Abortion - your views.

[King Sean]

My view on this deplorable act are simple. NO. i do not support such a horrible act and never shall. Woman use rape as a justification to throw away a life. if you know this happened, shouldn't you A:Look deep in your heart to make sure the child has the best life possible or B:Give it up for adoption. Some where, there are people that want the child you want to kill. how dare you kill that child before it can even take its first breath. just because people are young or havent been through the trauma you have, does not mean their views dont count. we are all human, cant we act that way. how would you feel if your mom or dad decided that he/she had too much children so they decided to throw YOU away, huh. oh yeah, thats right, you would not feel anything because you dont exist. Arguing about something that future generations will just abolish seems futile and we should be putting our time into much more worthy talks. Debating over human lives is for those who have no life of their own. All these excuses are just ways to justify an act that should be punished by imprisonment. it is not just your body once you get pregnant, that body is now shared by two beings. kill the child, might as well kill yourself too..... this act not only kills one innocent life, but lowers the human population potential rising. you are just helping kill the human race, just like a disease

 

[Daenerys]

I believe that, since this seems to be the way the topic is going, that men ARE allowed an opinion on abortion, because yes, it does take two to tango and they deserve to be consulted.

However, I firmly believe that the final decision is solely the woman's. It is her who will be carrying the baby, as well as giving birth to it, especially since birth can be a traumatic and painful experience, for example, my own mother lost half the blood in her body giving birth to me - complications and whatnot. The point I am trying to make here, is that it is the woman who faces these risks and consequences, not the man, so therefore, it is up to the woman to decide.

Men may have an opinion on abortion, but in my opinion, they shouldn't try and force that opinion onto a woman. Nor should anyone be shamed into thinking having an abortion is "wrong" or "murder" I know people who've had abortions - and it's helped them more than having the baby would, sometimes you have to make harsh decisions to do the right thing to yourself.

 

[Saga]

My view on this deplorable act are simple. NO. i do not support such a horrible act and never shall. Woman use rape as a justification to throw away a life. if you know this happened, shouldn't you A:Look deep in your heart to make sure the child has the best life possible or B:Give it up for adoption. Some where, there are people that want the child you want to kill. how dare you kill that child before it can even take its first breath. just because people are young or havent been through the trauma you have, does not mean their views dont count. we are all human, cant we act that way. how would you feel if your mom or dad decided that he/she had too much children so they decided to throw YOU away, huh. oh yeah, thats right, you would not feel anything because you dont exist. Arguing about something that future generations will just abolish seems futile and we should be putting our time into much more worthy talks. Debating over human lives is for those who have no life of their own. All these excuses are just ways to justify an act that should be punished by imprisonment. it is not just your body once you get pregnant, that body is now shared by two beings. kill the child, might as well kill yourself too..... this act not only kills one innocent life, but lowers the human population potential rising. you are just helping kill the human race, just like a disease

YOU be a woman. Get raped. Fall pregnant AND THEN tell me you would keep the child if you were the same age I was.

My mother very nearly aborted me. So don't start that shit.

Some women do it for selfish reasons, but do NOT tar us ALL with the same brush.

I don't regret having my abortion. Yet I do still think about the fact I could have a child, two infact (not getting into that here). Not a day goes by when I don't think "What if" but then I remember I was a CHILD. And I again think "I don't regret it".

If I had been older, it would have been an entirely different matter.

also, stop talking as though Abortion is an easy way out for a woman who doesn't want a child. It's a painful process,physically, mentally AND emotionally. I've still not recovered from that experience, but I know deep down it was the best decision I could have made overall.

Edit: And don't you DARE speak that way. Commanding us to do what YOU believe is right. We are not your playthings to do as you tell us too. We are humans as well, with the
F R E E D O M O F C H O I C E

 

[The Illusive Man]

My view on this deplorable act are simple. NO. i do not support such a horrible act and never shall. Woman use rape as a justification to throw away a life. if you know this happened, shouldn't you A:Look deep in your heart to make sure the child has the best life possible or B:Give it up for adoption. Some where, there are people that want the child you want to kill.

how dare you kill that child before it can even take its first breath. just because people are young or havent been through the trauma you have, does not mean their views dont count.

we are all human, cant we act that way. how would you feel if your mom or dad decided that he/she had too much children so they decided to throw YOU away, huh. oh yeah, thats right, you would not feel anything because you dont exist. Arguing about something that future generations will just abolish seems futile and we should be putting our time into much more worthy talks. Debating over human lives is for those who have no life of their own. All these excuses are just ways to justify an act that should be punished by imprisonment. it is not just your body once you get pregnant, that body is now shared by two beings.

kill the child, might as well kill yourself too..... this act not only kills one innocent life, but lowers the human population potential rising. you are just helping kill the human race, just like a disease

For a starters this seems to be a narrow minded and brain washed view of someone who has attended a religious school and is possibly from a highly relgious family.

