If it is your body & your choice why the he'll do I have to pay for the next 18 years?

[martybegan]

Put it on your wedding gift registry. That may be a first

LOL. You win this one, you rogue you.

 

[Care4all]

All this talk and these men are just forcing even MORE WOMEN to ABORT.....

BRAVO, (supposed) PRO lifers

Actually my point is that if abortion is legal, men being able to have a choice as well is only fair. If abortion is illegal, then both sides are equally to be held responsible.

While I don't like abortion in general, and would never welch on any kid I had accidentally, the fact that women have more legal options than men in the decision is unfair, and un-maintainable if we seek true gender equality.

Of course, the obvious solution is to not have unprotected sex if you aren't willing to risk a kid, but pointing out a solution that requires a bare minimum of pre-planning or modified coitus will get you branded as some sort of prude.

They, the men had their choice at the time they had to decide to lay their seed inside the woman.........................................................

Without the seed being deposited inside of her, no matter how many times the two of them screw, there will be no baby... the man has much more control of the matter than you give them credit...

And yes, she does have an additional choice with abortion being legal, but that choice also goes to cover an additional step in the process that the man never has to face or do, her having to carry her pregnancy to term in her body, not his.

They are separate steps.

you take away men having to support their own offspring from THEIR escapades, then you take all responsibility off of the man and make him irresponsible in every case, and give him a free pass to screw all the women in the world with no consequences.

Those women willing to own up to their responsibility in this unplanned Pregnancy and carry it through to term and raise their and the father's child and not abort, should be rewarded, not penalized, if you are a pro-lifer.

So, I don't understand your and others thinking....i just don't... you claim science says this fetus is a separate human being, while you try to deny your sperm created it and should support this human being?

No seed, no baby....no matter how much the woman may want one.

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

 

[PratchettFan]

Because it is not the man's body that has to carry the child. They both have a financial stake, but only she has to physically put herself at risk. The man gets no say in this because it is not his person that is on the line. If a man ever gets pregnant, then he gets a say.

So ever even consider the kids right to live??

No. I don't. No one has the right to the use of the body of another without their consent, no matter what the need. If anyone does, then everyone does.

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

 

[martybegan]

All this talk and these men are just forcing even MORE WOMEN to ABORT.....

BRAVO, (supposed) PRO lifers

Actually my point is that if abortion is legal, men being able to have a choice as well is only fair. If abortion is illegal, then both sides are equally to be held responsible.

While I don't like abortion in general, and would never welch on any kid I had accidentally, the fact that women have more legal options than men in the decision is unfair, and un-maintainable if we seek true gender equality.

Of course, the obvious solution is to not have unprotected sex if you aren't willing to risk a kid, but pointing out a solution that requires a bare minimum of pre-planning or modified coitus will get you branded as some sort of prude.

They, the men had their choice at the time they had to decide to lay their seed inside the woman.........................................................

Without the seed being deposited inside of her, no matter how many times the two of them screw, there will be no baby... the man has much more control of the matter than you give them credit...

And yes, she does have an additional choice with abortion being legal, but that choice also goes to cover an additional step in the process that the man never has to face or do, her having to carry her pregnancy to term in her body, not his.

They are separate steps.

you take away men having to support their own offspring from THEIR escapades, then you take all responsibility off of the man and make him irresponsible in every case, and give him a free pass to screw all the women in the world with no consequences.

Those women willing to own up to their responsibility in this unplanned Pregnancy and carry it through to term and raise their and the father's child and not abort, should be rewarded, not penalized, if you are a pro-lifer.

So, I don't understand your and others thinking....i just don't... you claim science says this fetus is a separate human being, while you try to deny your sperm created it and should support this human being?

No seed, no baby....no matter how much the woman may want one.

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

It may not make sense to you, but giving one party a choice, and the other party none, and then holding the other party responsible regardless of their choice simply isn't fair.

Both sides have a choice to either have sex or not, to use protection or not, before the act is done. Why, once the act is done, is the choice now given to only one side, and this side is chosen solely on the sex of the person? Either we take the choice away from both of them, or you give the choice to both of them. Its the only fair thing to do if a gender neutral society is your goal.

