Abortion: Why Men Don't Get A Say

[Madeline]

I believe that most do. Most men do, too.

Actually men don't get pregnant when they have sex however they may be forced to pay for their decision for the rest of their lives instead of a mere 9 months.

You raise a good point. I haven't had the time or the patience to read through all 12 pages of this thread, but I did read the first couple of pages. I didn't see anyone making the following point, so here goes:

Man and woman, not married, have fun and she gets knocked up. Man says, "Of course you are going to abort, right?" Woman says: "Hell no, Mojambo. I want this baby!" Man says: "OK, sweetie. You go right ahead - but it's on you. I will not be financially responsible for the child."

Forgetting about what society says on that point for the moment, let's take a look at this scenario. Is it fair to hold the man financially responsible for the child where the woman refuses to abort? I don't think it is. If the woman chooses to do something she does not have to do, something she can, in fact, reverse, and the man is asking her to do that, isn't that solely her decision then? Seems to me it is.

It is a decision she certainly should be free to make. But with that decision, should come responsibility. FULL responsibility.

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

 

[Madeline]

I wonder maddie - Will you at least admit that there is inequality in that a woman is capable of removing her responsibility to a possible future child through abortion and that a man does not have this option. Can you admit that the future of the man is now determined by the choice of the female. Yes, he did decide to have sex from the get go and he is responsible for that but she made the exact same decision and does not have to bear that responsibility if she so chooses. The man has ZERO recourse and is completely at the mercy of the decision of the woman. Do you understand that situation and are just accepting it due to the lack of a better option?

FA Q2, "inequality" implies two similarly situated people are treated differently under the law.....but the parents are not "similiary situated". The Mommy will risk her health, mebbe her life, will (hopefully) curtail her activities and 99% of the time, after the baby is born, she will raise it alone. Or she will abort, as is her right.

The Daddy will have to pay some money. Regardless of the Mommy's plans to abandon or adopt out or keep the baby, if he chooses, the Daddy can pursue custody -- he has as much right to raise the baby as its primary physical custodian as the Mommy has.

Unless you feel a man's money is of far greater importance to him than a woman's body and life is to her, I just don't see the "issue".

 

[Si modo]

Actually men don't get pregnant when they have sex however they may be forced to pay for their decision for the rest of their lives instead of a mere 9 months.

You raise a good point. I haven't had the time or the patience to read through all 12 pages of this thread, but I did read the first couple of pages. I didn't see anyone making the following point, so here goes:

Man and woman, not married, have fun and she gets knocked up. Man says, "Of course you are going to abort, right?" Woman says: "Hell no, Mojambo. I want this baby!" Man says: "OK, sweetie. You go right ahead - but it's on you. I will not be financially responsible for the child."

Forgetting about what society says on that point for the moment, let's take a look at this scenario. Is it fair to hold the man financially responsible for the child where the woman refuses to abort? I don't think it is. If the woman chooses to do something she does not have to do, something she can, in fact, reverse, and the man is asking her to do that, isn't that solely her decision then? Seems to me it is.

It is a decision she certainly should be free to make. But with that decision, should come responsibility. FULL responsibility.

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

 

[Madeline]

You raise a good point. I haven't had the time or the patience to read through all 12 pages of this thread, but I did read the first couple of pages. I didn't see anyone making the following point, so here goes:

Man and woman, not married, have fun and she gets knocked up. Man says, "Of course you are going to abort, right?" Woman says: "Hell no, Mojambo. I want this baby!" Man says: "OK, sweetie. You go right ahead - but it's on you. I will not be financially responsible for the child."

Forgetting about what society says on that point for the moment, let's take a look at this scenario. Is it fair to hold the man financially responsible for the child where the woman refuses to abort? I don't think it is. If the woman chooses to do something she does not have to do, something she can, in fact, reverse, and the man is asking her to do that, isn't that solely her decision then? Seems to me it is.

It is a decision she certainly should be free to make. But with that decision, should come responsibility. FULL responsibility.

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

 

[Si modo]

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

The only one saying that the father should compel the mother to give up the baby for adoption is you. Argue that with the nincompoop who said it - you.


You are clearly insane.

 

[George Costanza]

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

So the mother should be able to compel a birth against the father's will? Does that make you a "father-hater"?

Child support is the right of a LIVE child. At the base of this entire argument is that old bugaboo - abortion. There is never any point in arguing abortion with anyone. A person is either opposed to abortion or not - game over.