The values of which you preach are values that to be quite honest, are extremely outdated and have been for over 2 centuries, such as the Christian Value of "No contraception" claiming it to be extremely un-natural and to use it "A crime against god".

I can speak from this point of view because I AM a Roman Catholic, I have seen the views of the church and the teachings of the church leaders, and the fact they are still trying to instill bygone and outdated teachings into a extremely modernised culture, Heck they even still preach about the whole "sex before marriage thing" and that is down to a very fine minority as scientific and intellectual persuits work to disprove the churches way of life is not neccessarly the only path in life.

The biggest problem that has been forever a hurdle to human-kinds growth has always been the fear of that what we do not understand, The church are stubborn and in many respects STILL do not understand many things about modern society, and its a large portion as to why religion in the modern world is a fading ideal of times past.

Funnily enough, the debate of Abortion was discussed in my old highschool (I went to a catholic highschool) in which the Bishop of York came to visit the school and spoke frankly on his views of abortion. Suprisingly, the Bishop was "Pro-Choice" believing that in circumstantial situations, Abortion was fine and not a crime against humanity.

In many regards the Church of England has grown to accept "Pro Choice Circumstantial Abortion" and will advice it in council to victims of rape that may have fell pregnant, although there will always be Left Wingers that will always be "Pro Life", The Modern Church itself has at least begun to understand, adapt and accept the way of the Modern World.

As for your comment on "Killing the human race"......

You do realise the human race is actually WELL ABOVE the recommended population caps in most countries right, and in some countries its gotten so bad they have to enforce a "X amount of Children per family" law?

But I've spoke my piece, and you have spoken yours, everyone is entitled to an opinion, that is the greatness of the freedom of speech, however to force an opinion on others (as you have been) is nothing short of the same values as a dictatorship, so be mindful of your debating choices and comments!

 

[Fusilli]

My view on this deplorable act are simple. NO. i do not support such a horrible act and never shall. Woman use rape as a justification to throw away a life. if you know this happened, shouldn't you A:Look deep in your heart to make sure the child has the best life possible or B:Give it up for adoption. Some where, there are people that want the child you want to kill. how dare you kill that child before it can even take its first breath. just because people are young or havent been through the trauma you have, does not mean their views dont count. we are all human, cant we act that way. how would you feel if your mom or dad decided that he/she had too much children so they decided to throw YOU away, huh. oh yeah, thats right, you would not feel anything because you dont exist. Arguing about something that future generations will just abolish seems futile and we should be putting our time into much more worthy talks. Debating over human lives is for those who have no life of their own. All these excuses are just ways to justify an act that should be punished by imprisonment. it is not just your body once you get pregnant, that body is now shared by two beings. kill the child, might as well kill yourself too..... this act not only kills one innocent life, but lowers the human population potential rising. you are just helping kill the human race, just like a disease

I'm not going to spend too much time on this because I feel it's quite pointless, we all have our own opinions etc, and I have stated mine a few pages ago... But I'd just like to point out that an increase in human population is NOT A GOOD THING. Haven't you ever heard of things like overpopulation or finite resources? And the global human population is on the increase anyway regardless of abortion.


Also...

how would you feel if your mom or dad decided that he/she had too much children so they decided to throw YOU away, huh. oh yeah, thats right, you would not feel anything because you dont exist.

You kind of just contradicted yourself. And you're right, you wouldn't feel anything because you don't have a life yet.

 

[King Sean]

WHY CANT YOU JUST LEAVE ME ALONE. WTF ATTACKING ME SOLELY FOR 4 POSTS STRAIGHT!!!. I stated my opinion. srry if i seemed to be pushing my ideals on you, but i am done. continue with yourselves and just leave me alone, damn!!