Please understand that I am arguing this from a theoretical standpoint, which ignores the benefit that society gets from parents supporting their children. But if we want consequence free sex, which is what abortion is really about, then shouldn't BOTH sexes benefit from it, and be able to make the same choice, independently?

 

[martybegan]

So ever even consider the kids right to live??

No. I don't. No one has the right to the use of the body of another without their consent, no matter what the need. If anyone does, then everyone does.

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

 

[PratchettFan]

No. I don't. No one has the right to the use of the body of another without their consent, no matter what the need. If anyone does, then everyone does.

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

Indeed she can. But if she doesn't and he doesn't, then they are both equally responsible. But they do not equally carry the kid. If there is an abortion, they don't equally have the procedure. If there is a problem with the pregnancy, they don't equally undergo treatment. They are not equally at risk. So to make it equal, she gets to make the decisions about the pregnancy. After that, they are equally responsible. If the man doesn't like that arrangement, it is his responsibility to keep it in his pants. Once he pulls it out, he signs on for the whole ride whether he thinks it fair or not.

 

[Syriusly]

No. I don't. No one has the right to the use of the body of another without their consent, no matter what the need. If anyone does, then everyone does.

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

You keep saying that- but what we keep saying is that both men and women are equally responsible.

When having sex- both are equally responsible deciding whether to have sex and whether to use protection- both are equally responsible for the consequences of those decisions(pregnancy/std's)
After having sex- both are responsible for their own bodies- uniquely only the woman can get pregnant- so we either allow a woman to control her body- or we do not allow it. She is responsible for whatever decisions she makes with her body though.
After a baby is born- both are responsible for the baby.

 

[Skylar]

All this talk and these men are just forcing even MORE WOMEN to ABORT.....

BRAVO, (supposed) PRO lifers

Actually my point is that if abortion is legal, men being able to have a choice as well is only fair. If abortion is illegal, then both sides are equally to be held responsible.

While I don't like abortion in general, and would never welch on any kid I had accidentally, the fact that women have more legal options than men in the decision is unfair, and un-maintainable if we seek true gender equality.

Of course, the obvious solution is to not have unprotected sex if you aren't willing to risk a kid, but pointing out a solution that requires a bare minimum of pre-planning or modified coitus will get you branded as some sort of prude.

They, the men had their choice at the time they had to decide to lay their seed inside the woman.........................................................

Without the seed being deposited inside of her, no matter how many times the two of them screw, there will be no baby... the man has much more control of the matter than you give them credit...

And yes, she does have an additional choice with abortion being legal, but that choice also goes to cover an additional step in the process that the man never has to face or do, her having to carry her pregnancy to term in her body, not his.

They are separate steps.

you take away men having to support their own offspring from THEIR escapades, then you take all responsibility off of the man and make him irresponsible in every case, and give him a free pass to screw all the women in the world with no consequences.

Those women willing to own up to their responsibility in this unplanned Pregnancy and carry it through to term and raise their and the father's child and not abort, should be rewarded, not penalized, if you are a pro-lifer.

So, I don't understand your and others thinking....i just don't... you claim science says this fetus is a separate human being, while you try to deny your sperm created it and should support this human being?

No seed, no baby....no matter how much the woman may want one.

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

It may not make sense to you, but giving one party a choice, and the other party none, and then holding the other party responsible regardless of their choice simply isn't fair.

Both parties have a choice on the use of their own body. If a man wants to be the one deciding if he's going to use his body to bring a fetus to term then he should get pregnant.

Worse, your very premise of financial responsibility is nonsense. You say its 'choice'. You're wrong. The premise of financial responsibility is the child. If the child exists, the responsibility exist. It doesn't matter if a man wants the child. Or doesn't want the child. Or agrees with the mother. Or disagrees. None of that is the basis of his responsibility.

The child's existence is. And he's responsible for any child of his that's born. Whether or not he wanted it to be born.

