The Utter Insanity of Pro-Choice

Wasn't quite sure where to put this... mods move this if needed.

Alright folks, here is a kind of paradox I find so disturbing about the pro-choice side of the abortion debate.

So according to pro-choice, it is a woman's body that becomes pregnant; she is the one who carries the baby, therefore it is up to her whether or not she wants to keep the baby or have an abortion.

So here is my question... one that has been bugging me ever since I learned about the idea of "pro-choice".

What about the Father? Where is his choice?!?!?!?!

If the woman wants to keep the baby, and the father does not, the baby arrives, and if the father is no longer with the mother, he has to pay childcare fees and care for the baby as if he is just as responsible for that baby being brought into to life as the mother.

But what if the father wants to keep the baby and the mother does not?

Then the mother can "choose" to have an abortion, with the father having absolutely no control over this decision. Can you imagine if you found out, if your a guy, that your partner was pregnant, and you wanted to have this baby, and where totally against abortion, but in the end your partner had an abortion because you had absolutely no legal say in it?

I don't know about anyone else, but this really disturbs me :/

Thoughts?

First, I will say that I am pro-choice (which is NOT the same as pro-abortion) ... I believe in the right of a woman (hopefully in conjunction with her man) to make a personal decision to have a child, or not.

Having said that, I am on board with some limitations (for example: later term abortion)

I am not, however, as sympathetic to the scenario in which you laid out in the OP. Do I think family law is bias? Sure. Do I think Fathers often get overlooked in favor of Mothers? Yes. Do I think the laws needs to be reviewed and made more relevant to the present? Yes. However, this applies to after the children are born.

Until then, I will support a woman's right to decide and control her own body.


____________________
ed: punctuation, doh

[edit on 14-4-2010 by LadySkadi]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5702d6f45559.jpg[/atsimg]

If she aborts your kid dump her ass and sue for damages.

Then make sure the next one you lay is a little more in line with your outlook.

reply to post by Signals
I understand your point.

I will not attempt to change anyone's opinion, nor preach mine to anyone else.

I will only say that one's *belief* and *understanding* of when *life starts* is at the root of and a fundamental basis for this debate and that is not likely to be something that will be agreed upon. Religion vs Science and everything in between.

reply to post by Monts

but in the end your partner had an abortion because you had absolutely no legal say in it?

Are you saying it should be legal for a man to force his wife or girlfriend to go through pregnancy and child-birth?

I am also pro-choice but I have always agreed that the father should have a say as well.

I guess his only choice is to wear a condom.

reply to post by jeanvaljean


Not necessarily, I am merely pointing out the fact that as soon as the embryo is implanted, the father has absolutely no say in abortion or birth, even though he is just as responsible for the pregnancy as the mother.

Being a guy myself, this really bugs me :/

Originally posted by jeanvaljean
reply to post by Monts

 

[q

Are you saying it should be legal for a man to force his wife or girlfriend to go through pregnancy and child-birth?

Isn't that what the bible says. "Adam named the animals and Eve, and was to rule over them." Genesis 2:19; 1:28; 2:23. In other words, control the -snip-

reply to post by LadySkadi


That view is completely understandable... it is a woman's body, not the man's.

I myself feel that I am on the border of pro-choice and pro-life... I do believe that it is a choice that is up to the woman, but I don't think it is a choice anyone should make unless there are extraordinary circumstances involved.

There are countless parents out there who are unable to have children of their own, and are forced to pay ridiculous fees and go through endless hours of work in order to adopt a child from a different country because everyone in the west is getting abortions.

Also, I think one of the main reasons woman get abortions, especially young women, isn't so much that they are unable to support a child, but because of the stigma and massive social changes that would occur in their life if they were to go through with pregnancy.

In my mind, these stigmas and prejudices about pregnancy, as well as the inability of the father to have a say, are what need to be changed.

[edit on 14/4/1010 by Monts]

Are you people sure that there has never been a case where this has been brought up. I am sure there are plenty of men who would like to choose, and should have the right.

I am against abortion, but the fact that its here, males should be able to get the choice too, if they want for a child to be aborted.

Like i said i am against abortion, but the fact thats its here, a woman should not have the only right over this decision.

I am amazed that this has not been a case, if it has not been already.

Okay I have been thinking about this.
I am a man.

It may seem unfair for a man, but in the end who has the right to lay claim on anything but themselves? The fact remains that sperm ( how vital to live it may be ) is not connected to the blood stream of the mother. The fetus/baby is connected through the bloodstream to the mother. The fetus entire development is dependend on the nurishment given through the bloodstream from the mother who consumes and takes care for herself and the new live. So if anything, in the time that abortion is a realistic option it can be said that the fetus is part of the body of the mother and therefore it is her responsibility and her responsibility alone. This does not make it right or wrong, but makes it "correct".

