Do you think the father should have a choice whether a women has an abortion.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

I don't think that the man should have a say in whether or not the woman has an abortion.

But just as the woman can choose to terminate a man's son or daughter, I think that men should be able to terminate their financial obligations to the children. Within the first two trimesters, we should allow men to say, "nope, I ain't supporting the kid". Then if the woman wants the kid, she can take care of it on her own. And if she isn't able to take care of a child, it's still within the time frame in which it's legal for her to get an abortion. If she can't take care of the kid on her own, then she ought to get an abortion.

However, this is only up to the third trimester. After that, the man must be legally obligated to provide child support. But before the third trimester, I think that men should be fully able to say "nope. I refuse to accept that kid, and I refuse to support it. If you want it, go ahead, but you'll be doing so without my help." And if the mother has a problem with that, and can't take care of a child by herself, then she can go get an abortion.

But as far as men actually having a say in whether or not a woman gets an abortion, of course not.

MrGeezer

No, his mom should support the kid by herself. Or get an abortion. She knew LONG before the kid was born that the father refused to help her out financially. That's plenty of time for her to have aborted the kid if she can't afford to take care of it by herself.

Most people that are not planning on children don't discuss legal ramifications. Heck, they could be using birth control which has been known to fail.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]So if daddy doesn't want to support his child then society should?

LJS9502_basic

No, his mom should support the kid by herself. Or get an abortion. She knew LONG before the kid was born that the father refused to help her out financially. That's plenty of time for her to have aborted the kid if she can't afford to take care of it by herself.

Most people that are not planning on children don't discuss legal ramifications. Heck, they could be using birth control which has been known to fail.

If she doesn't believe in abortion, then she shopuldn't have gotten pregnant.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

No, his mom should support the kid by herself. Or get an abortion. She knew LONG before the kid was born that the father refused to help her out financially. That's plenty of time for her to have aborted the kid if she can't afford to take care of it by herself.

MrGeezer

Most people that are not planning on children don't discuss legal ramifications. Heck, they could be using birth control which has been known to fail.

If she doesn't believe in abortion, then she shopuldn't have gotten pregnant.

Exactly

if a woman is that against abortion, than she should acknowledge the fact that there is a risk of getting pregnant when you have sex, and should therefore not engage in it.

I mean, its really quite simple:

1. Have sex
2. Realize you got pregnant, so "ooops!"
3. Get abortion

Or:

1. Dont have sex

But back on topic- a man can say what he wants but the woman gets the final choice. That being said, hopefully the couple would be in a healthy relationship where they've already discussed and agreed upon children so there wouldn't be a big issue about whether or not to keep the baby. Ideally they'd be on the same page before the woman got pregnant. If not, well... don't be surprised when issues come up.binpink

In an ideal world, I agree with you...but, since the women make the choice, they and they alone should live with the consequences of their choice.

This is the way I see it, and please forgive the analogy:

its like a bank robbery where hostages get shot. The pregnant woman shoots the hostage, and the man is merely an accomplice. Yet when the judge rules, both the woman and man are given the same prison sentence, despite the fact that the man's offense was lesser than the woman's.

both parties are guilty, but ultimately only one party is guilty of a far greater crime.

If he raped her, no. If they consented she shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion unless it's her life at risk. Consenting adults, remember.

btw 5000th POST

Say the women doesn't want to have the baby, but the man does. Should it ultimatly be the womens choice or should the man have a say.

Mercenary848

All abortions occur in under 3 months, well before the foetus has a nervous system advanced enough to feel or care. It is irrelevant, beyond the parent's bogus sympathetic emotions.

Depends on the circumstances - but it's mostly up to the woman. But consider this: if the man 100% wants the woman to have the abortion - do you honestly think it's going to be a good start for the child? Do we need more people on the planet - even if they aren't going to have the best start at life?

Depends on the circumstances - but it's mostly up to the woman. But consider this: if the man 100% wants the woman to have the abortion - do you honestly think it's going to be a good start for the child? Do we need more people on the planet - even if they aren't going to have the best start at life?

GodLovesDead

I never met my dad. I don't even have any leads (least not because my mother does not even know where to begin), but why should I care who he is if he has chosen not to be a part of my life? My mother is a career academic who raised me very well on her own. Why try to seek out trash? It is of no consequence.