 

[Skylar]

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

You keep saying that- but what we keep saying is that both men and women are equally responsible.

When having sex- both are equally responsible deciding whether to have sex and whether to use protection- both are equally responsible for the consequences of those decisions(pregnancy/std's)
After having sex- both are responsible for their own bodies- uniquely only the woman can get pregnant- so we either allow a woman to control her body- or we do not allow it. She is responsible for whatever decisions she makes with her body though.
After a baby is born- both are responsible for the baby.

Exactly. What Marty and others are arguing for is unequal responsibility. Where a woman is responsible for every child she bears. But a man is never responsible for any child he fathers.

Or, even more laughably....that a man has control over his own body AND that of a woman. While a woman has no control over a man's body, nor her own.

Neither of these situations is 'equal'. Both are comically unequal. The former proposal overwhelmilngly encouraging abortion by dramatically reducing the resources available for raising a child. The latter making women into mere meat puppets controlled by men. Where a man has complete control over the reproduction of any woman he impregnates. While a woman lacks the ability to control even her own body.

Um, no. There's a reason that every single state, without exception, has rejected this nonsense proposal: its a stupid idea. So stupid that its idiocy transcends politics. With those on the right and the left both recognizing how awful it is. And every state legislature, democrat or republican, rejecting it.

 

[martybegan]

Horseshit. Infants aren't *squatters* or parasites. They are human beings created at least in part by the one that carries them. Once they're created, the manner of their creation doesn't matter, it's our responsibility to protect them. Get over it, death cultist.

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

Indeed she can. But if she doesn't and he doesn't, then they are both equally responsible. But they do not equally carry the kid. If there is an abortion, they don't equally have the procedure. If there is a problem with the pregnancy, they don't equally undergo treatment. They are not equally at risk. So to make it equal, she gets to make the decisions about the pregnancy. After that, they are equally responsible. If the man doesn't like that arrangement, it is his responsibility to keep it in his pants. Once he pulls it out, he signs on for the whole ride whether he thinks it fair or not.

You are confusing legality and biology. Again, you are placing an undue burden on one gender of the other.

A question, if an ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) ever gets passed, and removes gender from the law, how do you give women these additional rights over men?

And if you want that to be the case, Men have to get some legal benefit as an equalizer, or you are basically admitting legally women are inferior and require additional protections.

 

[martybegan]

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

You keep saying that- but what we keep saying is that both men and women are equally responsible.

When having sex- both are equally responsible deciding whether to have sex and whether to use protection- both are equally responsible for the consequences of those decisions(pregnancy/std's)
After having sex- both are responsible for their own bodies- uniquely only the woman can get pregnant- so we either allow a woman to control her body- or we do not allow it. She is responsible for whatever decisions she makes with her body though.
After a baby is born- both are responsible for the baby.

Exactly. What Marty and others are arguing for is unequal responsibility. Where a woman is responsible for every child she bears. But a man is never responsible for any child he fathers.

Or, even more laughably....that a man has control over his own body AND that of a woman. While a woman has no control over a man's body, nor her own.

Neither of these situations is 'equal'. Both are comically unequal. The former proposal overwhelmilngly encouraging abortion by dramatically reducing the resources available for raising a child. The latter making women into mere meat puppets controlled by men. Where a man has complete control over the reproduction of any woman he impregnates. While a woman lacks the ability to control even her own body.

Um, no. There's a reason that every single state, without exception, has rejected this nonsense proposal: its a stupid idea. So stupid that its idiocy transcends politics. With those on the right and the left both recognizing how awful it is. And every state legislature, democrat or republican, rejecting it.

The woman has control. In my view the man has to make it clear, prior to the legal end of the time window for an arbitrary abortion if he intends to support the child or not. If not, this gives time for the woman to make a CHOICE, support the kid herself or have an abortion.

Currently women have total sexual reproductive freedom (pre-third trimester) and men do not. I thought equality was the goal here? If it isn't, then all the nasty stuff said about feminism being about superior rights over equal rights becomes far more significant.