On a more personal note I do not believe that death is the end of existence and for that reason alone makes killing for me a different story. That said I believe that you cannot kill a human if it is not a human yet. To clarify. The neccesary neural pathways are not in place to create the conscious workings that is associated with humanity in the period that abortion is an option. At least this what I know please refrain from bashing if their are any other facts that make the above statement invalid, please be so kind to make me aware of my honest mistake if it is their.

Even so in most cases abortion is more a tool of conveniance then anything else. Taking responsibility is a different story, but I take a step back, their are a lot of factors in play that decide what is responsible and what not. As for religieus reasons. BACK OFF. The mother will decide as she is responsible everyone else should take responsibility for themselves as well. Much suffering has occured because we wanted to take responsibility away from each other because we thought it was the right thing to do.

My imput.

edit for linguistic errors.



[edit on 14-4-2010 by GamleGamle]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by GamleGamle]

Originally posted by LadySkadi
reply to post by Signals

 

I understand your point.

I will not attempt to change anyone's opinion, nor preach mine to anyone else.

I will only say that one's *belief* and *understanding* of when *life starts* is at the root of and a fundamental basis for this debate and that is not likely to be something that will be agreed upon. Religion vs Science and everything in between.

That's really both disengneuous and misleading..... the issue of what "life" is, is nothing at all to do with any perceived conflict between religion and science. Your suggestion is tacit that religion says life begins at conceptian whereas science says it does not. That is not an issue. The argument here is not religion vs science, rationalism vs belief, empirical vs subjective. If it is anything, it is the realm of philosophy to an extent (and philiosophy informs both science and religion, as it informs art and all human endeavour).

reply to post by Monts


Some of the abortions people get in the west are for reasons relating to the health of the mother, the health of the baby, etc. Many Western couples would much rather adopt a healthy baby from abroad than a child conceived in the back of a bar by a couple of meth addicts.

reply to post by andy1033
The Supreme Court made the ruling with Roe vs Wade and that ruling still stands ... unless or until a case makes it to the court involving men's rights. To date, it has not and my personal opinion is that it will not. The more likely avenue is to slowly chip away at Roe vs Wade...

I still do not see how you can say a women has the right and the man does not.

Abortion is wrong, but seeing as its here a man should be able to choose.

here is an interesting debate to think about pro choice pro life. what about the 50 million dead children that never grew up, bought a car, bought a credit card, bought an ipod. that increase in demand would definitly help the economy. right now we are just skidding by replacement levels in this country, and dying in europe to the point where it is becoming a crisis. look at russia, where most pregnancies end in abortion, and look at their economic model and tell me if they even have a chance as a country? basically my arguement against abortion is new to me and it is economically focused. it also goes against the "population control" conspiracy theorist because an economy and thus the partent country, cannont survive a demographic collapse

reply to post by d60944

That's really both disengneuous and misleading..... the issue of what "life" is, is nothing at all to do with any perceived conflict between religion and science. Your suggestion is tacit that religion says life begins at conceptian whereas science says it does not. That is not an issue. The argument here is not religion vs science, rationalism vs belief, empirical vs subjective. If it is anything, it is the realm of philosophy to an extent (and philiosophy informs both science and religion, as it informs art and all human endeavour).

Sure, Philosophy will contribute to a person's belief system. One can argue that Philosophy has a direct relationship to Religion.

Your post, however, references what "life is" not when "life starts" and that is a different (though related) concept and will be filtered depending on the one's view of (i.e. Philosophy, Religion and/or Science).
______________________________
ETA:
To add the quote.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by LadySkadi]

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


like i said demographic suicide, there will be no west if the west cannot reproduce, and if the west cannot reproduce our ideals and way of thinking will die with it

reply to post by Monts


I agree there is a rediculous double standard when it comes to things sex realted between men and ladies. My mom and i had the same discussion yesterday. It is screwed up it is not really a pro-choice problem but it is an "equal rights" issue. Somewhere along the lines equal rights got changed to seperate rights.
A woman has the right to get an abortion because it is her body, but a man has no say so in an event that will change his life just as much?
There are other areas where the law is anything but equal.
You can go to a party and lets say you and a woman both have 10 drinks. Now with both of you way too drunk to do anythingend up having sex in some bedroom. The next morning she can say that she was too drunk to give consent and what happened was date rape. Now the man is screwed because being drunk is not a defense that is allowed in court. So the idea here becomes lets treat women like irresponsible children and call it equal rights.
Ever see these stories about teachers sleeping with their students? When it is a man it is "disgusting he is a sexual predator pedophile that should be locked up for ...." when a woman does she has bipolar disorder and gets house arrest which gets knocked down to probation
www.foxnews.com...

[edit on 14-4-2010 by zaiger]