 

[Bambi]

WHY CANT YOU JUST LEAVE ME ALONE. WTF ATTACKING ME SOLELY FOR 4 POSTS STRAIGHT!!!. I stated my opinion. srry if i seemed to be pushing my ideals on you, but i am done. continue with yourselves and just leave me alone, damn!!

its a powerfu l subject, we are not '' attacking'' you merely debating your opinons

 

[Dolores Haze]

WHY CANT YOU JUST LEAVE ME ALONE. WTF ATTACKING ME SOLELY FOR 4 POSTS STRAIGHT!!!. I stated my opinion. srry if i seemed to be pushing my ideals on you, but i am done. continue with yourselves and just leave me alone, damn!!

When you post in a discussion thread, expect to have your views discussed. If you can't handle that, don't post such an over-assuming post with no justifications or examples.

I'm not going to post much here, or break down someone else's opinions. I'm just going to say that I am for women choosing what they want to do. The man shouldn't force her to do what he wants, saying it's 'his child too'. It's a massive experience for her - oh, you jack off and nine months later you have to take care of something (if you haven't taken care of the mother anyway). She has to go through a lot more.

I know my mother had no doubts about having me, she and Dad were happy together and about to get married, and she prayed for a little girl and she got one; she never regretted it. I've done everything I can to not be a burden to her and to be helpful since Dad left.

Basically, children can be amazing things if you're ready for it. In Vikki's case, she probably couldn't have raised that child in the happiest environment it might deserve (no offense, Viks.). Let the mother decide whether she wants to raise it right.

Also, saying 'you'll never know what the child could have been like', exactly. A child raised in an abusive environment with a depressed mother might grow up to be an abusive person also, or cause someone's suicide/breakdown (a bit of an exaggeration, I know, but I know exactly who caused my breakdown, but I don't wish they were never born.). You just don't know.

And feel free to say everything I've said is wrong because I'm tbh too young to fully understand this topic. I've read through others' replies and drawn my own conclusion from it.
Instead of wailing on women for 'killing' their unborn child, go start a massive flame topic over Hiroshima or something that actually killed living people. At least that would have some kind of purpose

 

[bitteroldman]

To all the folks knocking me for calling them kids:

Change your whippersnapping name to bitteryoungman/bitteryounglady. I've called myself bitteroldman, hence my calling you kids and whippersnappers. You bitteryoungfolks oughtta learn to take a joke.

ANNNNND

I agree that someone shouldn't be forced to raise a child they don't want. That's why you give the child up for adoption.

You see, all this talk of inconvenience and rape and such are used in courtrooms. They are called motives. People can excuse anything. ANYTHING. It's just a matter of perspective, and sometimes, the view is pretty screwy, y'know?

To ya folks who have been in some of the worst shoes in America: yes. Your situation was horrible. And believe it or not, I'm not going to preach your head off and say you did the wrong thing. Life is friggin' hard. People do things, that they sometimes regret. Some people do things that are absolutely screwy, but they come from a screwy place. So who am I to knock anyone else for what they've done? That's not really how I roll (homey), and yes, I'm a Christian, and that's how I learned not to knock folks for doing things that I disagree with, or that are "sinful". I truly, truly, truly regret that you had to go through that (the abuse/rape and the abortion) and I hope that someday those scars of yours can be mended. And that's all I'm going to say about that.

And, for the record, almost everyone I know who is actively against abortion (not passively ("Oh, that's NAWRTY, the dirty liberal sinnahs!" Whaddabunchajerks, making Christianity and this issue nothing more than a political view.) is a woman. I'm the only guy I've met personally that actively hates it. Several womenz around me do, just me on the male side. I don't think it's something a lot of fellers really spend much time thinking about, except the pundits, because it's not something that directly affects guys until it's in our faces.

Annnnnd

It's a baby. "Fetus" is Greek for "little one". "Embryo" is simply a living thing that isn't fully developed. That being said, an (we'll use your word this time) embryo begins to form its muscular, circulatory, skeletal, and neural systems are forming within the first week of fertilization. By day twenty, his heart, brain, spinal cord, and nervous system are nearly complete and his eyes begin to form. At twenty-two days, his heart is beating. So it becomes "human" and not just a clump of cells within the first month by most standards. My personal standard says its human from the beginning. You don't change species.