 

[martybegan]

Actually my point is that if abortion is legal, men being able to have a choice as well is only fair. If abortion is illegal, then both sides are equally to be held responsible.

While I don't like abortion in general, and would never welch on any kid I had accidentally, the fact that women have more legal options than men in the decision is unfair, and un-maintainable if we seek true gender equality.

Of course, the obvious solution is to not have unprotected sex if you aren't willing to risk a kid, but pointing out a solution that requires a bare minimum of pre-planning or modified coitus will get you branded as some sort of prude.

They, the men had their choice at the time they had to decide to lay their seed inside the woman.........................................................

Without the seed being deposited inside of her, no matter how many times the two of them screw, there will be no baby... the man has much more control of the matter than you give them credit...

And yes, she does have an additional choice with abortion being legal, but that choice also goes to cover an additional step in the process that the man never has to face or do, her having to carry her pregnancy to term in her body, not his.

They are separate steps.

you take away men having to support their own offspring from THEIR escapades, then you take all responsibility off of the man and make him irresponsible in every case, and give him a free pass to screw all the women in the world with no consequences.

Those women willing to own up to their responsibility in this unplanned Pregnancy and carry it through to term and raise their and the father's child and not abort, should be rewarded, not penalized, if you are a pro-lifer.

So, I don't understand your and others thinking....i just don't... you claim science says this fetus is a separate human being, while you try to deny your sperm created it and should support this human being?

No seed, no baby....no matter how much the woman may want one.

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

It may not make sense to you, but giving one party a choice, and the other party none, and then holding the other party responsible regardless of their choice simply isn't fair.

Both parties have a choice on the use of their own body. If a man wants to be the one deciding if he's going to use his body to bring a fetus to term then he should get pregnant.

Worse, your very premise of financial responsibility is nonsense. You say its 'choice'. You're wrong. The premise of financial responsibility is the child. If the child exists, the responsibility exist. It doesn't matter if a man wants the child. Or doesn't want the child. Or agrees with the mother. Or disagrees. None of that is the basis of his responsibility.

The child's existence is. And he's responsible for any child of his that's born. Whether or not he wanted it to be born.

But only one side has the ability to say "I don't want this child." In an equal world, both sides would have, and should have the right.

 

[Valerie]

you guys are wicked dumb, no offense...

 

[martybegan]

you guys are wicked dumb, no offense...

Why?

Again, I'm arguing from a point of equality under the law, something that would be constitutional if an ERA is passed. I wouldn't personally welch on a kid I fathered, but why can a woman make up her mind independent of the man who fathered the kid, and the man is stuck with the woman's decision? If men and women are supposed to be legally equal, how can you justify that?

 

[PratchettFan]

Not up to you. Its up to the woman involved and no one else. If you don't like it, then don't have an abortion. But you have no more right to determine how a woman's body is to be used than I have over how your body is to be used.

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

Indeed she can. But if she doesn't and he doesn't, then they are both equally responsible. But they do not equally carry the kid. If there is an abortion, they don't equally have the procedure. If there is a problem with the pregnancy, they don't equally undergo treatment. They are not equally at risk. So to make it equal, she gets to make the decisions about the pregnancy. After that, they are equally responsible. If the man doesn't like that arrangement, it is his responsibility to keep it in his pants. Once he pulls it out, he signs on for the whole ride whether he thinks it fair or not.

You are confusing legality and biology. Again, you are placing an undue burden on one gender of the other.

A question, if an ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) ever gets passed, and removes gender from the law, how do you give women these additional rights over men?

And if you want that to be the case, Men have to get some legal benefit as an equalizer, or you are basically admitting legally women are inferior and require additional protections.

No. The same legal burden is on both of them. You just don't think it's fair you don't get an equal say in the biological part of the equation, even though you accept no responsibility in it. She takes all the risks, but you think you should be able to make the decisions. The only thing I am admitting is the woman's body belongs to her and you get no say. Whether you think that is fair is of no consequence.

 

[PratchettFan]

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

You keep saying that- but what we keep saying is that both men and women are equally responsible.

