Scroll to see replies
They should have a say, but not an equal say, in actually aborting the fetus. They should however, be allowed to relinquish all responsibility of the kid if they so wish, up to the same point a woman is allowed to get an abortion.
People make mistakes. The woman must have the final arbitration and freedom to decide.
Contraception is only one part of the equation.
Abortion affects women disproportionately:
There are so very many other factors not the least of which are pregnancy, childbirth and the moral rights of the mother to choose what to do with her own body, the psychological (and potential physical) damage inflicted if the mother's wishes are ignored.
It affects her life forever, her education, her career, her employment, her entire family life.
Women are people and not just a 'container' for the foetus.
Guy's have a choice too - if they do not wish to be faced with the decision over abortion to be taken out of their hands, don't have sex. If you do, then you must also accept the responsibility for the consequences of unwanted pregnancy.
Simples.
Contraception is only one part of the equation.
Abortion affects women disproportionately:
There are so very many other factors not the least of which are pregnancy, childbirth and the moral rights of the mother to choose what to do with her own body, the psychological (and potential physical) damage inflicted if the mother's wishes are ignored.
It affects her life forever, her education, her career, her employment, her entire family life.
Women are people and not just a 'container' for the foetus.
Guy's have a choice too - if they do not wish to be faced with the decision over abortion to be taken out of their hands, don't have sex. If you do, then you must also accept the responsibility for the consequences of unwanted pregnancy.
Simples.
(edited 7 years ago)
No. However, a woman shouldn't be able to come after a man for child support if she tricked him by piercing a hole in the condom or whatever.
Personally I would say No.
Woman have more right in this case than us men, because they are the one who are going to carry the baby and endure the birth pain
Woman have more right in this case than us men, because they are the one who are going to carry the baby and endure the birth pain
Legally yes. Men should be able to give up any financial responsibility for a child they don't want in return for having no rights. It's an idea that has been around for a while now.
The actual birth side? No it's not our body that has to go through it. If a women doesn't want a baby then that's her choice and not one anyone should be able to override. That is a little unfair towards men but the reality is nature gave the hard job to the women and it does effect their life, even if only for that year, far more then the man.
I will say this - in law something needs to change. Right now men get no rights, normally end up seeing their children only on weekends if they aren't living with the mother and pay child support without any say in any of it. Father's should have much more of a role within any child's life and those roles should be legally protected in law.
The actual birth side? No it's not our body that has to go through it. If a women doesn't want a baby then that's her choice and not one anyone should be able to override. That is a little unfair towards men but the reality is nature gave the hard job to the women and it does effect their life, even if only for that year, far more then the man.
I will say this - in law something needs to change. Right now men get no rights, normally end up seeing their children only on weekends if they aren't living with the mother and pay child support without any say in any of it. Father's should have much more of a role within any child's life and those roles should be legally protected in law.
(edited 7 years ago)
No, but they should be able to opt-out if the woman chooses to not have an abortion.
I never understood this line of argument. People often state "men should have a say" but this legitimately makes no sense. With abortion, there are only 2 options. Have one or don't. There is no way to compromise. So giving men a "right" or "say" will inevitably equate to giving them precedence in the situation because there is no third option if the parents disagree. Sure, he can attempt to persuade her to go with the option he wants, but that is very much dependent on the mindset of the pregnant woman. So, short of giving a man full control of the decision- which I'm sure no one is idiotic enough to not understand why that is a horrendous idea- what are you going to do? Force the Mother to go to counselling with the Father and forcibly hear his opinion? That still makes no difference to the overall conclusion because if she has her mind set, what he says is irrelevant. For those who would listen and were open to the man's opinion, this kind of provision wouldn't be necessary because they'd listen anyway, so the entire concept is null and void.
While in principle, I agree that the decision should be a 50/50 split, there is no feasible way to do it that wouldn't be disproportionately dangerous for the woman, who after all bears all the risk in these situations. Realistically there is no way to give men a 'say' without either removing the woman's autonomy outright, or at least setting a precedent that will soon inevitably be exploited to encroach the woman's rights considering how much conservative men seem to think their decision is more vital than the woman's. Therefore, whilst it is regrettable, anyone who understands how abortions work should really be compelled to say that no, men should not get an equal say on abortion.
While in principle, I agree that the decision should be a 50/50 split, there is no feasible way to do it that wouldn't be disproportionately dangerous for the woman, who after all bears all the risk in these situations. Realistically there is no way to give men a 'say' without either removing the woman's autonomy outright, or at least setting a precedent that will soon inevitably be exploited to encroach the woman's rights considering how much conservative men seem to think their decision is more vital than the woman's. Therefore, whilst it is regrettable, anyone who understands how abortions work should really be compelled to say that no, men should not get an equal say on abortion.
Original post by Nirvana1989-1994
No, but they should be able to opt-out if the woman chooses to not have an abortion.
Babies and people have at that point become a commodity.
Original post by uberteknik
Not really. Because that simple argument amounts to abdication of responsibility in favour of financial priorities.
Babies and people have at that point become a commodity.
Babies and people have at that point become a commodity.
People shouldn't be forced to have a baby if they don't want one.
A woman has every right to have an abortion or keep the baby.
However if the sex was consensual but an mistake happens and for some reason the guy doesnt want the baby. In that scenario if the girl over rules him and proceeds to have the baby then she should lose the right for financial child support ( only because a mutual decision hasnt been taken)
Men should have equal say as they have an equal responsibility for looking after the child.