ANNNNNND

I don't see why there isn't a question of custody in most circumstances. As I said, most abortions ARE NOT for cases of rape, so most cases should have a viable case for legal custody. So if mama doesn't want it, there might be a lineup of folks who still have a claim. Such as the man-toy, the girl's parents (if she is underage), etc. Come on. This is America. The number of single fathers out there is becoming more prominent. Still a minority, but to give one sex rights the other doesn't have is discrimination. Daddy ought to have a say. Might not be much say if he hasn't committed, but I think if it's a choice of giving the baby to the one-night-stand man and killing it, that's no choice at all.
Personally, I think if abortion's going to be legal, you ought to have a court order to get one. I mean, this isn't a meat market here.
And, if I were the bitteroldking of America, I'd make it illegal to get an underage girl prego. So there.


ANNNNND

Hmph. What was I saying? Get away from my car, you hoodlums!

 

[Donald Trump]

ANNNNND

I agree that someone shouldn't be forced to raise a child they don't want. That's why you give the child up for adoption.

So mothers are disposable baby factories? It's not as if she lays back thinks happy thoughts and nine months later a baby pops out of her. Delivering a child is immesely painful. Pregnancy is a risk to a woman's health. There are so many related problems that listing them all would drain the patience of anyone.
The point is, it's not as simple as you make it out to be.

It's a baby. "Fetus" is Greek for "little one". "Embryo" is simply a living thing that isn't fully developed. That being said, an (we'll use your word this time) embryo begins to form its muscular, circulatory, skeletal, and neural systems are forming within the first week of fertilization. By day twenty, his heart, brain, spinal cord, and nervous system are nearly complete and his eyes begin to form. At twenty-two days, his heart is beating. So it becomes "human" and not just a clump of cells within the first month by most standards. My personal standard says its human from the beginning. You don't change species.

Semantics.

It isn't a life, it will be but currently isn't.
Since it isn't yet a life, there's not much of a difference between an abortion and any other prophylactic.

I don't see why there isn't a question of custody in most circumstances. As I said, most abortions ARE NOT for cases of rape, so most cases should have a viable case for legal custody. So if mama doesn't want it, there might be a lineup of folks who still have a claim. Such as the man-toy, the girl's parents (if she is underage), etc. Come on. This is America. The number of single fathers out there is becoming more prominent. Still a minority, but to give one sex rights the other doesn't have is discrimination. Daddy ought to have a say. Might not be much say if he hasn't committed, but I think if it's a choice of giving the baby to the one-night-stand man and killing it, that's no choice at all.
Personally, I think if abortion's going to be legal, you ought to have a court order to get one. I mean, this isn't a meat market here.
And, if I were the bitteroldking of America, I'd make it illegal to get an underage girl prego. So there.

In most cases the father should have a say in it. I still think that the ultimate decision is the woman's. I don't think her father or anyone other member of her family has the right to say what she can and can't do with her body. That's what it comes down to for me at least. The right of a woman to make decisions about her own body vs a section of society trying to force their views onto others. And to me, the answer is fairly obvious.

 

[bitteroldman]

So mothers are disposable baby factories? It's not as if she lays back thinks happy thoughts and nine months later a baby pops out of her. Delivering a child is immesely painful. Pregnancy is a risk to a woman's health. There are so many related problems that listing them all would drain the patience of anyone.
The point is, it's not as simple as you make it out to be.

Not as simple as you make it either. Mom's not a baby factory and not disposable at all. However, from my understanding, abortion is also painful and has been known to have complications and side effects that include death. Same argument coming from both sides=moot point.
That being said, some women make quite a bit of money taking the adoption route. I think that's appropriate.

Semantics.

It isn't a life, it will be but currently isn't.
Since it isn't yet a life, there's not much of a difference between an abortion and any other prophylactic.

Ah, my point is that it's semantics. Calling it an embryo/fetus/baby is semantics, and doesn't make it any less what it is (an unborn child).
Your opinion vs mine=moot point. Moving on...
I haven't heard of a prophylactic that requires a medical procedure to reverse what has already happened. Pro=before. A=after.
And let's think about that too: you need a medical procedure to end the phenomenon that is occurring within you? And it's not the same as removing a tumor, because a tumor is harmful, while an "embryo", in most cases in the Western world, is not. So how is this not ending a life?

In most cases the father should have a say in it. I still think that the ultimate decision is the woman's. I don't think her father or anyone other member of her family has the right to say what she can and can't do with her body. That's what it comes down to for me at least. The right of a woman to make decisions about her own body vs a section of society trying to force their views onto others. And to me, the answer is fairly obvious.

