Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pr0f3n
I'm not going to be pedantic and spell this shit out for you.
|
"If you're pissed, don't post." This thread has the potential to become very heated, so please leave your anger at the door. This goes for everyone.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pr0f3n
Yes, it's a double standard, one that's imposed by biology and social contract. I understand the sentiment you're trying to convey, but it's wrong. A man has a choice to give the sperm to a woman, and she has the choice of what to do with a fertilized egg. Should she carry it to term, the man's responsible for the child as a provider. Our socieconomic climate has certainly allowed for role reversals to occur but it's still the man's legal and social duty to provide for his kid.
|
A woman has a choice to allow her eggs to become fertilized and a man has a choice to fertilize them. She carry's it to term, but she is not the only parent. The man is only responsible as a provider if both parents agree that's his role. As I stated, there are plenty of stay-at-home dads out there, in fact there are so many that the idea of a rule or law concerning a man's role as the provider is antiquated. I'd say that saying a man's place is in the workplace is tantamount to saying a woman's place is in the kitchen, which is something I'm sure you'd never say seriously.
Yes, it's a double standard.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jewels443
That's great in principle. But what price does the father pay for the next nine months? Or if the woman's prepared to have the baby and the guy doesn't want it, she's forced to abort?
|
This would be a good question for pro-choicers. As someone who's more in the pro-life camp, I'd want to err on the side of not aborting, but that would be a function of my bias towards my philosophy on the subject.
For those who do believe that abortion is okay, it's obviously okay or a woman to have a baby aborted, but a man has no say?