How is it that a woman can get an abortion under the thought that the baby isn't alive yet but if I were to hit a pregnant woman with my car and kill her and the baby I would be charged with the deaths of both baby and mother? The baby is either alive or it's not, can't have both can we?
Careful, you're making sense, we can't have any of that in political discussion......
Actually, what we can't have is an over-simplified answer to an obviously complicated debate. (If it weren't complicated, there wouldn't still be a debate... and yes, despite how "obvious" it always seems to the angry debaters on either side.)
And while I can certainly see the temptation to make a comparison like the one you are making, the implications of your analogy are problematic.
Using your reasoning, if it's that simple, then any woman hit by a car and killed, even were it only a few moments after having sex, could count as two deaths in the eyes of the law. Sort of the Morning After Law of Traffic Fatalities.
I don't believe that that is correct. First of all, unless you ran over the woman intentionally you wouldn't be charged with her murder let alone that of the unborn fetus. Second, my impression is that double murder would only be charged in cases of a pregnant woman who was in the late stages of her pregnancy.
Abortion laws are not based on the baby not being "alive"
The baby is alive.
The difference is, the woman has say so over her body and if she wants to give birth.
Hitting a pregnant woman with your car, is a reckless criminal act.
How can you compare the two?
How is it that the wealthy can say it is unfair to tax them just because they make more money then other people but it is okay for the middle to be taxed more then the poor because they make more then the others?
The wealthy will say, "because it is my money and I should get to say what I do with it." They might also say that 20$ is nothing compared to a million, but it is up to the person to decide it's worth.
Similarly, a woman can say, "because it is my body and I should get to say what I do with it. They might also say that being pregnant for 2 weeks is nothing compared to being pregnant for 7 but it is up to the person to decide it's worth.
What you are insisting is that because some woman have abortions, then it isn't fair for you to be held responsible for killing her and her baby without her consent.
Similarly, you are saying that you get to decide the worth of a woman and her child. If it suites you, you will say, "so, it's not like she valued her or her child's life because some woman get abortions.
so only the woman has the right to kill her baby?
"What you are insisting is that because some woman have abortions, then it isn't fair for you to be held responsible for killing her and her baby without her consent."
I'm seriously not trying to be a smartass here, just trying to understand.
Not doing so well on the understanding part are you. Any woman can decide what to do with any lump inside her whether it is a foetus or a cnacerous growth, both are a mass of cells, neither of them is a person.
define your statement. MAN is man. Finding the Grail, for you, will be difficult. The darkness has its hold on you. There is only so much time, and you know, in your heart, that you are not more than the sum of the parts. What is that sum? What would you be willing to pay? What price, life? Death? If you chose death, then what is life to you? Life to you means nothing. Still, as you breathe, there is yet time to reverse your thinking. Me? No, not me. You will reverse it yourself. Step by step. But first, you must find the grail within. Here is where the first Druid found it. Everyone posesses the grail, you are the key, seek it, seek it and in so doing, you will first understand it. In that understanding your doors of perception will be opened, and the wind will speak your name, so that only you can hear it. In that moment, you will see, that what has been done, was not done by me, nor was it done by my son or my grandson. Had they, I would not be here.
Certain words you should pay attention to, of those words: some, consent.
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH no - we already did this until we bored it to death at least three times in the last few months. All the logical thinking stuff and all the emotional dribbling moron stuff - it would be less painful if you just dug that old thread out.
...mornin' CM!....see you finally passed GO too!....now what's wrong with a little pain from time to time....i don't think i've read that thread!....'specially the ones that keep condemning women over and over and over......
another interesting point i find is that if a woman doesnt need the mans consent on terminating a baby then a man should have the same right as so not to be trapped into paying for a baby that the woman wants and the man does not. I mean there should be forms at a planned parenthood for the father to fill out a, 'Paternul abortion form' so to speak i guess where he could sign off that the baby is no longer his responsiblitiy. If the father cant terminate the baby just as the mother can, it would be a double standard just the same wouldnt it?
When it comes to double standards we have more than enough; I am going off topic here, but it has always intrigue me the vocal protest of the ones who are "pro life" in terms of a fetus and "pro death" in terms of capital punishment (which in many cases proved to be sending to death the wrong person)
Explain that one from a double standards perspective
One life is innocent, the other is not. And please knock off the "innocent man execution" stuff.....yes, it may happen, but it's not exactly commonplace...
