FA_Q2
Gold Member
So...it is your contention that a fetus is equal to a birthed baby when brain activity of some sort can be measured?
If so, is that your cut off point for a decision by either party to opt out?
That was basically the conclusion that was reached in the referenced thread. Oddly enough, I believe that Sy and JB have very similar views on abortion if JB would settle down enough to get over the semantics and the poor 'put it on the table' metaphor that Sy used. I don't actually think she meant to actually put it on a table but rather that there was a point at which a fetus should no longer be subject to an abortion because it had developed to far.
As to your point, I would agree that an agreement would have to be made by that point or all parties would be assumed to have agreed to raise the child.
This topic has been blown way off the course it was on 10 pages ago. The matter was quite simple - In all fairness a man should have the right to 'abort' his end of the responsibility in a child in the same manner that a woman has a choice to abort the child if she does not want the responsibility. There is no arguing that the current system is one that does not respect women and men equally. There is CLEAR favor given the woman. If you refuse to accept that (i am looking at you maddie) then you are purposely being intellectually dishonest. It is a different matter entirely if you cannot agree with that standard because of the good of the child. An argument could easily be made that, for the sake of the child, the man must buck up. OTOH, the same argument could be made for the woman as well. The only caveat there is the fact that it is the woman's body and there is no way to force a woman to carry to term and there really should not be one either.
After all those pages I have not seen ONE -NOT ONE- person argue against the proposition that the man is wronged for the greater good and that is the way it must be. Every argument is tilted toward the woman having the right of abortion and the man not so there, the man has no rights. Lots of straw men and no real argument.
If you really believe that I find your insistence that fathers pay child support insupportable (pun intended). Simply substitute "father" for "government" and you can make a case that without mandatory child support unwanted pregnancies would cease to exist.
As a matter of fact, I believe you have made a point without meaning to. I have known SEVERAL women that have become pregnant only to anchor an unwilling man or receive the benefits that come with it. Ridding that anchor may well reduce the number of pregnancies that are brought to term or even conceived in the first place. I am not sure that the pros would outweigh the cons but there is a point there.
In the end, I am weary of letting the man off simply because I want the number of abortions REDUCED as it is a rather barbaric concept and should not be a normal or encouraged process. This method is encouraging the use of abortion as a birth control and would certainly increase its use. I agree that the system is MASSIVELY unfair to the man but I also do not see a viable solution that I can get behind. I believe that the man should be allowed out of the situation and there would be a way out in a better world but this is not that world and I cannot see a good way out.
Under that same EXACT reasoning I could say that a woman that does not want to be in that position then control access to their eggs. That is a completely false argument as you are applying different standards to both parties. That is, of course, you can JUSTIFY why there needs to be two separate standards. I believe that is where the discussion WAS going before it was derailed into an abortion thread. The right to abortion is established and assumed in this argument. If the woman had no right to abortion then there would be no argument as to whether the man should be able to walk away. At that point they BOTH would be stuck with the consequences. The debate hinges on the fact that the man MUST accept the woman's choice yet the woman does not have to accept the consequences of her actions through abortion.
Last edited:
I can also agree that the current system IS the current system. I do not think it is fair or equal, it is absolute gender bias
