kutulu

I'm sick of the straight up lies in this thread. If you are going to present a debate, be honest.

Putative fathers have rights and CAN prevent mothers from giving up kids for adoption. It's been said before in the thread and others. To continue to state that is trolling. This also goes for abandonment.

Also, it's dishonest to make as big an issue about abortion as it has been made of here. Only about 20% of potential births end in abortion. For most people, because of spiritual, moral, or medical issues abortion is NOT an option.

Also, why the hell should a man have any say in whether the woman can get an abortion or not? Whose freaking body is it? When does a man have to ask permission from someone else to get a medical procedure done?

Back to the OP, the article never said that the woman LIED about her ability to get pregnant. That is you people drawing your own conclusions based on you own presumptions. People are born all the time from people who have been told they can't get pregnant. Women can get their tubes tied and it isn't 100%. I know at least 5 people that had another kid after being told by their doctor that they can't have kids. Shit happens.

Seaver

Ok Kutulu, please explain my one question.

How come women can opt out and men can not upon conception? Dont give me that "keep it in your pants" stuff, it does not hold up as long as abortions are legal.

kutulu

Because its her body. It can't get any simpler than that.

Infinite_Loser

A man should have some say so in the matter because a woman doesn't get pregnant on her own-- End of story. A baby might develop inside of your body, but you aren't solely responsible for creating it. A man had as much part of creating that child as you did.

The day that a woman is able to become pregnant in the absence of a man is the day that I will concede that argument.

And, to answer your question, I read that other thread and I believe a man has to get the permission of his wife to have a vasectomy while a woman needs no such permission to have an abortion.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

krwlz

But that child's body belongs to her as well?

kutulu

I checked around on this and I don't believe this is based on any laws. It is true that many doctors will require consent of the wife but this is for liablity issues and not a legal requirement. However, if you can provide a citation, I'd be interested.

Is the fetus capable of independant life?

Willravel

Once an older person is no longer able to take full care of themselves, can we just have them killed? I mean if we can do that with unborn children, I see no real difference (besides the fact that the older person has had the opportunity to live life, of course).

Seaver

Kutulu I'm not getting into the right of a woman's abortion. So throwing that right around does not answer the question.

The question is a woman is allowed to abort a child. This is her method of not becoming a mother, not drastically changing her life, not having the responsibility. Don't answer by stating how a man should use a condom, vasectamy, etc. This is about post-conception, a woman *should* take care of everything on her side instead of aborting. Unless she was raped she has as little amount of excuses as the man.

However, a man has absolutely no method of dealing with a pregnancy post-conception. They can not abort if the woman decides to carry it, they can not wash their hands of responsibility as the woman can decide to. Their lives are changed, futures altered, plans ruined by the same outcome that a woman at any time can decide she does not want.

Don't speak to me about a woman's right of her own body. Dont speak to me about prevention. This discussion is about a mans rights post-conception, or lack thereof. If you can state why a woman should have every opportunity and a man have absolutely none, please try.

Impetuous1

It's not the same thing because the older person (assuming they are no longer competent) was once a sentient being with the ability to decide what they want done to them medically through a living will. A fetus has not lived in the sense that they have never left the womb and have not communicated in a meaningful way. You would have been better off using an example of someone who was mentally retarded. Anyways, your observation is straying from the point of the debate.

My case again is that arguing this is futile as women are the bearers of children. Whether they want to be or not. It is their body and they can decide what they want to do to it. This is not inequal. This is nature. The biological purpose of sex is to conceive children. This debate could only come up in a western country as in most non-western countries women don't have the right to decide much for themselves. Abortion is not an option in many countries.

I'm not saying that it's fair BTW. Especially if the woman lies about whether she wants children. That's not right.

Dramatic example: say the woman has the kid. You never pay a dime. The mother never asks you for any. Roll forward 18 years later and the kid comes looking for you. They ask you why you never helped out when they were living in poverty with their mother. They tell you all the horrible trials they went through. You come to realize had you given some support they would have been better off. What kind of person are you, they ask. Their wearing your face and you can recognize them as one of your own. What do you do? Tell them that you think that it's unequal that women get to make the decisions regarding pregnancy so you didn't have to contribute towards any support?