And how is it that if I were to give a beer to a 13-year-old kid, I'd be contributing to the delinquency of a minor, but if a pregnant woman drinks a beer, it's okay, and she won't?
How is it that if a pregnant woman rides a roller coaster (even though she's been warned not to!) she won't be charged with child abuse (or with murder, if she miscarries)?
It's so obvious, right? Either it's a child or it's not, right?
....if a woman is drinking alcohol while pregnant...she probably has other problems....like an addiction beyond her control?.....unfortunately....
and if she's doing other things that she's warned about....she could be pretty young...and life could be chaotic.....and she doesn't really understand what is being said...did you listen to everything you were told when you were young and invisible?
..your examples are not of those for all women.....you must look at the context of someone's life before you judge and make those statements Jeff.
....don't get me started!
"you must look at the context of someone's life before you judge"
Exactly! You win the prize! My whole point was, it's not so cut-and-dried as the ideologues on either side of the issue would have us believe.
good point jeff, Petra even if a man wears a condom its not 100% my wife and i thought we were done (for now) and were using protection and found out that we were pregnant with our daughter, she is 6 months now and is proof that a condom isnt 100%. im not saying she wasnt wanted because she was we had just planned for her in a couple years, she just came early.
a man should have the same rights as the woman in terms of a child if abortion is legal. everyone in sociaty is looking for equal rights so why isnt the man given the same rights to not father a child as a woman has not to mother a child?
i'm sure it happens.......however, men & women should be prepared when engaged in sexual activity....it's still the woman's body...whatever way you want to look at it....a man cannot decide for her.....ever.....ever....just like women can't make you get a vasectomy....if a man never wants a child.....go for the 100% method....it's your body and your choice.
..btw...are you actually complaining because you and your wife had a child earlier than you had planned...and you'd rather your wife have aborted that child I assume you had out of love for each other.....this doesn't make a lot of sense to me....
There you go SOH You get all revved up and into 'em, I'm off to bed at 1 in te morning here - night all
im not saying the man should have the right to MAKE a woman have one, im saying a set of legal documents should be set in place to support the man in walking away if the woman chooses to keep the baby. a man should be able to "abort" as well
...well i'm not sure if it's going to happen....of course you could probably draw up some kind of pre-F***?...like a prenup....not sure if you'd have the time to do that just before having sexual encounters....'hey lady, before we get it on....can you sign here pallleeese?'......maybe it could happen...just like when you're totin' around your 'clean bill of health papers too'.........sure you can walk away...men do it all the time....that's nothing new.....but again, choices were made and some accept the responsibility of an unwanted pregancy and at a minimum provide financial support for that bad decision that was made in the first place.......maybe you are on to something....pre-f*** papers.... you just never know! later....off to work....
@SOH-Why are you being so aggressive in this discussion? Are you that immature? I assmued that I would be speaking with adults on the subject and not children, as to attack my wife and I or even just me isn't offensive but is suprising. I never said anything to imply I was complaining but I can respect the fact you are feeling cornered of even threatened by a discussion such as this but if you are unable to speak on the subject with respect to others you might want to work on self control before entering into a forum such as this. I have said nothing about condeming anyone on getting an abortion and have left my views on it out but as far as it being your body your choice, it's a crock. If your are going to say that a man HAS to support the "consequences " of his actions and take care of a child then that same man has the right to object to the abortion. YOU cannot have it both ways.
SOH is talking about all those real cases out there that this kind of bland thread with its worn out questions would like to ignore. In real life it is the forced sex, the socially inept people, dysfunctional families and already damaged people who have to struggle with reality while you blow hot air. Abortion is not about middle class cheerleader types discussing this with momma and poppa - it is about half-educated, dysfunctional people in dysfunctional families where a another kid is another millstone and the kid is pretty much guaranteed to follow in its mothers staggering footsteps.
"a man should have the same rights as the woman in terms of a child if abortion is legal. everyone in sociaty is looking for equal rights so why isnt the man given the same rights to not father a child as a woman has not to mother a child?"
and just previous to that in the same post you were talking about your unplanned child....so my confusion of course got mixed up with what you were saying since it followed directly behind your statement about 'rights to not father' and seemed linked in some way....so I apologize for me misunderstanding you...I was not attacking you and your wife...read your post.