In my opinion, it's disgusting that society has set up a system that allows my daughter to get a medical procedure with possible complications done without consulting me. As a parent, within reason, it is my say what she does with her body, including medical care. She can't get a piercing or a tattoo without my permission. She couldn't have a mole removed or get a filling put in. So why should they be allowed to handle her genitalia and reproductive system, possibly risking infection, infertility, or even death, without consulting me? This is a girl who might not be able to understand the procedure or the complications, and is more likely to make an emotional decision when under stress than a sound one. This is why she remains in my care.
As for grown women? What they do with their bodies is their decision. They can do drink their liver rotten, do drugs till they don't remember who they are, sleep with every guy and catch every disease, and get all the on-the-spot medical treatments she wants. But should it all be legal? Paid for by the state? No. If she agrees to sleep with the guy, to my mind, that is an understanding of the possible outcomes for both sides. That's an understanding that a baby could come of this. There should be mandatory notification for the father, and if she decides to kill it, he should have legal rights too.
It's just like a business deal: both sides make an investment, both sides have a claim on the profits. Though, no, it is not an equal claim, since it is the woman doing the work. However, if she forfeits the claim on the profits, he should be able to "buy out" her share.

 

[Donald Trump]

Not as simple as you make it either. Mom's not a baby factory and not disposable at all. However, from my understanding, abortion is also painful and has been known to have complications and side effects that include death. Same argument coming from both sides=moot point.
That being said, some women make quite a bit of money taking the adoption route. I think that's appropriate.

I'm not saying that women should always have abortions, just that they should be able to chose. As we've both pointed, both options can be detrimental to women's health. If we agree that abortion is legal etc, then it should be the woman's choice.

I haven't heard of a prophylactic that requires a medical procedure to reverse what has already happened. Pro=before. A=after.
And let's think about that too: you need a medical procedure to end the phenomenon that is occurring within you? And it's not the same as removing a tumor, because a tumor is harmful, while an "embryo", in most cases in the Western world, is not. So how is this not ending a life?

Because it's not alive. If you removed the child/foetus from the mother it wouldn't be dead because it wouldn't have ever been alive. Until whatever is in the womb can survive outside of it, it's not alive.
The only difference between a prophylactic and an abortion is a practical one. After nine months you won't have a child. You'll disagree because you believe that after conception it's a life. Which as you say makes it a moot point.

In my opinion, it's disgusting that society has set up a system that allows my daughter to get a medical procedure with possible complications done without consulting me. As a parent, within reason, it is my say what she does with her body, including medical care. She can't get a piercing or a tattoo without my permission. She couldn't have a mole removed or get a filling put in. So why should they be allowed to handle her genitalia and reproductive system, possibly risking infection, infertility, or even death, without consulting me? This is a girl who might not be able to understand the procedure or the complications, and is more likely to make an emotional decision when under stress than a sound one. This is why she remains in my care.
As for grown women? What they do with their bodies is their decision. They can do drink their liver rotten, do drugs till they don't remember who they are, sleep with every guy and catch every disease, and get all the on-the-spot medical treatments she wants. But should it all be legal? Paid for by the state? No. If she agrees to sleep with the guy, to my mind, that is an understanding of the possible outcomes for both sides. That's an understanding that a baby could come of this. There should be mandatory notification for the father, and if she decides to kill it, he should have legal rights too.

I meant the father of the not yet born child. Both terms I use for convience.
I also don't think a father owns his daughter either. I'm in favour of the daughter having the final say, because you can't say that every father would have his daughters' best interests at heart. And in almost all cases the daughter would discuss it with her father and/or mother.

It's just like a business deal: both sides make an investment, both sides have a claim on the profits. Though, no, it is not an equal claim, since it is the woman doing the work. However, if she forfeits the claim on the profits, he should be able to "buy out" her share.

Again woman's right to choose > Man's right.
If the woman thinks that the man will raise the child 'well' then I think in some or most cases, the woman would give birth.

 

[Davey Gaga]

I've posted (most of) my opinions in previous posts, so I'll only home in on points, which I've yet to cover.

In most cases the father should have a say in it. I still think that the ultimate decision is the woman's. I don't think her father or anyone other member of her family has the right to say what she can and can't do with her body. That's what it comes down to for me at least. The right of a woman to make decisions about her own body vs a section of society trying to force their views onto others. And to me, the answer is fairly obvious.

