|
i have been reading through this thread from time to time, wondering if there would come a post that would enable me to see the real issue that is being debated--it is pretty clear---it follows the sad logic of the bakke decision and is effectively another curious conservative argument against abortion as a matter of law disguised as an argument about "fairness"....it seems to me that the claim is a straw man--nothing at all precludes discussions between partners prior to a decision being taken to have or not have the procedure....nothing precludes men from having an important role at every step--nothing at all. the only issue seems to be whether it is possible for a conflict situation to extend itself into lawsuits that would enable a man to prevent a woman who is carrying a baby that is also his from having the procedure if she wnats it and he does not.
if that were possible, i would expect slap suits from anti-choice groups being filed against every woman who would choose to have the procedure. this would operate under the figleaf of "protecting male reproductive rights"---if you filed enough suits, getting the procedure would effecitvely become impossible--because, presumably, a court would have to prevent the woman involved from proceeding until the merits--or lack thereof--of each suit was determined. in that scenario, worthless suits would be functional becuase they would delay delay delay.
the issue itself seems to me to be a fraud.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|