As for me being immature and aggressive, I'm pointing out some facts of life...and yes women can have it both ways and they do...i'm saying as you'll see in my other posts that choices are made beforehand by both a man and a woman...but women have the ultimate choice of what to do if they become pregnant...that's a reality.....I assume some of us have learned something after all of these years...eons of unwanted pregnancies...there are various birth control methods....basically if a man has intercourse with a woman, the man should be prepared for the results...as well as the woman...
later i commented on your idea of legal papers...well maybe that's the answer...i just don't know how it would really work in reality...and a man could walk away without a worry because they've handled the unwanted pregnancy legally.....there is no such thing that i'm aware of ...some men still walk away anyway.....financial support is truly a minimum form of support when it comes to raising a child...a child that 2 people made.....one decided to keep and the other didn't want....problem is, only one person has control over the woman's body...the woman.....and that's not a crock...i don't understand why you believe otherwise....
....men should take precaution because they do not have control over a woman's body.....and never will.....and vice versa...
..i don't feel threatened and cornered....I'm commenting from the perspective of one woman and one woman who has witnessed lots of unwanted pregnancies and the fallout and damage, etc. etc. and the men that walk away over and over and take absolutely no responsibility.
...and no you didn't outright condemn abortion....and I didn't say you did, did I?
as well, your beginning post could have appeared to be questioning abortion in a way don't you think?...or maybe i misunderstood and it was more about questioning a manslaughter charge?
"How is it that a woman can get an abortion under the thought that the baby isn't alive yet but if I were to hit a pregnant woman with my car and kill her and the baby I would be charged with the deaths of both baby and mother? The baby is either alive or it's not, can't have both can we?"
so, if the above makes me immature and aggressive to you, that's just too bad.......
btw...you brought up the subject right?...it's a sensitive one....
i think i like SOH lol i apologize, that post about my child and the abortion thing was a mixed response to two different posts, one pointing out that condoms are not 100% effective as birth control and a seperate thought on making it to where a man could legally walk away if he chose to do so.
I DO NOT think it is ok for these dead beat men to just walk about screwing women, knocking them up and living their life while a woman and her family, in some cases, is picking his slack.
that being said i do believe that in this land where everyone is screaming for the rights to get married and the rights to abort and the rights for this that and the other it is not fair for a man to have to pay child support/care for an unwanted baby.
i guess this topic was posted more of the double standereds dont make sense and i posted it under the abortion section because the double standered referred to it.
i say its a crock mainly on this point. As an American (speaking for abortion in America) we have the right to LIFE liberty and the persute of happyness in the nation. Abortion takes away that first right. Liberty has been taken away by ObamaCare and the persute of happyness is only there if you have enough money to pay the taxes and can devote more time to your job than your family. I love my country please dont misunderstand, i just recongize things need fixing is all.
someone very close to me had an abortion, i have never condemed her for it. ultimatly she had the choice, no one can hold her down until the baby is born, but i cannot support the idea that it is just your body when the baby is alive inside. At the same time I dont want women dying or seriously hurting themselves to backally butchers like they used to. You are aboslutly right, if you are ready to do the bump then you should be ready to change their dump because doen the dirty makes a baby. stand up and take care of it.
Yes there is a double standard in America- however, the double standard should apply to those of wealth versus those without.
There is no double standard with regards to abortion. Abortion is a legal procedure offered by the medical establishment, as an option for women. As for the MEN not having a choice in the decision, you are incorrect! They had their choice and made their choice before having sex/intercourse.
And on a different view- Did YOU have a choice to be born?
*please keep your comments to reality, and keep out religious points of view which are completely meaningless to the discussion.
Just a thought.
No I did not! If abortion was legal when I was conceived I would not have been born at all.
I am an abortion survivor or so I have been told all my life!
If you've been told all your life that you were an abortion survivor, then you have serious issues that cannot be addressed in this post. I'm saddened to hear you had to listen to such negativity during your life, especially from family.
how can you say that a man has no choice but to father/pay child support for a child even if they dont want it but any woman can at any point decied to abort the baby and all responsibility to it?! it is a rediculaus statement.
