Abortion

[spartacus]

you could have added ` should the father have a choice in the matter?`

if a man gets a woman pregnant then he is legally responsible to pay for the upkeep of that child and yet if the woman wants to have an abortion then he has no choice in the matter. to a large degree i`m playing devils advocate on this.my view is that a womans body is her own but in some cases the man certainly gets a raw deal

[Asmodean]

my view is that a womans body is her own but in some cases the man certainly gets a raw deal

Ii is unfair for a man to have to pay for a kid he never wanted. I think there should be some sort of law stating that he does not have to pay for the kid if he, for example, asks the mother (in writing, for the bureocracy's sake) to have an abortion and offers to pay for it during the first two trimesters or the like. Just to get rid of an obvious loophole at once, he would then not have to pay for the kid if he learned about the pregnancy too late. (Like when the mother showed up on his doorstep with the kid)

It would probably amount to a lot of work and money spent, but it would be fairer as I see it.

[curiosityandthecat]

my view is that a womans body is her own but in some cases the man certainly gets a raw deal

Ii is unfair for a man to have to pay for a kid he never wanted. I think there should be some sort of law stating that he does not have to pay for the kid if he, for example, asks the mother (in writing, for the bureocracy's sake) to have an abortion and offers to pay for it during the first two trimesters or the like. Just to get rid of an obvious loophole at once, he would then not have to pay for the kid if he learned about the pregnancy too late. (Like when the mother showed up on his doorstep with the kid)

It would probably amount to a lot of work and money spent, but it would be fairer as I see it.

That's ridiculous. That's like saying you aren't going to pay tuition for a class that turned out to be different from what you wanted. "I took an African American literature class and we read Frankenstein. I'm not paying for this." Huh-uh. Nope.

He shoulda wrapped it up if he didn't want a kid. It's simple as that. If, like in your last example, the woman purposely uses him to get pregnant, drops off the planet and shows up later wanting support, then I agree with you. She is manipulating him. However, like I said, if it's a relationship or even just a casual sex partner and a child results, they should have been more responsible. It takes two to make a baby; the fault is on both.

[Ihateyoumike]

I used to be 100% anti-abortion. But then again, I used to be catholic also. Both due to the fact that that was what I was raised to be.

In the last few years, as I've educated myself and expanded my views, I've changed my stance. And the first time I ever read anything that made me start to change my mind regarding abortion, I felt sick for even thinking it may be justified. The book in question is Freakonomics by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt. They have a chapter in the book which speaks of the correlation between RoevWade and the staggering drop in crime rates across america almost exactly 18 years later.

Now, to clarify, the thought of abortion still makes me sick. Use condoms, pills, surgery, etc.. as birth control. Not abortion!

That being said, whether the thought of it makes ME sick or not is irrelevant to my stance on the issue. I believe overpopulation is the #1 threat facing the future of humanity these days. I also believe that the majority of women who would have their babies, if not for abortion, are not the type who are suitable to raise a decent human being. Or they don't have the means to do so, regardless of their good intentions. Having worked at a home for troubled youth in the past, I can say society may have beneffited from the abortion of these children. Hell, sometimes I think the CHILDREN may have beneffited from being aborted. Does it feel wrong for me to be saying this? Absolutely. But it makes sense to me. Some of these children live in their own personal hell every day due to the choices that their parents made. Unwanted children who have been abused, sexually assaulted, beaten, starved, and so forth all of their lives may even agree that it would've been better for it to end before it began.

I believe that a child who is wanted and loved by the parent(s) will ultimately be happier, and much more importantly, better people. However, I would definately much prefer to see a child adopted than aborted, overpopulation or not.

[SSY]

my view is that a womans body is her own but in some cases the man certainly gets a raw deal

Ii is unfair for a man to have to pay for a kid he never wanted. I think there should be some sort of law stating that he does not have to pay for the kid if he, for example, asks the mother (in writing, for the bureocracy's sake) to have an abortion and offers to pay for it during the first two trimesters or the like. Just to get rid of an obvious loophole at once, he would then not have to pay for the kid if he learned about the pregnancy too late. (Like when the mother showed up on his doorstep with the kid)

It would probably amount to a lot of work and money spent, but it would be fairer as I see it.