The fallacy of your argument is that it assumes that the child will be born, regardless. Last time I looked, it is possible for a woman to obtain an abortion. When a "surprise" comes along, that neither of the two adults involved had planned or now want, and abortion is an available option, the wishes of BOTH parents must be taken into account.

I am not saying the mother should be compelled to get an abortion if, after conceiving the child, she "goes female" and changes her mind, now wanting to go ahead and have the child. I am only saying that, if she so chooses, she should not be compelled to force financial responsibility on the father for a child he had not planned on and for whom he does not want to be financially responsible.

And let's not forget either - prior to getting themselves into this mess, one would assume that both potential parents were aware of the fact that abortion is an option in the event of a surprise. Surprises are not always discussed before the fact. That's why they are called surprises. I would submit that most men, caught in this type of situation and who had not discussed options prior to passion, just assumed that in the event of a surprise, she would abort. That's what most rational people would assume when the parties are not married and certainly were not planning to conceive.

That's why it is not fair for a woman to refuse to abort or put the child out for adoption in the event of a surprise. Once again - no one is saying she has to abort or put the child out for adoption; only that, if she refuses to do either, it should be on her thereafter, financially speaking.

 

[nraforlife]

Dominic Holt-Reid, Man Who Tried to Force Girlfriend to Have an Abortion, Charged With Attempted Murder | Scene and Heard: Scene's News Blog

Now imagine if men could legally compel women to abort or not?

last century feminazi tripe.

 

[Madeline]

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

So the mother should be able to compel a birth against the father's will? Does that make you a "father-hater"?

Child support is the right of a LIVE child. At the base of this entire argument is that old bugaboo - abortion. There is never any point in arguing abortion with anyone. A person is either opposed to abortion or not - game over.

The fallacy of your argument is that it assumes that the child will be born, regardless. Last time I looked, it is possible for a woman to obtain an abortion. When a "surprise" comes along, that neither of the two adults involved had planned or now want, and abortion is an available option, the wishes of BOTH parents must be taken into account.

I am not saying the mother should be compelled to get an abortion if, after conceiving the child, she "goes female" and changes her mind, now wanting to go ahead and have the child. I am only saying that, if she so chooses, she should not be compelled to force financial responsibility on the father for a child he had not planned on and for whom he does not want to be financially responsible.

Yes, I understood you, George. All babies born in the US have survived whatever "risk of being aborted" they were exposed to, and all babies are legally entitled to be supported by both parents (provided they are known, alive, etc.). This "option" you advocate for on behalf of fathers would dramatically alter the rights of children for the worst, and would create quasi-property rights in children for mothers. IMO, it is anti-human and would serve no one's interests (apart from those of irresponsible men who make babies they wish they did not have to support).

It just does not fly with me. But as you say, no one ever changes their mind about abortion -- and I suspect people are just as heavily invested in their POVs on this topic.

 

[Madeline]

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

The only one saying that the father should compel the mother to give up the baby for adoption is you. Argue that with the one who said it - you.

You are clearly insane.

Jesus H. Christ, you are a such a big fat crybaby these days, Si. Everyone who disagrees with you is nutz? R-i-g-h-t.

 

[Madeline]

Dominic Holt-Reid, Man Who Tried to Force Girlfriend to Have an Abortion, Charged With Attempted Murder | Scene and Heard: Scene's News Blog

Now imagine if men could legally compel women to abort or not?

last century feminazi tripe.

I wonder if you even know what the word "feminist" means, nraforlife? It merely means a person who supports the rights of women. I am proud to be a feminist and clearly there is still need for such people, as men like you would strip our freedom from us like fancy hubcaps on an abandoned car in Detroit.

I wonder what you call yourself? A woman-hater?

 

[Si modo]

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

The only one saying that the father should compel the mother to give up the baby for adoption is you. Argue that with the one who said it - you.

You are clearly insane.

Jesus H. Christ, you are a such a big fat crybaby these days, Si. Everyone who disagrees with you is nutz? R-i-g-h-t.

Acually, those who imagine shit that isn't there and who argue with themselves publicly are clearly insane.

 

[Madeline]

The only one saying that the father should compel the mother to give up the baby for adoption is you. Argue that with the one who said it - you.

You are clearly insane.

Jesus H. Christ, you are a such a big fat crybaby these days, Si. Everyone who disagrees with you is nutz? R-i-g-h-t.

Acually, those who imagine shit that isn't there and who argue with themselves publicly are clearly insane.

