cheating dogs. Girls are taught from a young age to have no respect for men and to treat them as breathing wallets

tapatalk post

yes, because men nowadays show so much respect towards woman?

Look, I think both sexes lack respect for each other. People sleep around, take no responsibility, no moral compass etc.

I have a daughter who is 14. I am a single mom. I have not taught her that men are cheating dogs, scum or that I am any better than them....but, I have taught her that she should not have to rely on a man for support and to make smart choices. In other words to be independant.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abotion should require both mother's and father's consent/permisison.

 

[thanatos144]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abotion should require both mother's and father's consent/permisison.

That is a lie

tapatalk post

 

[FA_Q2]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abortion should require both mother's and father's consent/permission.

that really only follows if the woman gets to hand off the pregnancy to the man 50 percent of the time.

Biological fact makes women the sole controller of abortion. There is simply no way around such realities.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abotion should require both mother's and father's consent/permisison.

That would be un-Constitutional:

t would be reasonable to conclude as a general matter that the father's interest in the welfare of the child and the mother's interest are equal.

Before birth, however, the issue takes on a very different cast. It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother's liberty than on the father's. The effect of state regulation on a woman's protected liberty is doubly deserving of scrutiny in such a case, as the State has touched not only upon the private sphere of the family but upon the very bodily integrity of the pregnant woman. The Court has held that "when the wife and the husband disagree on this decision, the view of only one of the two marriage partners can prevail. Inasmuch as it is the woman who physically bears the child and who is the more directly and immediately affected by the pregnancy, as between the two, the balance weighs in her favor." This conclusion rests upon the basic nature of marriage and the nature of our Constitution: "[T]he marital couple is not an independent entity with a mind and heart of its own, but an association of two individuals each with a separate intellectual and emotional makeup. If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child." The Constitution protects individuals, men and women alike, from unjustified state interference, even when that interference is enacted into law for the benefit of their spouses.

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

 

[Mr. H.]

19 years ago, I held our daughter's life in my hands. Some of you know the story already, but for those who don't...

The first ultrasound revealed obvious signs of Downs Syndrome, and the doctor told us to go down to the coffee shop to "discuss our options".

And there we sat. Staring at each other in disbelief. I was fucking speechless. I had no clue what was going through my wife's head. So I waited for her to make the first move. That was the longest moment of my life.

Three scenarios presented themselves to me....

In my mind, I envisioned our lives immersed in servitude and poverty.

I also envisioned our lives as they existed before we walked into THE hospital that morning. Parents!
Cool.

And finally, I pictured us as the carefree lovers we were when we first met, and how with one word from me it could all return to the carefree days.

And yet, I waited. For the host to speak.

Her words changed our lives forever.... "you take what life gives you".

That so fucking blew me away that I didn't care what the future would bring for us.

Eight months later she gave birth to a perfectly (albeit premature) healthy child.

She graduates in May and is on her way to college in the fall.

So, fuck you people of "choice", and your Supreme Court-given right to slaughter at will.

 

[thanatos144]

19 years ago, I held our daughter's life in my hands. Some of you know the story already, but for those who don't...

The first ultrasound revealed obvious signs of Downs Syndrome, and the doctor told us to go down to the coffee shop to "discuss our options".

And there we sat. Staring at each other in disbelief. I was fucking speechless. I had no clue what was going through my wife's head. So I waited for her to make the first move. That was the longest moment of my life.

Three scenarios presented themselves to me....

In my mind, I envisioned our lives immersed in servitude and poverty.

I also envisioned our lives as they existed before we walked into THE hospital that morning. Parents!
Cool.

And finally, I pictured us as the carefree lovers we were when we first met, and how with one word from me it could all return to the carefree days.

And yet, I waited. For the host to speak.

Her words changed our lives forever.... "you take what life gives you".

That so fucking blew me away that I didn't care what the future would bring for us.

Eight months later she gave birth to a perfectly (albeit premature) healthy child.

She graduates in May and is on her way to college in the fall.

So, fuck you people of "choice", and your Supreme Court-given right to slaughter at will.

damn good post



tapatalk post

 

[KevinWestern]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abotion should require both mother's and father's consent/permisison.

There are biological differences that you simply cannot change. One could argue that it's not "fair" the woman has to always be the one to carry the child for 9 months, experiencing a rollercoaster of weight gain, mood swings, morning sickness, and ultimately childbirth. But that's a fact we cannot alter.

In simple terms, the child is growing in her body, and therefore the final decision regarding an abortion rests with her.