So, who is it you're wanting to hit with your car?
Hey Steven, try not to put words into my statement, for which, I do not make myself.
You apparently have an issue with someone or something, and it's not me, that's for sure.
But, you opened a forum thread with the intent on infringing upon the rights of others, with your poorly thought out opinion.
You look and see a double standard? I see, a woman's right to govern her own body and what she does with it.
I did not state that men have no choice. I said that MEN make a choice before sex/intercourse happens. Men make a choice before sex. Got it?
The woman made a choice also, she let you touch her. Both sides lack responsibility, otherwise, this discussion would not exist.
Abortion is a medical procedure offered to woman, who have unwanted pregnancies. It is not your right to interfere with her rights.
And, besides- (a) abortion is legal, and (b) no woman can kill a viable(meaning that it could live on it's own without help) fetus(7 months or older), via abortion. Many states have laws in place to prevent it.
The laws that apply to criminal actions, with regards to women carrying, are just that- Laws and they are defined, so as to not infringe upon the rights of others.
I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. And, as I said in my other statement, for which, you seem to dismiss entirely, I ask you question-
Did you have a choice in being born?
i put nothing into your statement that you yourself did not infer in the first place, this is an open forum. if you didnt want to have YOUR views discussed you shouldnt have posted. i never said abortion wasnt a legal but to say that its ok because you use the term, sorry...they use the term viable (meaning that it couldn't live on its own without help) fetus, doesnt mean a damn thing. no baby post birth could live on its own without help. does that make it ok to kill a baby? as far as did i have a choice to be born, im pretty sure i didnt. i dont remember signing up for the "populate the world" program, what does that have to do with anything, a baby being born is a chemical reaction due to a sperm fertalizing an egg. abortion is something else.
The point made, which is obviously over your head. So, let me repeat myself.
The argument you presented in this forum is and has no sense. You are comparing two things that rightfully don't get compared. DUH!
Apples to oranges? Get it!
Secondly, you are arguing on what grounds? Are you claiming to have a higher moral ground to stand upon? I would hope not.
Thirdly, when you talk abortion, there is always some sort of religious fanatic, who wants to talk about the fertilization of the egg, for which, later turns to a living human being.
The problem with these folks is that they have a limited understanding of life and only see things one specific way. And, you are starting to show signs of those attributes, with your argument.
Science has deemed that life begins at fertilization. Yes, we can agree upon that- HOWEVER, technology and advance medicine has developed a procedure that grants woman an option/choice.
In olden days, sure abortion didn't exist, but it does today. The rights of the woman are ahead and remain ahead of the child, simply because- YOU don't have a choice to be born.
It is not a choice that can be made on a conscious level by the simple nature of fertilization. Fertilization does happen when two adults don't play it safe.
On a worldwide- your argument holds even less weight with many other variables to be included.
no, I dont get it. Explain it to me like the simplton I apparently am. How is it ok for a woman to terminate the pregnancy if she chooses not to have the baby but if I were to hit her with my car I could be charged not only for the death of the woman but of the unborn child as well. In Ohio, that can happen. I dont know where you are, I dont care where you are. I dont think I'm better then you, so break it down for me Sensei and teach me. Feel free to point out the flaws in my second point, How is it fair that a woman can terminate the baby, legally, but a man is unable to, legally, walk away from any responsiblity of taking care of an unwanted child.
As far as religious views go, im not real sure where I have inferred what my faith views are on abortion but I can assure you that you have no idea where my thought process is when it comes to God, the bible, Allah, the Koran, Buddah or Wiccan. I would put money down that you would be unable to put me in any box you think up.
I can see that from the rest of this post.
Remember, you said this, I did not.
The "infant/baby/fetus/child/human" would have to be up to certain "age" if you will, before you would be held accountable for such, if you hit her with a car. Not to mention, a boat load of other charges I'm sure of.
I'm sure the State has some factor with regards to the "infant/baby/fetus/child/human". You would be convicted on just the woman alone.
Was there a point?
Sarcasm is meaningless in a computerized forum of this sort, so please do try to control yourself.
That is the argument you have been wanting to make this whole time? Hmmm......He is on the hook, because he didn't use better judgment before sex/intercourse. And, the woman retains sole rights with regards to her body. Or did you miss that in my previous post?
