It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Hypothetical Abortion Question

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I've always hated the way the legal system, when dealing with children, will almost always rule in favor of the mother. It's unfortunate, and a terrible case of oversight.

That being said, there are reasons for it. In this scenario, it's the woman's choice because until she gives birth, the man has no obligation. It's inside of her, she's "feeding" it, and she should retain complete control of what she does. It sucks for the guy, I'm sure he feels like he's having his heart ripped out through his mouth, but that's evolution.

You cannot force someone else to do anything, you can only punish them for doing something illegal. The man has no authority over her. And abortion isn't illegal yet. (and it better stay that way!)




posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I think it's nothing short of CRUEL for a woman to abort a child when the father wants said child. So what if she's the one carrying said child? If she doesn't want the child, she can give the child to the father after he/she is born!

It happened to my uncle. He got a woman pregnant. He wanted the child and was ready to support him/her. But she aborted anyway.

It's been almost 30 years and my uncle is STILL grieving.

It's cruel, it's selfish, it's heartless--and it's technically illegal (Roe is an unconstitutional ruling--5th and 10th Amendments).



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
I think it's nothing short of CRUEL for a woman to abort a child when the father wants said child. So what if she's the one carrying said child?


Is it not cruel to force a woman to go through a very dangerous process (it remains dangerous, no matter what), HUGE swings of hormones and emotions for a year, IMMENSE (no offense) bodily changes, some of which (eg, weight) often never leave you? The father can adopt, and while I understand he might like his own child, having a child is a two-way street - if you don't both agree, it's a no go.


and it's technically illegal (Roe is an unconstitutional ruling--5th and 10th Amendments).


Nothing is unconstitutional unless ruled as such. Before that, it's just media fodder.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
having a child is a two-way street - if you don't both agree, it's a no go.



Now that obviously isn't true, if the woman has total say and the man doesn't have any say, it really is just her and not a two-way street.

He can't back out unless she wants to, and it seems that people think that is a good thing... I think there are too many people who think that because we have laws, laws should make their ethical/moral decisions for them. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. The law is there for protection, not for guidance.



posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 12:39 AM
link   
No matter the situation, no matter who wants what, it is my opinion that it is solely the womans choice whether or not she wants the kid, period. It is her right to end an unwanted pregancy. Not the mans. I dont care how you see it, the womans body and anything in it belong soley to her, and thus, anything inside it or attached to it is her descision on what to do with it. She is the one who must live with whatever consequences her descision entails. The man should have no legal say. The whole "well, its his kid too" arguement doesnt fly. He placed his sperm in ehr body. Once it was released into her body, it becomes hers to do with as she pleases.

As for men paying child support, if they father a child, they should pay for it if she keeps it. Its their responsibility whether they like it or not.

Now, of course its fair. Why? Because we all have choices to make. And we must deal with those consequences. Men have total control over their bodies. Thus, no one can force them to have sex with a woman. They make that choice. Sex is not required to live. You can survive without getting laid. But if you are a man, you also have the freedom and choice to decide on things like sterilization and birth control. If you are a man and you never want kids, you can get a vasectomy. If you want kids some time in life, you can wear a rubber, or take male birth control injections. You cannot leave birth control totally up to the woman. She might wish to get pregnant without your consent, or might be irresponsible and forget to take it. Thus, it is vital that men take control over their own bodies and their own futures into their own hands, and protect themselves from all possible problems. If they get a woman pregnant and did not use some sort of protection, and they did not want to get that partner preganant, then its their fault and they must face whatever consequences come about.

The same goes for women. Women need to protect themselves from pregnancy that they dont want, and cannot expect men to take care of birth control, or talk them into not using it. If they do get pregnant, then they must make the choice, and deal with whatever consequences that follow, including loss of a relationship and other things. If a woman decides to keep a kid, but her lover doesnt want it and leaves her, she is entitled to child support for the kid, but none for her. She shall have to carry the burden of caring for a kid alone, and will have to sacrifice alot of things.

I strongly believe in personal choice, but with freedom and choice come total personal responsibility that all persons involved must make.

If you arent willing to deal with the consequences, than dont play the game, pure and simple. Your hormones are no excuse for short term gratifying behavior.




top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join