 

[BobPlumb]

I take the position of prolife because I believe that human life starts at conception. The zygote is at the first stage of many stages of human life. Scientifically, the zygote is human for it has all 46 human chromosomes and was conceived a male and a female. It is a living organism, starting from a single cell but, if allowed, will live through many stages of human development.

I am not going to make a religious argument for life beginning at conception for science is sufficient. Also, many do not believe in God, so such an argument would be in vain for them.

It is irrefutable science that a living zygote is human life. However, it is not irrefutable that a zygote deserves to be considered a person through science alone. A zygote has no brain. It is unaware of its own existence. Many people that take the “prochoice” position believe that a human life is not a person deserving legal protection of murder laws until it is viable outside the womb.

I started this thread because I can understand the prochoice position if I view the issue through the prism that human life is not a person until viability outside the womb. If this is true, then when a woman has an abortion the living human cells being destroyed are not so much different than having a gall bladder removed. A gall bladder is after all made up of living human cells, but it is not person. The human tissue being destroyed has no more knowledge of its existence than the gall bladder. If a fetus that is not viable is truly not a person, then it should be the mother’s right to terminate a pregnancy as a method of birth control.

Of course, that which is good for the mother should also be good for the father. I titled this thread “Males right to abortion” but I did not intend it to be about a man being physically able to have an abortion. I argued that the male should be able to draw up legal papers to op out of responsibility, and the woman still has final say in whether to abort or not.

I find it hypocritical when pro-choice people say that a woman has a right to abortion but a man should “keep his pants on” if he does not want to be responsible for a child. Those that are prochoice tend to resort to many of the arguments made by those that are prolife when it comes to the responsibility of the father. Pro-choice will make arguments about the welfare of the child when it comes to the father; however, if they want to be consistent with their pro-choice argument there is no child at this time. So the welfare of the child is not any more relevant than it is when the woman decides to have an abortion. This being said, there were many people who are prochoice that did agree with a man having the ability with opting out of responsibility for a pregnancy. At least these people are consistent.

As a prolife person, it is much easier for me to be consistent with the issue of male and female responsibilities of a child. It starts at the beginning of the pregnancy for both parents.

Since viability outside the womb is an arbitrary point of reference to define personhood for human life, who is to say that our society will not change this arbitrary point to something else. Perhaps 20 years from now there will be a court case in which personhood is defined when a baby speaks its first words. After all, isn’t language one than that makes us different from animals. This court case will allow parents to euthanize infants up to 3 weeks old since they are not yet capable of language. If anyone objects because they are of the opinion that killing a two week infant is murder, just remind them that infants are not people until 3 weeks after birth. You say this could never happen! Times may be very different when the world has perhaps 50 billion people rather than 6 to 7 billion people.

 

[RosieS]

When the world has 50 billion people no woman now alive will be alive.

So that scenario does not matter.

For now, if a man does not want the responsibility of fatherhood, he can double bag his organ, get a vasectomy or do himself himself.

If you do the deed you are responsible if a child results.

Anything else is a refusal to deal with reality.

Which is one way some men impregnate women in the first place. Denial of the reality of the sex act, whether thru inebriation or blindness.

Regards from Rosie

 

[Noomi]

A husband and father has the same legal rights over his children outside their mother's womb as his wife. So why wouldn't he have a 50% say/right when they're still inside the womb?

Abotion should require both mother's and father's consent/permisison.

His sperm is inside the woman, it becomes her property, as does the resultant fetus. Too bad for him.

 

[whitehall]

It is the position of prochoice people that abortion is not murder. The fetus before viability outside the womb does not have a right to life that trumps the will of the potential mother. Thus, the pregnant female may legally use abortion as a method of birth control if she decides that she does not want the responsibilities of a child for any reason. She may even get an abortion against the wishes of the potential father.

However, if the male does not want a child, the female can go through with the pregnancy anyway. The male currently has no choice at this point but the female does. The male could be on the hook for 18 years of child support if the female has the baby.

I purpose that if a fetus is not a baby, not a legally protected human life, then the male should be able to op out of his responsibility for the pregnancy. He should be able to legally inform the female that if she does not use the available contraception of abortion, then she is responsible for the child that is born as a consequence of the pregnancy.

Prochoice people, am I wrong? Why or why not?

Should it be legal for a man to coerce and intimidate and threaten a woman with bodily harm or worse unless she hires someone to kill her(and his) unborn child? I expect it happens a lot more than abused women care to say and who in this abortion mad society would listen anyway, certainly not social agencies or state and local Police.