<p>I'm sure that on this board, my take will be EXTREMELY unpopular, but I feel like venting. The way I see it is that abortion isn't about women's rights, it is a FATHER's rights issue. Think about what abortion does-what it really does. It allows a woman to walk away from the responsibility of having unprotected sex. A woman can live sexually "liberated" and have an abortion to alleviate ALL responsibility of having sex. Now, think about this from a man' s perspective- If a man has sex and the woman gets pregnant, then the man is legally obligated to assume responsibility. He can not say that her regrets the decision to have sex and not at minimum be forced to pay child support. In this regard, the law carries a HUGE double standard.</p>
<p>Now, even more important to me is that a father has no legal say in whether his child is aborted or not. Think about it this way, what if a woman gets pregnant and believes the mass growing inside her is a mere clump of cells with no human value. Now, assume that the man feels in his heart that that is a baby- HIS baby. At this point, legally, the woman has the right to terminate the pregnancy and the man has no legal recourse. In essence, the legal system respects the woman's beliefs as to whether it is a baby and ignores the man's. In a fair world, both partners have sex and if either 1 or both of them believe the pregnancy to be a child, then that should be respected and the pregnancy should go full term, even if that means that the man takes full responsibility after birth. </p>
<p>OK, just my deep thought for today- I am pretty sure I'm going to get flamed on an "academic" board where femenists and "progressives" are the norm, but like I said, just venting.</p>
<p>There is no easy fix. If you think like tomslawsky, then the men will get more rights, but women will lose there's, whereas the common idea behind today's abortion issue gives women rights and cuts down on men's. </p>
<p>Just think about it this way: who's actually carrying the baby? Who's going to suffer from morning sickness? Who's going to have to take care of the baby if the father walks away?</p>
<p>Forcing a woman to carry her baby to full term is punishment for having unprotected sex, but what punishment would men get? A mother is always more responsible for her child then the father. Therefore, the mother should have the choice. Fathers don't need rights here, because what do they lose if the baby is forced to be born?</p>
<p>I think that this is an interesting perspective, tomlawsky. I'd agree with you that the law creates a true double standard, but I'd also argue that despite the legal structure, the reality is a double standard in the other direction. </p>
<p>The current law frames pregnancy largely as a woman's issue, especially in cases like Roe v. Wade, which was determined to be an issue of a woman's privacy. These laws certainly don't give men an equal share in controlling the prenatal destiny of the child. But men and women are not naturally equal either; as PurpoisePal said, men don't have to deal with any of the complications of pregnancy. </p>
<p>It would seem to me like an even more egregious violation of a woman's privacy for a man to specifically force her to have an abortion (or not to if that's what she wants).</p>
<p>And they do. Commonly. That's all there is to it. I honestly don't even think males should be able to debate the abortion issue because they are not directly affected by pregnancies, as PorpoisePal pointed out.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I honestly don't even think males should be able to debate the abortion issue because they are not directly affected by pregnancies, as PorpoisePal pointed out.
[/quote]
=</p>
<p>That's not really fair. Are blacks the only people who can debate the effects of racism? </p>
<p>I def. agree...but I don't like to talk much about this 'touchy' subject. Yea the woman is going to be carrying the baby, but what about us guys that arent gonna run because our lives are rooted in the town that we got the girl pregnant in. Now I agree a woman should have a large say in what happens, but if she wants to have it...then it's automatically assumed that the father is going to pay a large chunk for the child too. But why would you want a loved one (assuming its your gf or something) having to go through abortion against her will? Its a double sided sword. And best talked over with the person you're going to have sex with before this critical point is reached :)</p>
<p>It's all about birth control. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration irrationally believes that sex ed shouldn't be taught in schools and that abstinence is the only way to go. Unfortunately also, some people don't think before they act. I mean is it fair for a hormone-crazed 16 year old girl who had unprotected sex because she wasn't taught how to have protected sex and got the urge to do so because of her hormones to be forced to support the child even if she's not ready to do so, and she should be in school? We make mistakes, it's not just about punishment and crime. I don't see sex as a crime. It's a natural human instinct and desire, and that's completely fine. It's about resolving a problem with the least impact on all parties involved, and usually for a teenage girl that means abortion.</p>
<p>I think the whole concept of "crime and punishment" being applied to this issue is the wrong approach. We have to work TOGETHER to find the BEST solution with the LEAST impact to all parties involved. We're in this together. It's not us vs. them. It's not about the government punishing a woman for fulfilling a natural desire (but making the mistake of not protecting herself), it's about the government working with the individual to find the best solution for all those involved.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A mother is always more responsible for her child then the father
[/quote]
</p>
<p>careful with blanket statements. I honestly think men are made out to be less responsible for their children because of the social dynamic at play with father's paying child support and mothers being "stuck" with everything else. There probably is some truth to that in various cases, but there are also many cases where the father is full time parent, and the mother is dead-beat. Then, unfortunately, most cases are the father struggling to make ends meet, pays child support/healthcare/childcare expenses, and then gets continually reamed by society/legalities for not being "there" for the child physically.... well, the man is probably working 80 hours a week at 3 jobs to pay all the expenses (if you take into account the wages people are being paid these days, and the exhorbitant amount of child support usually expected) incurred by the child. Meanwhile, the father is categorized as dead beat, and made to continually feel guilty for not being there. It's a wicked cycle and some of it needs a hard nose reality check.</p>
<p>There is legal recourse if a woman chooses to have a baby that her partner truly doesn't want, he can waive his parental rights. If he truly wants the baby and she doesn't but is willing to carry the fetus to term she can do the same, granted she's a little more invested since she has to carry it for nine months, but she can waive her rights as a parent. Not the easiest thing in the world for either party I assume, but I don't think most things in being a parent are easy.</p>
<p>The Romans firmly believed that men were the real creators of children. Women were just the "vessels" which carried a man's kids. </p>
<p>This is one extreme from the past. Another extreme, this one from the present, is the feminist view that women are the true creators of children, and they alone should have the say over what happens to the child during pregnancy.</p>
<p>"A mother is always more responsible for her child then the father. Therefore, the mother should have the choice. Fathers don't need rights here, because what do they lose if the baby is forced to be born?"</p>
<p>A S S H E A D- I am a single father raising my 3 year old daughter for 2 years, mom lives 1500 miles away. Don't be so quick with the stereotypes.</p>