When having sex- both are equally responsible deciding whether to have sex and whether to use protection- both are equally responsible for the consequences of those decisions(pregnancy/std's)
After having sex- both are responsible for their own bodies- uniquely only the woman can get pregnant- so we either allow a woman to control her body- or we do not allow it. She is responsible for whatever decisions she makes with her body though.
After a baby is born- both are responsible for the baby.

Exactly. What Marty and others are arguing for is unequal responsibility. Where a woman is responsible for every child she bears. But a man is never responsible for any child he fathers.

Or, even more laughably....that a man has control over his own body AND that of a woman. While a woman has no control over a man's body, nor her own.

Neither of these situations is 'equal'. Both are comically unequal. The former proposal overwhelmilngly encouraging abortion by dramatically reducing the resources available for raising a child. The latter making women into mere meat puppets controlled by men. Where a man has complete control over the reproduction of any woman he impregnates. While a woman lacks the ability to control even her own body.

Um, no. There's a reason that every single state, without exception, has rejected this nonsense proposal: its a stupid idea. So stupid that its idiocy transcends politics. With those on the right and the left both recognizing how awful it is. And every state legislature, democrat or republican, rejecting it.

The woman has control. In my view the man has to make it clear, prior to the legal end of the time window for an arbitrary abortion if he intends to support the child or not. If not, this gives time for the woman to make a CHOICE, support the kid herself or have an abortion.

Currently women have total sexual reproductive freedom (pre-third trimester) and men do not. I thought equality was the goal here? If it isn't, then all the nasty stuff said about feminism being about superior rights over equal rights becomes far more significant.

No. You accepted responsibility the moment you chose to have sex.

 

[Syriusly]

They, the men had their choice at the time they had to decide to lay their seed inside the woman.........................................................

Without the seed being deposited inside of her, no matter how many times the two of them screw, there will be no baby... the man has much more control of the matter than you give them credit...

And yes, she does have an additional choice with abortion being legal, but that choice also goes to cover an additional step in the process that the man never has to face or do, her having to carry her pregnancy to term in her body, not his.

They are separate steps.

you take away men having to support their own offspring from THEIR escapades, then you take all responsibility off of the man and make him irresponsible in every case, and give him a free pass to screw all the women in the world with no consequences.

Those women willing to own up to their responsibility in this unplanned Pregnancy and carry it through to term and raise their and the father's child and not abort, should be rewarded, not penalized, if you are a pro-lifer.

So, I don't understand your and others thinking....i just don't... you claim science says this fetus is a separate human being, while you try to deny your sperm created it and should support this human being?

No seed, no baby....no matter how much the woman may want one.

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

It may not make sense to you, but giving one party a choice, and the other party none, and then holding the other party responsible regardless of their choice simply isn't fair.

Both parties have a choice on the use of their own body. If a man wants to be the one deciding if he's going to use his body to bring a fetus to term then he should get pregnant.

Worse, your very premise of financial responsibility is nonsense. You say its 'choice'. You're wrong. The premise of financial responsibility is the child. If the child exists, the responsibility exist. It doesn't matter if a man wants the child. Or doesn't want the child. Or agrees with the mother. Or disagrees. None of that is the basis of his responsibility.

The child's existence is. And he's responsible for any child of his that's born. Whether or not he wanted it to be born.

But only one side has the ability to say "I don't want this child." In an equal world, both sides would have, and should have the right.

If and when a man's body gets pregnant- then the man can decide whether or not to continue the pregnancy or terminate it.

But once a baby is born- both the mother and father are equally responsible.

 

[martybegan]

Then a woman should have no right to force a man to pay for a kid she want's to keep, and he doesn't. With great power comes great responsibility.

Nope. And if you don't think that is fair, then talk to the person who came up with the division of labor on making babies. You don't want the responsibility, then get snipped or keep it in your pants. But don't pretend that how babies are born is an equal thing between men and women. It isn't and the women don't get to make you carry it half way because it's not fair. The man gets no say, and that's just too bad.

