posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 02:12 PM
As you said, it takes two to Tango....
While the woman is tasked with carrying the fetus to term, it seems a bit unrealistic and immoral to completely remove the male from any
decision/responsibility regarding the matter, and future of the would-be child. That's just one of the factors making it such a controversial issue.
While I agree with you that it is a matter of choice, I don't agree with the assessment that it's a "women's issue". I feel it's a choice both
would-be parents need to make. I will agree that the woman's choice (due to her role) carries more weight, but the father's wishes should not be
completely disregarded, if he wishes to weigh in on the matter and assume responsibility.
I understand where you're coming from Gazrock, but they're forgetting yet another option.. abstinence.
If they cannot procreate responsibly, then the choice is simple, don't. There's no logical reason to have a dozen kids that you cannot afford to
feed, clothe, or care for properly.
That's great in theory, however as much as we want to deny it, we're animals of nature and somewhat subject to our internal instincts, and one of
those instincts is to pro-create. It's difficult to tell teenagers not to have sex, when mass-media and mother nature are sending them a completely
different message. While we'd like to think that everyone should be able to control their urges, the simple matter is that warring hormones tend to
win out, especially when supported by society at large.
[edit on 20-6-2008 by Gazrok]