This argument is shallow and those in favor of it sound like children to me. Where's your honor and responsibility?

Ustwo

Not quite. I am for abortion but I don't sugar coat it in the BS that is a womans right to her own body, blah blah blah. I am for abortion because I see it as self selective eugenics. It keeps genes out of the pool from people willing to sacrifice their own healthy children.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

kutulu

Its an unfair situation. I get that, but that's the way nature set things up. Is it fair that they have to deal with gaining 40 pounds, getting stretch marks and wrecking their bodies in general, taking time off of work, etc. while we just have to do is kick back and handle a crazy pregnant woman? No, just like this, its the way it is.

There are ways out already. Couples can reach agrements where one party is completely taken out of the picture. Sure, it doesn't work all of the time but that's life. Choose your partner well.

YOU may not be speaking of the right to abortion but it still goes hand in hand with the arguement.

Another thing, it's not as if abortion is a decision *most* people just make over their morning coffee. Half of the country thinks it should be outlawed and of the ones who support it, a damn good portion want it legal but would never consider it for themselves. Even the ones who *think* they would want it can't make the decision either. We are talking about a subset of a subset of a subset that is butthurt about the way nature is and a woman's right to choose.

Willravel

The debate was about male equality (legally, morally). Whether the child is sentient before birth (a.k.a. what abortion vs. anti-abortion ultimately boils down to) has bearing on the discussion. If the child isn't sentient, then the fetus, which might as well be a bank account, would simply belong to the mother, including all legal rights and responsibilities. That means abortion and such, but also no payments from daddy. If the child is sentient, then kiling the baby is murder, and the living child belongs to both parents.

As for the comparison between a fetus and an elderly person who has lost the ability to make responsible decisions....I really don't see a difference. You say that a lack of life experience makes one life more meaningful than the other. That's obviosuly not true. I'm 22...is a 35 year old more important than I am? Not unless you are an agist (bigot based on age). I know you're not an agist, so I can only assume that you meant something else.

Perhapse I would be better off using the mental retardation comparison, but it's been done to death. We all know what it boils down to....what is a soul, and how can you prove that one does or doesn't have one? That question is better left to scholars and philosophers, so I decide to err on the side of life. Yes, I said it. Err on the side of life. Think about it. Do you want to be wrong? If the child doesn't have a soul until being born and you make sure it isn't aborted, then you simply have one more person in the world. If the child who isn't born yet does have a soul, and you kill it, then that's obviously murder.

If I have a baseball implanted in my chest, is that baseball my body? Of course not. Yes, a woman can do what she wants with her body, but a fetus is no more a part of a woman's body than a half digested hamburger. The child is half sperm and half egg. That means that the legal and moral responsibility will be with both the father and the mother. People act like mothers are the only parent. I will spend the rest of my life as my daughter's father. Yes, for 9 months, she was inside my wife, but does that negate my responsibility? Honestly? I don't think so.
Forcing someone to do the right thing is dangerous. Give them the chance to do the right thing. If they make the wrong decision, then they are irresponsible at best, a horrible person in all honesty. Some of us do the right thing, you know.
My honor and responsibility is me waking up every day and devoting my life to my daughter's well being and happieness. I would do anything for her. I didn't even have to think twice when I took the crappy job that payed better vs. the fun job that didn't pay enough because I know that my small sacrafice means that we will always have food on the table.

I think the real question is where is the responsibility of the mother? Yes, we all know that there are bad fathers out there, but what about all these teenagers getting abortions? Where is their sense of responsibility? The whole "my body, my right" thing disolves pretty quickly when you consider that abortion is one big removal of consequences and responsibilities. You have sex, which we all know is intended to create children, and then when you get pregnant you get a "get out of the maternity ward-free card". What honor is there in killing something that you created for the mear reason that you shouldn't have created it in the first place?