The only one who should have a choice on whether the woman can have an abortion... IS THE BABY.Silenthps

The "baby" is not physiologically/mentally capable of making such decisions in the womb until well beyond the option of an abortion is illegal- moot point.

He is the father and he should have the right to have a say. She should ask how he feels about it.MoonMarvel

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]The only one who should have a choice on whether the woman can have an abortion... IS THE BABY.jazzkrotch

The "baby" is not physiologically/mentally capable of making such decisions in the womb until well beyond the option of an abortion is illegal- moot point.

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]He is the father and he should have the right to have a say. She should ask how he feels about it.jazzkrotch

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

[QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]The only one who should have a choice on whether the woman can have an abortion... IS THE BABY.Silenthps

The "baby" is not physiologically/mentally capable of making such decisions in the womb until well beyond the option of an abortion is illegal- moot point.

Stopping life before it practically starts, and arguing about its "potential" relevance or significance is very silly. Think about it- "I should have made love harder with my ex-girlfriend, but because I didn't, now my lovechild will never be born. I will forever hate her for denying his/her existence!" Does this sound logical or reasonable?!

[QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]He is the father and he should have the right to have a say. She should ask how he feels about it.MoonMarvel

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

It's called biology/science- is it really that foreign to you?

[QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]He is the father and he should have the right to have a say. She should ask how he feels about it.MoonMarvel

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

jazzkrotch

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"] What in the world are you talking about? :?MoonMarvel

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

1. Yes, a fetus is a bit more complicated than a carrot...but not much

2. What did you say? All I remember is an extremely vague question. Please clarify.

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

A human foetus under 3 months is no more advanced than a carrot. You would think nothing of uprooting a carrot and killing it for sustenance, right? Why be hypocritical? Human sentiment can be very irrational.

mrbojangles25

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

A life is not a life unless it is aware of it's own existence. A carrot is not aware of feeling pain or emotion, and neither is a fetus under 3 months, so why should you care? You may as well care about completely un-conceived beings if that is the case, and that is pretty illogical, isn't it?

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"] What in the world are you talking about? :?MoonMarvel

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

Not under 3 months it's not, and anything beyond that, an abortion is illegal.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

What in the world are you talking about? :?MoonMarvel

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

A life is not a life unless it is aware of it's own existence. A carrot is not aware of feeling pain or emotion, and neither is a fetus under 3 months, so why should you care? You may as well care about completely un-conceived beings if that is the case, and that is pretty illogical, isn't it?

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

Not under 3 months it's not, and anything beyond that, an abortion is illegal.

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

1. Yes, a carrot is a bit more complicated than a carrot...but not much

2. What did you say? All I remember is an extremely vague question. Please clarify.

[QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

MoonMarvel

A life is not a life unless it is aware of it's own existence. A carrot is not aware of feeling pain or emotion, and neither is a fetus under 3 months, so why should you care? You may as well care about completely un-conceived beings if that is the case, and that is pretty illogical, isn't it?

True, but this is a matter of philosophy. Stop it before it happens and matters, or (on moral grounds) insist it continue such that it will matter. My argument is, if you are going to feel that way, you may as well also care about people that you wish existed, but were never actually biologically conceived! Where do you draw the line? Obviously you would prefer to draw it after physical conception, irrelevant of the circumstances of conception (rape, for instance) even though the fetus is not advanced enough to even be aware that it is alive in the first place.

I am a pragmatist- results are what matter, not romantic or ideological concepts/feelings.

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

A life is not a life unless it is aware of it's own existence. A carrot is not aware of feeling pain or emotion, and neither is a fetus under 3 months, so why should you care? You may as well care about completely un-conceived beings if that is the case, and that is pretty illogical, isn't it?

