Roe v. Wade

Post Reply New Topic

Then you should agree with abortion. If the woman aborts the fetus there is no claim to be made against the man for support. Rejoice!

ruveyn

That only works IF the man is in agreement with her wishes. What happens to the man if he doesn't want the abortion.

It's been established that the biological father can suffer severe emotional trauma when a woman has an abortion against his wishes. He can feel guilt and condemnation as if he is guilty for not doing more to prevent the loss of his child's life. Again, he has no legal rights and no say in the matter, but he's emotionally invested if he wants the fetus to live.

It's the lack of any common sense or JUSTICE.

The woman gets the choice. The man gets nothing. If she wants to let the fetus live, he can't force her to have an abortion nor can he exempt himself of the consequences of HER choice (not HIS). Likewise, if she wants to terminate the pregnancy, he gets no option if he wants to have the fetus live and take care of it. If she let it live and handed custody over to the biological father, he could likely NEVER compel her to pay for child support because only MEN are burdened like this. Women pretty much get a free pass.

A woman gets the power to choose but stick someone else with the consequences no matter what choice she makes. The man gets nothing. How is that just and equitable in a legal system that supposedly enshrines those principles?

Likewise, child support is never based on truth, just documentation. If a man can prove he is not the biological father but he was induced to admit that he was the father (even if that was done by his being deceived by the mother), he is legally obligated with no option of appeal. The state cares only that someone is saddled with the economic burden, regardless of if it is the right person.

Anybody who has lived for a decent length of time has encountered situations which engender guilt. That's part of being alive and having some sense of decency. Tough! You learn to live with it. It does not give you the right to enslave a woman for about 18 years to alleviate your guilt.

Calling any woman who ends up with an unwanted pregnancy a dirty slut is really pushing it, in my opinion.

Not any woman. There's plenty ways accidents can happen. I said without protection. Considering that it's a (hypothetical) woman who had an abortion without telling their other either it's not a relationship, it's not a serious relationship, or there's other problems and probably isn't exactly the kind of relationship where you go around without protection. And also, I understand condoms fail...normally by user error but they do fail.

Before going too deep into this debate, first we must recognize that no amount of discusion will ever reconcile the differences of opinion in this matter. For, there are too many differences of opinion, on numerous aspects of the debate.

One of the key points in question, is when is a fetus a person? Legally, it is at birth. Yet, it becomes legally protected before that. Once it is "viable" if taken out of the womb. However, some people have other views on when they consider a fetus to be a person, and that is an important aspect of this issue to consider. The specific moment a potential person becomes a person is a widely differing opinion. Varying from the moment of conception, to even well after birth.

Another point of conficting opinion of the matter, is the rights of parents. Ussually viewed from the maternal angle, yet many have differing opinions of the paternal rights as well. Does a woman have the right to abort pregnancy to protect her body from the potential harm, changes, and potential death it may cause? And, if she does, what are these rights at the cost of? Is her right to remain as she is, more important than the right of a potential person to live? Is it more important than a fathers right to rear his offspring? Should a potential father even have a say in the matter? And, another important question to ask, is a woman aborting a fetus because of her own safety, or is it to avoid the responsibility of a child? Few would openly admit to abortion for that reason, but, in reality it is often the strongest motivator.

There are numerous other angles and opinions as well, and many of them conflict and clash on many different points.


My own opinion of the matter, as I had a bit of experience in the subject. My wife found out she was pregnant, and she brought up the subject of abortion. My initial reaction was anger, although I did not act upon it. We discussed the matter and decided to have the child. That was my desire and hers as well. She wanted to at least discuss it, as, we where both pretty young still, and wasn't sure if it was even something we could handle.

However, if she had decided to abort regardless. My initial reaction of anger would have been transformed into something a bit less savory. My view was that it was already a child, even though it was early in it's development. And to abort would have been to slay my child. I'm normally a peaceful nonviolent person, but, when someone wishes harm upon my children, I can react, rather savage.

~NS

zer0netgain, you take childbearing, labor, and parenting way too lightly. The first two responsiblities are always on the mother, so why sould it not be her choice alone to make. As for the choice of whether or not to become a parent, that should be decided before sex, by both parties. You have no problem telling a woman to just keep her legs shut, but a man bears just as much responsibility in avoiding unwanted pregnancy. Enough with the nonsense about how a man can be deceived into thinking a woman is sterile, or that she's on the pill. If you have sex with a woman, she can become pregnant, regardless of protection (actual or falsified). A man must accept these risks if he makes the choice to have sex.

As for children born into these circumstances, their fathers do have rights. In the past, the idea of a father getting custody was laughed at, but not today. The playing field is much more even. I have a family member who is a deadbeat mom, regretably, and she's spent many months in jail because of it. Her wages are garnished and she can't even leave her own state. Good I say. Dads, even today, are often the ones who get away with murder whan it comes to not paying child support. If, in the rare instance, a man has to experience an unwanted abortion, well that is a shame - but he should have thought of that before knocking a girl up.

I am pro-choice, but I would never have an abortion myself for any reason other than my own life being threatened (I would never want to leave my kids without a mom). I think it should be taken more seriously and adoption should be more widely accepted and encouraged. Making abortion illegal would solve nothing. There will always be women who want/need an abortion, and will have one at any cost. If it were illegal, they would just be performed behind closed doors. Back alley abortions are horrible and extremely dangerous. My own mother had one and nearly died.

For what it's worth, I'd like to tip my hat to all posters on this thread thus far. The level of decorum exhibited, while discussing what is arguably the most emotionally charged issue of our day, is to be much commended. Perhaps there is hope for our species after all.

Tough nuggies. The man's life is at no danger by childbirth. Only the woman can decide whether she wants to risk her life giving birth.

ruveyn

As it happens, Roe does address the "rights" of three interested parties; the mother, the state, and the fetus. That it excludes the interest of the father is notable, and in my opinion deserves further examination.

The issue is Ruveyn, that often times, it isn't necessarilly the risk of danger caused by pregnancy that is the factor that determines the use of abortion. Often, it is the responsibility for rearing said child.

How do you determine which of the motivators is just? Or which is the cause of an abortion? Or which should warrant an abortion?

Is it ok for a woman to abort a pregnancy because she doesn't want to raise it, even if the father wishes to do so? And, again, we can visit upon the right of the unborn, does it's life mean less than a womans lack of desire to raise it go unheard?

~NS

PS/Edit. My wife broke my hand during my son's birth >.> (Not that it was life threatening or anything...but it did cause harm)

Why even list motives? There shouldn't be a judgment as to why one does something, it's either legal or it's not. This garbage that's been going on with abortion is an abomination of the legal system and is religion's abuse of the separation of church and state.

/we should tax the churches.

The law would differ with you here. Consider the difference between first degree murder, (premeditated), and manslaughter, (accidental). The difference is in motive.

Yes. The woman owns whatever is in her body. End of story. The only restriction on disposal of the contents of her body is the prevailing public health laws.

That is why we don't void our bowels or bladder in the middle of the street.

ruveyn