Abortion / "Rape" question

[manifold]

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?

 

[martybegan]

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?

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

 

[mal]

I'd say that one is his to Kill.

Oh yeah and mani... I left you a little something in the Original Thread.



peace...

 

[manifold]

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?

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

I'm not talking about legislation mandating an abortion, I'm talking about the victim of rape being allowed to choose whether to terminate a resulting pregnancy.

 

[Katzndogz]

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?

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

Not only could she sue for child support, but she would undoubtably get it. Boys who have been the victims of statutory rape by an older woman have to pay child support all the time.

 

[High_Gravity]

I would say yes he does.

 

[Katzndogz]

Not only will she get child support, but victims of rape who choose to keep the child invariably have to face custody and visitation rights of the rapist, even if he is serving time in prison, AND might have to pay child support to the rapist for his joint custody periods.

Some states are passing specific laws relating to the rights of a rapist to their children, but they don't have them now.

 

[martybegan]

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?

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

I'm not talking about legislation mandating an abortion, I'm talking about the victim of rape being allowed to choose whether to terminate a resulting pregnancy.

As an individual I would say no, although I would think the state would be free to make a law saying he could demand one.

 

[Borillar]

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?

An interesting if unlikely scenario. I would say that no one except the woman carrying the fetus has a right to demand an abortion. That said, she should face criminal charges for her actions, and lose any parental rights. The wronged man should have the option of custody of the child, or abandoning any parental rights to the child with no further obligations, and the child put up for adoption.

 

[manifold]

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?

An interesting if unlikely scenario. I would say that no one except the woman carrying the fetus has a right to demand an abortion. That said, she should face criminal charges for her actions, and lose any parental rights. The wronged man should have the option of custody of the child, or abandoning any parental rights to the child with no further obligations, and the child put up for adoption.

There is no perfect solution and ^that's really the only sensible option, IMO.

 

[jwoodie]

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?

Nice cutesy thread, but why don't you tell us where YOU stand on the issue. Partial Birth abortion ok with you? If not, why not? How about infanticide? Speak up or shut up.

 

[Ravi]

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?

An interesting if unlikely scenario. I would say that no one except the woman carrying the fetus has a right to demand an abortion. That said, she should face criminal charges for her actions, and lose any parental rights. The wronged man should have the option of custody of the child, or abandoning any parental rights to the child with no further obligations, and the child put up for adoption.

Yep. Though in the real world, an out and out adoption would be better for the child.

 

[Againsheila]

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?

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

I'm not talking about legislation mandating an abortion, I'm talking about the victim of rape being allowed to choose whether to terminate a resulting pregnancy.

Excellent question...the problem is there is a difference between men and women. A woman who goes though pregnancy goes through changes. I didn't have arthritis before I had kids. Therefore I don't think it's the same. I do believe that the man can't be sued for child support and that the woman should be forced to give up the child. No woman like that should be allowed to raise kids.

Thanks for putting a new perspective on the debate for me. I know it's not what you wanted, but now I don't believe the man should have ANY say in whether the woman should get an abortion or not. Previously I thought the father should have a say.

 

[G.T.]

I don't know, but it's slightly different in that he doesn't need to feel his rapist inside of him for 9months like a woman who was raped and carrying to term would.

 

[mamooth]

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.

 

[Againsheila]

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.

I have no problem with that idea.

 

[manifold]

At most I would see a prosecution for kidnapping, theft, sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment.

Also there would be no way in hell she could sue for child support.

Under current law if she wants to keep the baby she could. Also I am lothe to support any type of legislation that would mandate an abortion, as opposed to one the prevents one.

Be that as it may, I wouldnt vote for an abortion ban, however I do believe it is a legislative issue, not a consitutional one, and if a state/locality wants to ban abortion they should be able to.

I'm not talking about legislation mandating an abortion, I'm talking about the victim of rape being allowed to choose whether to terminate a resulting pregnancy.

Excellent question...the problem is there is a difference between men and women. A woman who goes though pregnancy goes through changes. I didn't have arthritis before I had kids. Therefore I don't think it's the same. I do believe that the man can't be sued for child support and that the woman should be forced to give up the child. No woman like that should be allowed to raise kids.

Thanks for putting a new perspective on the debate for me. I know it's not what you wanted, but now I don't believe the man should have ANY say in whether the woman should get an abortion or not. Previously I thought the father should have a say.

I've always thought the father cannot have any say, legally speaking. Who breaks the tie when he and her disagree?

 

[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.

 

[syrenn]

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?

I would say he has a right to demand she return what his his....since he did not willing give it to her.

Yes, i wold say in this absurd case example....he would have every right to demand an abortion.....

 

[martybegan]

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.

But couldnt that be considered non equal protection under the law? Even more so if the Equal Rights Amendment is passed, barring gender from being a determination in any legal condition.