Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opting out: Women can have an abortion, some men say they should have a choice over p

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
    So true, however as we all know: sex sells. Therefore, R&D in the health and medical field will always be more devoted to Viagra.
    Ooooo they could if they had a catch phrase and had Viagra as part of it. Maybe 'Keep it up, longer, better, with no responsibility for 18 years after use.'

    Comment


    • #77
      Maybe this thread should restart when these options become available to men;

      What is the male pill?

      Comment


      • #78
        Resistance is futile

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Links17 View Post

          The abortion is ludicrously easy now, its almost criminal to choose option 2:


          Abortion is easy? Google abortion procedure video and tell me you still feel the same way.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Berner_Faith View Post

            If a child is born, should men be given the opportunity to sign away their parental rights? I agree with the poster that stated that men should be given the option of signing away their parental rights within the time frame an abortion is doable. If a man signs away their parental rights and a woman decides to still go through with the pregnancy, that should be her responsibility, as she knew from the start that the man didn't want kids.
            The problem with this, is what happens 20 years down the line, and the
            Father suddenly sues for access? Is he therefore on the hook for 20 years of child support?

            It's a choice that is not valid to offer.


            Originally posted by standing on the sidelines View Post
            would it be fair to say that once a mans sperm leaves his body that he no longer has control over the little suckers? To me he has the right to control his own body but once those swimmers leave his body, he loses that control.
            By that logic, the child is completely autonomous of Mom once born. She has no rights to the child anymore. Maybe they should revert to the sperm donor?

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by wretchedotis View Post
              The problem with this, is what happens 20 years down the line, and the
              Father suddenly sues for access? Is he therefore on the hook for 20 years of child support?

              WO - if you sue for access when the child is 20 yrs old I'll eat my pyjamas.

              Comment


              • #82
                So far we have been talking about the man's perspective of not wanting a child, and the Mom going ahead with birth.

                What about if the man wants the child, and the Mom aborts against his wishes?

                She gets to control her body, and a child goes unborn.

                The Best interest of the child would be for it to actually exist.

                So she should be forced to carry to term and then legally rescind her parental rights? Or further, pay child support too?

                It's a wildly 'unfair' reality looking at it from either perspective, from a mans point of view.

                There is no possible way this argument should actually be given any real credence by society. There are just far too many moral and ethical questions for society to be allowed to decide birth 'by committee' between the two sexes.

                The line has to be drawn somewhere, and it has been drawn along the most reasonable ideals.
                Last edited by wretchedotis; 11-13-2013, 12:03 AM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  By law, it isn't deemed a child until birth, ergo the best interest of the child does not exist, it is essentially an extension of the mother's body during gestation. You cannot force a woman to endure gestation, especially given the lifelong side effects on her physical being.

                  Whether a woman chooses to have a child or an abortion, whether the man wants or does not want the child, there is never any physical effects on a man's body or permanent lifelong physical effects to him.

                  It will never be, and should never be equal until men and women are physically capable of the same reproductive cycles.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                    By law, it isn't deemed a child until birth, ergo the best interest of the child does not exist, it is essentially an extension of the mother's body during gestation.
                    Aha!

                    So Mom has complete control over the potential life, penultimate only to her health.

                    It's her decision, and her's alone without any thought to a potential child, or a potential child's father becoming legally obligated to her financially.

                    That doesn't sound 'fair' to me, for some reason.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Up until the birth, it is the mother's body and health, ergo nobody else SHOULD have any say in the decision.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by wretchedotis View Post
                        Aha!

                        So Mom has complete control over the potential life, penultimate only to her health.

                        It's her decision, and her's alone without any thought to a potential child, or a potential child's father becoming legally obligated to her financially.

                        That doesn't sound 'fair' to me, for some reason.
                        My friend needs a blood transfusion. So we're going to hook you up to him by a tube and you can pull him around with you all day for the next nine months until he's better.

                        We're not giving you any choice in the matter.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Mess View Post
                          My friend needs a blood transfusion. So we're going to hook you up to him by a tube and you can pull him around with you all day for the next nine months until he's better.

                          We're not giving you any choice in the matter.
                          A little simplistic. Your buddy wasn't conceived by my DNA. But overall, the point is made.

                          There is no good solution to this, or at least an solution that will appease everybody (simply because that is impossible in todays world).

                          I do have an issue with prospective fathers not being given the opportunity to be a father because the pregnant mother unilaterally chooses to abort. They jointly both understood the risks of having sex and that pregnancy may be an outcome. Unilateral deciding to terminate after jointly agreeing to the act of conception seems unfair. However, the idea of causing a woman to go through the changes to their body through the pregnancy and then labour, so the man can have the child is also distasteful. It would be nice if the man had a say in choice to abort or at least have their input taken into serious consideration, but that is where my opinion ends.

                          However a man should not be able to force an abortion on a woman or be able to opt-out of their parental responsibilities. The joint decision to have sex obligates one to the responsibilities of possible outcomes of the act. You did the crime, you do the time.

                          I did take offence to the statement that men can just walk away and never look back. While it is a true statement, it is also true for women. After birth, the woman can just as easily walk away as the man can. Gender is irrelevant as stupid people will do stupid things.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            I think the bottom line is that there really is no such thing as "casual sex."

                            You need to protect yourself and know who you're sleeping with or take responsibility for the serious risks you're exposing yourself to.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              I couldn't help it, I had to...


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                The bottom line is:
                                That we are in such an extreme situation that theoretically one person's refusal to take a pill the day after an encounter can result in a 200,000$+ obligation for somebody else. Not always, not everytime but that is a very likely possibility.

                                There are shades of grey in between but the "My body is mine" camp asserts the above.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X