Impetuous1

I'm not going to argue about abortion. Suffice it to say that I would never get one myself unless I were raped. I couldn't bear to carry a child that was got on me by a violent means. But from an encounter that was mutual, I would always decide to keep the child. Of course you have to keep in mind that I am 30 and am fully capable of raising a child both financially and emotionally. I agree that women most definitely have responsibility in making decisions about whether or not they want to have children and if they do not; what they want to do to prevent it. They have more responsibility in that area than men do or ever will. Because the woman will almost always be the one stuck with the child. If it were up to me, all women would be on birth control from the time they start menstuating until they're conscientious enough to make informed decisions.

But I can't be against abortion for the reason that I've met some people who were adopted. They rarely have the love that most here probably received from their biological parents. Most of the ones I met were mistreated in some way or another by their adopted parents. A few of theses individuals you would not want to have met in a dark alley. On top of that, it's not easy to adopt a child. Those who can afford it often are white and choose white children. What of all the children who are black,hispanic and asian? What about girls who get pregnant through incest or rape? What about those who are too young to financially support a child? Raising a child is expensive. Let alone the hospital bills for giving birth for those who are uninsured. What if you learned your child will have severe, visible malformations and retardation?

I believe that you have to seriously weigh the quality of life the child will have before you make the decision to abort.

For the record, I've never gotten an abortion and doubt very much that any woman uses it as their primary source of birth control as it is not cheap. It would be relatively cheaper to get on contraceptives. But, I could be wrong.

krwlz

The issue is really male rights here. And we've proven, that no matter how you spin it, it's unfair. The people who argue we deserve no such thing, as it's a womans body, are really just throwing out a hollow argument.

And by the way, if I can recall high school biology class... In a very technical sense, the fetus isn't even part of the womans body at any point. There is no blood flow between the two. There isn't even a direct nutrient transfer, it kind of filters through the placenta, and then into the child.

The umbilical cord is a connection between two seperate bodies.

Regardless, again, I doubt there is an answer to this problem (and I do see it as a problem) that everyone can agree on. But I do think some compromise is probably possible.

However, whenever it gets brought up, woman are going to scream "ITS MY BODY" and in the end, the male is going to slink off with his tail between his legs.

And willravel is right, a lot of people seem to make this assumption, that not only should a woman have the right to her body (which she should) but that she is the necesary parent, and that the father is optional.

Sorry to say it, but I'll bet I know a lot of kids that would be better off with their father, but they are stuck with their mother, based shearly on gender.

In fact, I'm related to one. She lets him run wild, he does not behave, and now at 15, he's a little duesche bag. His father HAS morals, and a sense of responsiblity. Had he grown up there 90% of the time and 10% with his mother, rather than vice versa, I garauntee he would prove to be a better part of society.

MechCow

The crux of the problem as I see it is that our billions of years of evolution has shaped us so that doing the actions towards having children is incredibly pleasurable and rewarding yet for a variety of reasons many of us don’t want to have children. Unfortunately one of the big problems with capitalism as a system, especially the way it is run at the moment is that it is very dependent on continual growth and there really isn’t much planet left. Combined with the fact that people just don’t seem to die anymore, obesity etc. we have strong tensions on the issue of baby making. So ordinarily I would say that the answer is for society to force people to stop being so self centred and to gear people more towards having children – but the reality is that there are valid non selfish reasons for not wanting to add more chaos to this world.

That being the case I think we need to make the system more accountable for women who receive these payments. Men need to know the money is being spent for the child’s welfare. As for women who lie, the courts have to stop this simplistic attitude of just ruling in favour of women in family court cases. Its not working at all. We need a radical rethink of the process.

I am a big anti-women campaigner because I think that the last 30 years have brought through a number of changes in favour of women and many of them were not well thought out or knee jerk reactions. That said, in this case I think this guy is a complete dick and he should be taking an interest in his child and saving his money to help raise the kid rather than wasting it in frivolous suits like this. I hope the judge throws the book at him. I don’t want to have kids either – but fuck it if its going to happen doesn’t matter which slut lied to me I will still love the little beast.