Again, you are putting words into my mouth. Please stop- I said "religious fanatic" use the Fertilization of the Egg argument, which you used.
That is why I asked in my original post to keep out any religious points of view, because they are meaningless.
In a box? Why on Earth would I want to put you into a box, when you do it all so well yourself.
I hope I've cleared up any misunderstanding.
Wow, you are leave me with no words, in udder wonder. You dare say a word to me about sarcasim.
You just come off like some big politician with an agenda. You say that what you've said has gone over my head yet you still havent addressed what I posted.
You attack and attack with some sort of rightous certainty that you are right upon all subjects at hand with no attempt to discuss a word. You, stranger, preach like your in a pulpit. You stand with religious rederic and condem others for not conforming to your thinking. You say shame to me?
There is not sarcasm in my words and if you are reading something into, then I can see how you end in sarcasm. Please try not to do that.
There are already enough skewed views from plenty of religious folks.
Please refrain from making comparisons with politicians and an agenda. I'm only stating, what can and what cannot be done.
If you're planning on continuing not to read my posts, then this conversation will only run in circles and be useless to anyone.
There is a difference, because I'm speaking from the higher position, which results in the defense of civil/human rights. You are not.
My religion is Life. I live it religiously. I use a consciously active mindset, which holds the highest available moral standard. Individual rights impair the highest moral ground from being a true standard for humanity.
I am not condemning anyone for what they think. I would rather people simply understood the words, as they are intended, instead of reading things into them, which is not intended.
I am not any better than anyone else, with the aspect of being human, but I do see with a bit more clarity than most. The average person is so entwined into religion and maintain religious beliefs of a god- that they cannot see two feet in front of their faces. Nor do they bother to honestly hold themselves accountable- yet scream bloody murder at others.
Maybe that helps.
How easy is it to fit your head through your neck opening in your shirt when its that big?
Nice condescending post. I have no ego. I am not conceited. And, the simple fact that you see it as you do is astounding.
Have you ever watched Life of Brian? Well if you have, do you recall how whenever someone says, "Jehovah", people start stoning him/her? He seems like that and it is really funny too after reading your post to him that you asked NOT to bring religious views into the discussion and he got all crazy and defensive on you.
Astounding? It's more like clockwork.
"I'm speaking from the higher position"
" I use a consciously active mindset, which holds the highest available moral standard"
" I do see with a bit more clarity than most"
These are all things you said, if you puffed yourself up any bigger you'd pop!
The higher position is human rights. Or did you NOT catch that?
Wake up and read the words. DUH!
If you have a problem with morals, then I suggest you learn what they are? I did write a hub on them and human beings cannot and most likely will not ever stand on the highest moral ground. If humanity can, then it will have a solution for overpopulation of the planet. Otherwise, it isn't happening.
Yes, I do see with a bit more clarity than most- 2/3 of the world is religious and holds some sort of fantasy belief in a god.
So what's your point? My head is going to explode. How nice?
If that is your arguement against the greatest act of genocide known to man, way beyond what Hitler ever thought up, then you should be ashamed. It's not fair to you. Boo hoo, poor baby.
you can always count on cagsil for an answer
let me rephrase, personal feelings aside as to where anyone stands on abortion. ok, in the whole car situation, it may depend on the month. sure would it be wreckless to hit a pregnant chick, yeah. would i do it, no.
AS to the second question that has arose, Cagsil, I do hear you but you are drawing attention to the woman and her rights over her own body.
this question i guess has to due more with life and the right to your own future.
How is it that a woman has more of a right to be able to decide her fate and a man does not. I get the whole point of he should have thought about it before he slid home without a rubber blah blah blah. the woman is just as responsible as the man so that argument cant work here. she should make sure he is wearing one just as much as he should.
IS IT FAIR THAT THE MAN WOULD HAVE NO CHOICE, NAY ABILITY TO "ABORT" ON PAPER ANY RESPONSIBLITY TO THE CHILD/MOTHER WHEN THE THE MOTHER HOLDS ALL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO DO SO IF SHE SO DESIRES?
Okay, we're finally on the same page. Yes, a woman's rights. Basic Human Rights, which is free from being infringed upon by others.