Or the woman can simply keep her legs crossed. Problem solved. For some reason you think women are somehow unable to control their sexuality, but men somehow can.

Indeed she can. But if she doesn't and he doesn't, then they are both equally responsible. But they do not equally carry the kid. If there is an abortion, they don't equally have the procedure. If there is a problem with the pregnancy, they don't equally undergo treatment. They are not equally at risk. So to make it equal, she gets to make the decisions about the pregnancy. After that, they are equally responsible. If the man doesn't like that arrangement, it is his responsibility to keep it in his pants. Once he pulls it out, he signs on for the whole ride whether he thinks it fair or not.

You are confusing legality and biology. Again, you are placing an undue burden on one gender of the other.

A question, if an ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) ever gets passed, and removes gender from the law, how do you give women these additional rights over men?

And if you want that to be the case, Men have to get some legal benefit as an equalizer, or you are basically admitting legally women are inferior and require additional protections.

No. The same legal burden is on both of them. You just don't think it's fair you don't get an equal say in the biological part of the equation, even though you accept no responsibility in it. She takes all the risks, but you think you should be able to make the decisions. The only thing I am admitting is the woman's body belongs to her and you get no say. Whether you think that is fair is of no consequence.

But only one has the legal ability to remove their responsibility. What I am saying is both should have an EQUAL decision. If a woman wants responsibility for her body, she can have it, but she should also accept the total responsibility of the decision to keep a baby if the male does not want it. The final decision would always be hers.

You want to deny men the same choice just because they are men. That you don't get the sad irony of this is your own problem.

 

[Skull Pilot]

you guys are wicked dumb, no offense...

Especially when we trust women with birth control.

 

[martybegan]

So basically men have to be held more responsible, just because they are men..... How about we turn that around and say if a woman doesn't want a kid, keep your legs closed? If you are offended by one, and OK with the other, regardless of the direction, you are a hypocrite.

I am not a pro-lifer, I am a pro-let the States decide the issue- Roe V Wade is terrible law-er.

HOW are the men being held MORE responsible when the woman has chosen to NOT ABORT and carry this accidental child and raise this child of theirs.....?????

That makes NO SENSE to me Marty, just none....

Are you seriously trying to punish the woman who chooses to own up, just because of the women who chose not to? And those women who chose to abort and give up their responsibility, they relieved the man of HIS RESPONSIBILITY in this mess as well.

You need to rethink your position. Those women willing to own up and give out/give up the next 20 years or longer of their life for their and the father's child, should NOT be punished for owning up. And that's what you are TRYING TO DO.

It may not make sense to you, but giving one party a choice, and the other party none, and then holding the other party responsible regardless of their choice simply isn't fair.

Both parties have a choice on the use of their own body. If a man wants to be the one deciding if he's going to use his body to bring a fetus to term then he should get pregnant.

Worse, your very premise of financial responsibility is nonsense. You say its 'choice'. You're wrong. The premise of financial responsibility is the child. If the child exists, the responsibility exist. It doesn't matter if a man wants the child. Or doesn't want the child. Or agrees with the mother. Or disagrees. None of that is the basis of his responsibility.

The child's existence is. And he's responsible for any child of his that's born. Whether or not he wanted it to be born.

But only one side has the ability to say "I don't want this child." In an equal world, both sides would have, and should have the right.

If and when a man's body gets pregnant- then the man can decide whether or not to continue the pregnancy or terminate it.

But once a baby is born- both the mother and father are equally responsible.

Again you bring biology into it, when in a gender neutral society, gender cannot be an issue. Again, only the mother gets a real choice, and only because of her gender. Again, its discrimination, and you can't get it through your head.

From a legal standpoint, if you remove gender from the equation, why should the male have any less rights than the female? And I get the point that the man cannot force the woman to carry. Why should the man be forced to pay if he doesn't want the kid, tells her so before the end period for an abortion to be legally done, and thus gives her the option to keep the child OF HER OWN FREE WILL or abort it if she doesn't want to keep it on her own?