True, but this is a matter of philosophy. Stop it before it happens and matters, or (on moral grounds) insist it continue such that it will matter. My argument is, if you are going to feel that way, you may as well also care about people that you wish existed, but were never actually biologically conceived! Where do you draw the line? Obviously you would prefer to draw it after physical conception, irrelevant of the circumstances of conception (rape, for instance) even though the fetus is not advanced enough to even be aware that it is alive in the first place.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"] A fetus is a bit more complicated than a carrot. And it still has nothing to do with what I said.MoonMarvel

1. Yes, a carrot is a bit more complicated than a carrot...but not much

2. What did you say? All I remember is an extremely vague question. Please clarify.

lol im drunk, so...forgiveness, pweeeaase. :oops:

1. I corrected that 2 minutes ago

2. OK, I will go back and read it...in the morning.

3. Cheers...I respect your thoughts and beliefs, mate, and I certainly dont think youre wrong per se. But that doesnt mean we cant enjoy a good debate! Bring it on!

ROFL @ carrot vs. fetus debate :D
I think if the chick wants an abortion it should be her choice, but if she wants to keep it I think the man should havejust as much say, cause he's gonna be the one paying child support or whatever even if he doesn't want it.

[QUOTE="jazzkrotch"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"] A carrot will never be aware of that, a fetus will be in time.MoonMarvel

True, but this is a matter of philosophy. Stop it before it happens and matters, or (on moral grounds) insist it continue such that it will matter. My argument is, if you are going to feel that way, you may as well also care about people that you wish existed, but were never actually biologically conceived! Where do you draw the line? Obviously you would prefer to draw it after physical conception, irrelevant of the circumstances of conception (rape, for instance) even though the fetus is not advanced enough to even be aware that it is alive in the first place.

Fair enough. I don't believe the father should have any right in deciding whether a woman goes ahead and has an abortion (during the legal period), as this matter is far too personal to the woman, and will affect the rest of her life. As for the motives behind the father conceiving in the first place, there can be any number of reasons and/or possibilities, many of which could be very selfish and unsavoury indeed. However, once the potential mother has commited herself to having the baby, the father should be entitled to equal rights and visitation as a co-parent, and unless the father is practically deemed unsuitable, anything less is unsatisfactory. This is where the law in America becomes biased toward the mother. US law is very archaic and biased towards the mother's wishes and views, and this is very unfair.

There are so many stupid mothers out there that love to manipulate the flawed US legal system to their favor, preying on on the stupid Republican old-school law makers that still think America is a Wild West of old. Granted, there are still hick wifebeaters out there, but the law in America has to catch up with the times and learn how to differentiate. Obama will ensure this happens in due course. The Hillbilly is a dying breed, thank Dog!

I suddenly really want some carrot

Doesnt it look so crunchy, sweet, and healthy? Oh man...somehow, its hard to believe a fetus could ever be so satisfying.

mmmmmm *crunch crunch* mmmmmmm nom nom nom *crunch crunch*

I suddenly really want some carrot

Doesnt it look so crunchy, sweet, and healthy? Oh man...somehow, its hard to believe a fetus could ever be so satisfying.

mmmmmm *crunch crunch* mmmmmmm nom nom nom *crunch crunch*

mrbojangles25

You're a funny dude, no doubt. Read my above edits, not that it will necessarily make a difference.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

No, his mom should support the kid by herself. Or get an abortion. She knew LONG before the kid was born that the father refused to help her out financially. That's plenty of time for her to have aborted the kid if she can't afford to take care of it by herself.

MrGeezer

Most people that are not planning on children don't discuss legal ramifications. Heck, they could be using birth control which has been known to fail.

If she doesn't believe in abortion, then she shopuldn't have gotten pregnant.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"] What in the world are you talking about? :?jazzkrotch

a carrot is alive, unconcious, and a collection of primitive cells

a fetus is alive, inconcious, and a collection of primitive cells.

I can see where the anology is coming from, from a Devil's Advocate point of view.

Still...my soul cant help but romanticize that there is a humane difference.

A life is not a life unless it is aware of it's own existence. A carrot is not aware of feeling pain or emotion, and neither is a fetus under 3 months, so why should you care? You may as well care about completely un-conceived beings if that is the case, and that is pretty illogical, isn't it?

we have nothing to say when it comes to their body.escapeoftheape

im not sure its the womens body so she has the right to do what she wants with her boby but the mans dna also made the fetus so should have a say but it also depends who has the best points

im not sure its the womens body so she has the right to do what she wants with her boby but the mans dna also made the fetus so should have a say but it also depends who has the best points

killerkool07

You can't rape a woman and say she should keep it. This is why woman have 100% choice. Stealing wives.

It's 100% the woman's choice :)