It stops talking about Life, when you cross the line of individual rights.
The man made the "choice" before having sex/intercourse. If a woman has an abortion, then he is no longer obligated to any factors concerning the would be child. If she carries to term, then he is obligated by law.
I was not negating her irresponsibility with preventative measures. But, the responsibility to her future is what is important more so than anything else. That's why "choice" and Rights exist.
By all accounts, a man can give up any parental rights and not be obligated for anything at all. So, I'm not sure what you are driving at?
how does that work? no man has the right to walk away from a child without at the very least being responsible for child support. a man does not have that right.
I'm being patient with you, but you seem bent on making it difficult.
I told you, if a man wants to give up all parental rights, then he has that right to do so. He will have "no" connection with either, the woman or the child. Never!
If a woman has a right to keep the child, that is her right to do so. If the man does not want anything to do with it, then so be it. This is only providing the woman agrees, because Law applies. The woman can waive off a man's obligation, by simply not needing him to pay for anything.
I would rather he walked away then be forced into a situation, neither he is ready, capable or inclined to take upon himself.
Therefore, a man should be able to reserve the right to negate the child, just as a woman has to abort without his opinion, say or thoughts on the subject.
Just an added thought.
hate to tell you but your wrong, my sister is the whole reason i even thought of this stupid thing! she got knocked up by this idiot that wants nothing to do with her or my nephew, she wants nothing to do with him and the judge has informed both of them that he HAS to take responsiblitiy for the child, there are no papers for him to file that wave his rights soley to the mother. this wasnt a custoy case where she was awarded sole custody this was just two people having a kid! it ant that easy!
Actually, your first mistake, with regards to the statement you just made? Is that they actually got the Law involved.
If the two of them sat together talked it out, then there would be no problem, as I stated in my previous post.
You would have to keep the Law out of the situation in order for it to happen. The "rights" issue isn't one that has been addressed properly in America.
Hence, the reason for keeping in the mix of themselves and not involve the courts or Law. The Law is only about compensation and nothing more. Paying is how the Law holds people accountable with false responsibility(with many other factors involved also).
I'm saddened to hear about your sister and what happened, however, she can make the active choice to do with "him", but keep the child, and keep him away from the child. All she has to do, is get him to walk away, which he is more inclined to do.
Bringing the Law into the situation is only about money. Nothing more, nothing less.
Actually your wrong. When two people have a baby that are not married they have no choice, either party, on the topic of child support. This is how some woman with low morals trick men into getting them pregnant so they can collect child support.If child support is forced upon the father then he is tied to the child period. This brings visitation rights as well as the possiblity of the child becoming a tool of spite when things continue to become sour between the parents.
No matter what, it is HER body. They are both responsible but the laws can not take over a woman's body and say "you have to have this baby even though you don't want to"
If the law or anyone else is allowed to control another person's body, then where is this world headed.
If a man doesn't want a girl he got pregnant to abort the baby, than he should have prevented the pregnancy.
After she is pregnant it is too late no have a say so. IT'S HER BODY.
If you can convincingly prove that the woman had intentions of aborting her baby, then you can get charged for single murder only, I suppose!
idk it's a crazy country! LOL
Maybe it's that women (some are pro some are not -as in life...
are all given the benefit of the doubt
and those that agree to kill, kill...
no insult intended......abortion is murder of a helpless child in the womb. Even abortion doctors (former) say so
and women suffer after from depresison/suciadality/and poss death or pain and sufferning
I went to church for a while with a lady who was a former abortion clinic director, and as hard as it was to listen to, she would tell me stories of what goes on in these clinics that would turn your stomach.
She also told me to never be fooled by pro-choice "it's not a life" rhetoric; abortion doctors know that it is a life, and they know that what they are doing is committing murder. The horrific part is that they know and don't care.
Apparently, money not only talks, but it has a very loud and influential voice.
That is not money talking it is the truth - which is maybe something that is lacking in your little story.
While I agree with this statement, keep in mind all of the women who purposefully become pregnant by an unsuspecting man, has the baby (the man has no choice) and then proceeds to make his life a living hell (the man has no choice), using the baby as ammo (the man has no choice). I've seen it happen, and it's not pretty; just as it's similarly not pretty when a woman is left to care for a child after the man decides he's going to be a 'deadbeat' (ie: my mom).