That's ridiculous. That's like saying you aren't going to pay tuition for a class that turned out to be different from what you wanted. "I took an African American literature class and we read Frankenstein. I'm not paying for this." Huh-uh. Nope.

He shoulda wrapped it up if he didn't want a kid. It's simple as that. If, like in your last example, the woman purposely uses him to get pregnant, drops off the planet and shows up later wanting support, then I agree with you. She is manipulating him. However, like I said, if it's a relationship or even just a casual sex partner and a child results, they should have been more responsible. It takes two to make a baby; the fault is on both.

The difference is the woman can terminate the pregnancy or give the baby up for adoption, absolving herself of responsability for it. Once the man has blown his load, he is commited to whatever the woman decides to do, he has no say in the fate of his loin fruit.  

What Asmodeon is talking about is a "male abortion", an idea suggested in 1999, that allows a man, after being informed, to make a choice about hsi involvement or not with a pregnancy, relying his choice to the mother, and then allowing her to make her own choice based on this evidence. While he has the option to not pay child support under this system ( he loses parental rights at that point ), she has the ability to kill his baby if she so wishes, despite his protestations.

her control is the only acceptable answer in my view, and to make this fair, the man must be a given at least some degree of control over his involvment as well.

[athiest12]

i'm an independent but i agree with democrats that abortion is the preganant womens choice. its their baby they should be able to decide what they want to do with it.

[VanReal]

Wow, it sounds as if many of you guys are under the impression that fathers have rights..... :hide:

[SSY]

Maybe if the mothers knew they could not live off the child support of the father, they would be less willing to have babies in the first place?

I also agree though that parallel measures are needed on the part of the state to stop exploitation of the welfare system.

[liveyoungdiefast]

I say first 2 trimesters is a decent line to draw.

I also think 'only in the case of rape' is the most ridiculous argument. A 'baby' conceived of rape is just as 'innocent' and just as 'human'. Basically the pro-life rape exception says, if you have an abortion because you didn't want your boyfriend to wear a condom, that's murder. But if you're raped, you can murder the rapist's child. Now obviously it's not murder and they aren't children. Which is basically why I don't like the pro-life movement, they're either hypocrites or they're insane and think women should carry pregnancies conceived by rape.

[SSY]

An astute argument, it also brings the thread nicley back on topic.

[Will]

I also think 'only in the case of rape' is the most ridiculous argument. A 'baby' conceived of rape is just as 'innocent' and just as 'human'. Basically the pro-life rape exception says, if you have an abortion because you didn't want your boyfriend to wear a condom, that's murder. But if you're raped, you can murder the rapist's child. Now obviously it's not murder and they aren't children. Which is basically why I don't like the pro-life movement, they're either hypocrites or they're insane and think women should carry pregnancies conceived by rape.

You're so close! Take it to the logical conclusion: It's *drumroll* punishment. The attempt to outlaw abortion by a lion's share of pro-lifers is an attempt to punish women for sexual promiscuity. It has exactly nothing to do with the life of the child and everything to do with forcing puritanical standards on people that don't believe what they believe (something religions are quite good at). If a woman doesn't wear a condom, the baby can't be aborted and she has to raise it. If the pregnancy is from rape, the baby can be aborted. It's oh so simple and oh so sick.

That said, I don't pretend to know when life begins. It's probably not until after gestation and likely before birth, but because I don't know I'm agnostic on the issue.

[verybigv]

It takes too much faith and/or arrogance to claim to know when human life begins. I sure don't know.But since I don't know,I don't want to be mistaken and be in anyway responsible for the deaths of millions of humans. When conception occurs what do you call that life that's in that blastula? I think it would have to be considered human life(it's not a giraffe life or a turtle life)and therfore not to be killed.I've never quite understood the claim of many women,including my wife,that says,"it's my body and I can do what I want with it". This is simply untrue. You legally can't put heroin in it, or perform sex acts for money with it.This is obviously a tricky topic. It's just interesting to see that there are actually pro-life atheists.(The worst a humanist can do is kill another human.)

[Nulono]

Only as a last resort to save the mother's life.

[Kylyssa]

Only as a last resort to save the mother's life.

So, you'd have made that little 9 year old Brazilian girl carry her twin rape babies to term?  It might not have killed her but it sure would have messed her up.

[Nulono]

Yup. A child conceived of rape is no less human.