However if the sex was consensual but an mistake happens and for some reason the guy doesnt want the baby. In that scenario if the girl over rules him and proceeds to have the baby then she should lose the right for financial child support ( only because a mutual decision hasnt been taken)
Men should have equal say as they have an equal responsibility for looking after the child.
Original post by uberteknik
Not really. Because that simple argument amounts to abdication of responsibility in favour of financial priorities.
Babies and people have at that point become a commodity.
Babies and people have at that point become a commodity.
Do you oppose a woman having an abortion for financial reasons then? Say she can't afford to raise it?
Original post by Gold-Confetti
I never understood this line of argument. People often state "men should have a say" but this legitimately makes no sense. With abortion, there are only 2 options. Have one or don't. There is no way to compromise. So giving men a "right" or "say" will inevitably equate to giving them precedence in the situation because there is no third option if the parents disagree. Sure, he can attempt to persuade her to go with the option he wants, but that is very much dependent on the mindset of the pregnant woman. So, short of giving a man full control of the decision- which I'm sure no one is idiotic enough to not understand why that is a horrendous idea- what are you going to do? Force the Mother to go to counselling with the Father and forcibly hear his opinion? That still makes no difference to the overall conclusion because if she has her mind set, what he says is irrelevant. For those who would listen and were open to the man's opinion, this kind of provision wouldn't be necessary because they'd listen anyway, so the entire concept is null and void.
While in principle, I agree that the decision should be a 50/50 split, there is no feasible way to do it that wouldn't be disproportionately dangerous for the woman, who after all bears all the risk in these situations. Realistically there is no way to give men a 'say' without either removing the woman's autonomy outright, or at least setting a precedent that will soon inevitably be exploited to encroach the woman's rights considering how much conservative men seem to think their decision is more vital than the woman's. Therefore, whilst it is regrettable, anyone who understands how abortions work should really be compelled to say that no, men should not get an equal say on abortion.
While in principle, I agree that the decision should be a 50/50 split, there is no feasible way to do it that wouldn't be disproportionately dangerous for the woman, who after all bears all the risk in these situations. Realistically there is no way to give men a 'say' without either removing the woman's autonomy outright, or at least setting a precedent that will soon inevitably be exploited to encroach the woman's rights considering how much conservative men seem to think their decision is more vital than the woman's. Therefore, whilst it is regrettable, anyone who understands how abortions work should really be compelled to say that no, men should not get an equal say on abortion.
At the end of the day it's the woman's choice whether to keep it or not because it is her body going through the actual child birthing process. But if the woman wants to keep it and the man doesn't want that responsibility he should not be held liable for child support. He shouldn't have to pay out for the next 18 years of his life for a decision that is effectively out of his hands.
Original post by Zargabaath
They should have a say, but not an equal say, in actually aborting the fetus. They should however, be allowed to relinquish all responsibility of the kid if they so wish, up to the same point a woman is allowed to get an abortion.
Why should the taxpayer pay for men who don't want to pay for their kids?
Do you want me to send you a bill for my kids' upkeep?
Men don't give up elements of their skeletal structure to form the embryos skeleton over the course of the pregnancy, nor do they push a child out of their vagina (think having a small melon or a large squash coming out of your anus) so it's a bit disingenuous to suggest the parts men and women play and equal in the process leading up to birth and hence should have equal say in the matter.
If a man wants a child he can find a partner who is willing to undergo the extreme physiological and psychological stresses of pregnancy, or he can adopt one of the many children who are either currently being fostered or who will be fostered if they are not adopted.
Equally if a man doesn't want a child he should not stick his dick in places it can lead to one. Also a vasectomy is, in theory, reversible (albeit with reduced fecundity).
If a man wants a child he can find a partner who is willing to undergo the extreme physiological and psychological stresses of pregnancy, or he can adopt one of the many children who are either currently being fostered or who will be fostered if they are not adopted.
Equally if a man doesn't want a child he should not stick his dick in places it can lead to one. Also a vasectomy is, in theory, reversible (albeit with reduced fecundity).
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Tiger Rag
It depends on the situation. If he raped her, then it's 100% her choice. If not, then it's should be a joint decision.
Obviously in a consensual scenario.
Original post by ComplanAddict
At the end of the day it's the woman's choice whether to keep it or not because it is her body going through the actual child birthing process. But if the woman wants to keep it and the man doesn't want that responsibility he should not be held liable for child support. He shouldn't have to pay out for the next 18 years of his life for a decision that is effectively out of his hands.
I never have nor will dispute this. The question asked about Male input on abortion, which are the opinions I gave.
However, with regard what happens to the father after that, I fully agree. If the mother has the right to abort, then denying men that same right to opt-out in the form of permanent disownment would not be equality. If a man does not want the child, they should have the same amount of time that a woman would have to decide on abortion, and if they decide they don't want the child, they can sign away all rights/ responsibilities and therefore be in the same position as if the foetus had been aborted. I know a lot of people have problems with that view, but coming from a woman and staunch pro-choice supporter, I believe it is only fair that the man has the same (or as close to the same as we can get in principle) options as the woman.
If other women don't support that principle of an opt-out, then I suggest they either start calling themselves hypocrites, or they switch to pro-life, because the whole "don't have sex if you don't want kids" crap is the exact same logic applied when contesting abortion rights.
Original post by Maker
Why should the taxpayer pay for men who don't want to pay for their kids?
Do you want me to send you a bill for my kids' upkeep?
Do you want me to send you a bill for my kids' upkeep?
you can extend this logic to every single taxpayer funded thing.
why should the taxpayer pay for people who don't want to pay for private healthcare?
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