Forgive me, I'm not sure what the laws are in the US, but in Canada child support is the right of the child, not the parent. Most often times child support is begun through an agreement while the child is still very young, and that of course is different. But if later on the child decides he or she wants to fight for child support, having legally signed over his parental rights does not abscond him of the possibility of paying child support to the child.
I saw it happen with a high school friend who legally signed over his parental rights because he was young, immature and felt he would do more harm than good to a child at that juncture in his life. He is now paying child support.
I double checked that the law is still as such with my best friend, who practices family law.
Just wanted to give something of a citation
I'll be honest and admit that I don't know where I stand with regard to equal abortion rights. Logically, and morally, it seems to me that since the would-be child belongs to both people, that both people should have a say. I also understand the point of view about the woman's choice over her body. I get that. Until there is some way to remove the fetus from the woman and grow it for the man to raise, I see no acceptable solution for the man wanting, and the woman not.
Again with the experience: My friend and his girlfriend became pregnant, and he was really excited, going on about names and whatnot. He randomly showed up at my house one night, bawling his face off and barely able to talk because his girlfriend went and got an abortion without even asking him, or letting him know. He was beyond crushed, and just kept repeating, "I didn't even have a say". It broke my heart.
Thread topic: The two are different. As someone already said, situation a: the woman is making a choice, which is a right. Situation b: a choice is being made for the woman, which is not a right of the driver.
If people followed Christian values or rules more, we wouldn't have these problems.
Our country is in for a rude awakening when God's wrath/anger has reached it's limit!!
No man is "Unsuspecting". Every man knows if he has sex he might get the woman pregnant. Your unsuspecting man argument is ridiculous.
A man needs to take control of his actions
I do not agree. Are you telling me that it would be the fault of the woman who got pregnant if, the man she had sex with tampered with the birth control method?
What I meant by "Unsuspecting" is being under the impression that your sexual partner and you are on the same page, when in actuality your partner is, without your knowledge taking measures to become pregnant. You are not suspicious and trusting. I believe this defines "Unsuspecting".
Your statement sounds angrily one sided. Men and women are equally responsible for their actions, and the repercussions thereof. It is not solely the man's responsibility to ensure that protective measures are taken, it is also the woman's job.
Women also, need to take control of their actions.
Angrily? Not at all my dear. Usually when I'm angry you'll know.
Exactly, as I said, They are both responsible, and that means not relying on the other to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.
If the woman tricks a man and he has not also done his part, it's his fault too. That's regardless of how you see it.
I digress. If the two are in a relationship and one tricks the other, I would not blame the other for having trusted someone. Relationships are built on trust, it's not the other's fault their trust was broken. When in a relationship with someone you trust, would you carefully inspect all condoms and other forms of birth control every single time you had sex together? Would you actually stop everything to examine the product? Would you do so even in the throws of inebriated passion with said trusted lover?
I suppose you could say the other is at fault for having trusted someone they loved, but that would be pretty callous.
I notice we've completely jumped ship on the original topic.
by efeguy6 years ago
Jean,am unmarried teenage mother had her first baby three years ago.To her dismay today,she is pregnant for her second baby.Though Charles the father of her baby and pregnancy left her.Now there is an elderly divorcee...
by Kara Leigh Miller7 years ago
I have a friend that is 3 months pregnant and has been drinking alcohol like a fish! I haven't said anything to her because it is her body, her baby, and her choice. But I can't help but be angry with her...
by Slarty O'Brian5 years ago
Gen 218 And the LORD God said: 'It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.' 19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and...
by pisean2823113 years ago
A 31-year-old Indian woman dentist died in Ireland from blood poisoning after doctors allegedly refused to terminate her 17-week-long pregnancy, telling her that "this is a Catholic country". Irish authorities...
by Steven Escareno5 years ago
Ladies, would you ever sell your virginity for money? And if so, for what price would it be worth it to lose your virginity to someone that you don't even know or love? Do you find it empowering to women to...
by CrystalSingleton8 years ago
I just want to say I was outraged that I was charged $7.25 for my 13 month old to attend the new Dr Suess movie "Horton Hears a Who" with her older siblings of age 6 and 4. It's bad enough I pay for my own...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.