Do you have a POV on the topic of this thread, Si? If so, I am happy to discuss it. Your emotional problems, meh, not so much.

 

[Si modo]

Jesus H. Christ, you are a such a big fat crybaby these days, Si. Everyone who disagrees with you is nutz? R-i-g-h-t.

Acually, those who imagine shit that isn't there and who argue with themselves publicly are clearly insane.

Do you have a POV on the topic of this thread, Si? If so, I am happy to discuss it. Your emotional problems, meh, not so much.

The sane and the adults have been discussing. You've been arguing with yourself. That is a conversation that does not interest me.

 

[Madeline]

Acually, those who imagine shit that isn't there and who argue with themselves publicly are clearly insane.

Do you have a POV on the topic of this thread, Si? If so, I am happy to discuss it. Your emotional problems, meh, not so much.

The sane and the adults have been discussing. You've been arguing with yourself. That is a conversation that does not interest me.

Then go clean the kitty litter box, Si. Make yourself useful. I think everyone knows by now you have an irrational dislike for whatever I write and since you will not share what is bugging you, no one can help you...certainly not me.

I do not need to read 101 more posts from you containing nothing but childish insults....and I dun think anyone else does either. You have nothing to add.....so add nothing.

 

[Si modo]

Do you have a POV on the topic of this thread, Si? If so, I am happy to discuss it. Your emotional problems, meh, not so much.

The sane and the adults have been discussing. You've been arguing with yourself. That is a conversation that does not interest me.

Then go clean the kitty litter box, Si. Make yourself useful. I think everyone knows by now you have an irrational dislike for whatever I write and since you will not share what is bugging you, no one can help you...certainly not me.

I do not need to read 101 more posts from you containing nothing but childish insults....and I dun think anyone else does either. You have nothing to add.....so add nothing.

When you address what folks actually say and not what you hallucinate, I'm sure your discussion experience will be both more pleasuarable and enlightening for you.

 

[Madeline]

The sane and the adults have been discussing. You've been arguing with yourself. That is a conversation that does not interest me.

Then go clean the kitty litter box, Si. Make yourself useful. I think everyone knows by now you have an irrational dislike for whatever I write and since you will not share what is bugging you, no one can help you...certainly not me.

I do not need to read 101 more posts from you containing nothing but childish insults....and I dun think anyone else does either. You have nothing to add.....so add nothing.

When you address what folks actually say and not what you hallucinate, I'm sure your discussion experience will be both more pleasuarable and enlightening for you.

Why do you expend energy fretting over whether I am maximizing my USMB experience? Clearly, yours is degrading.

 

[JBeukema]

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

Irony. Saying something truly moronic and then saying you're surrounded by stupidity.

It seems Mad can't get away from herself.

 

[JBeukema]

You are applying the wrong test, George. Baby A is born to two married people, and because Mommy and Daddy fully support her, Baby A has a lovely childhood and becomes a successful adult. Baby B is born to a single Mommy and Baby B's Daddy walked, wants no financial responsibility for her and in fact tried to persuade Baby B's Mommy to abort.

Baby B is as entitled to the security and comfort her Daddy's financial support can provide as Baby A is......child support is the right of the child, not the parents.

Adoption.

So the father should be able to compel an adoption against the mother's will? Jesus H. Christ, I am surrounded by woman-haters and nincompoops.

 

[JBeukema]

I wonder if you even know what the word "feminist" means

Oh, the irony...

I am proud to be a feminist

You are to a feminist as Maxine Waters is to John Locke.

Only three feminists have posted in this thread that I've seen: me, Pixie, and Si.

 

[Si modo]

Then go clean the kitty litter box, Si. Make yourself useful. I think everyone knows by now you have an irrational dislike for whatever I write and since you will not share what is bugging you, no one can help you...certainly not me.

I do not need to read 101 more posts from you containing nothing but childish insults....and I dun think anyone else does either. You have nothing to add.....so add nothing.

When you address what folks actually say and not what you hallucinate, I'm sure your discussion experience will be both more pleasuarable and enlightening for you.

Why do you expend energy fretting over whether I am maximizing my USMB experience? Clearly, yours is degrading.

When I have to continually scroll past your insanity, I am somewhat annoyed; so it is in my best interest that you come to the side of sanity from time to time.

I point your idiocy and insanity out to you, as do so many others, in the hope that perhaps you might experience some flash of sanity and not pollute so many threads with your idiocy.

Maybe it's a pipedream, but I am often optimistic.