While I agree that the woman should indeed have the final say, I do believe that the man should heavily influence the decision. Aye, the woman bears the burden of pregnancy, and surely has the right to choose what to do with her body, but what about the birth thereafter? When the baby comes in to the world, after 9 months of pregnancy, a lifetime of committment then begins - a responsibility, which is (usually) a joint effort between both parents. For the father to be excluded from the final decision is, to me, highly inconsiderate of him and his life. Half of the baby is his and so half of the decision should be his - without sounding as though I'm dismissing pregnancy as a quick pushing job, the 9 months of carrying the child can't compare to the lifetime of responsibility.

100% pro-choice, btw.

 

[Fusilli]

Ideally, whether or not a baby is kept or aborted would be a mutual decision between both parents. But at the end of the day, if a woman is set on getting an abortion then it's going to be her say that counts. No, it's not entirely fair BUT then again it isn't exactly fair that women have to go through with pregnancy and childbirth in the first place whereas men don't.

I don't see why there isn't a question of custody in most circumstances. As I said, most abortions ARE NOT for cases of rape, so most cases should have a viable case for legal custody. So if mama doesn't want it, there might be a lineup of folks who still have a claim. Such as the man-toy, the girl's parents (if she is underage), etc. Come on. This is America. The number of single fathers out there is becoming more prominent. Still a minority, but to give one sex rights the other doesn't have is discrimination. Daddy ought to have a say. Might not be much say if he hasn't committed, but I think if it's a choice of giving the baby to the one-night-stand man and killing it, that's no choice at all.

To be fair, I'm sure that most abortions aren't just carried out on a whim, and it would be discussed beforehand. You talk about giving other people a claim, but don't you think this would have already been considered? If a girl didn't want the baby but was willing to go through with the pregnancy to either give it up for adoption or give it to the father, then she would. But if she's completely unwilling to go through with it, then it doesn't matter who else would raise it, because it's her body and her choice. Sure, she may be able to be persuaded, but like I said before, abortions aren't usually carried out on whims anyway and there is often a lot of discussion preceding one, so this would have all been considered.

And, if I were the bitteroldking of America, I'd make it illegal to get an underage girl prego. So there.

Yes, it's called paedophilia.

 

[Davey Gaga]

Ideally, whether or not a baby is kept or aborted would be a mutual decision between both parents. But at the end of the day, if a woman is set on getting an abortion then it's going to be her say that counts. No, it's not entirely fair BUT then again it isn't exactly fair that women have to go through with pregnancy and childbirth in the first place whereas men don't.

We could start another debate on who has it worse off in life - men, or women - but I think that we can agree that we'll end up firing across equally strong points. I don't think that, simply because the mother carries the child in the first 9 months, she has more of a right to determine the outcome of their lives. If the man doesn't want the child, but the woman has it, then the man's life changes forever without his consent. If the man wants the child and the woman does not, then it's not at all right, in my eyes, to get rid of the child (albeit, the latter situation is more easily adaptable - the couple could get pregnant again at a later date when both parents are ready, the man could find another partner, et cetera - than the former).

I think I want to change my view on abortion to being a complete 50/50 decision between the couple. If the man is not in the woman's life, e.g. rape, abandonment, and the woman has no intention of letting the father know of the baby's existence, then I think it's 100% up to her. More complicatedly, if the father of, say, a rape child does not want the baby (as would likely be the case), then I do not think that he has any right to decide the outcome of the baby's life, and I firmly believe, in that situation, that he should be forced to support the child, financially.

I'm digressing, slightly. In short: couples should make a joint decision, regardless of the circumstances, and single mothers have full rights over the decision.

 

[Fusilli]

Well yes, I agree. Couples SHOULD make a joint decision. As I said 'Ideally, whether or not a baby is kept or aborted would be a mutual decision between both parents.' But unfortunately sometimes they'll disagree, and if this is the case then it'll be the woman who has the final say. If she doesn't want to have a baby, regardless of whether or not she's going to raise it, then she shouldn't feel pressurised into giving birth. As Hal said earlier, we aren't baby factories, and if a man wants a baby so bad then he should have one with somebody else who wants one.

 

[Bambi]

We could start another debate on who has it worse off in life - men, or women - but I think that we can agree that we'll end up firing across equally strong points. I don't think that, simply because the mother carries the child in the first 9 months, she has more of a right to determine the outcome of their lives. If the man doesn't want the child, but the woman has it, then the man's life changes forever without his consent. If the man wants the child and the woman does not, then it's not at all right, in my eyes, to get rid of the child (albeit, the latter situation is more easily adaptable - the couple could get pregnant again at a later date when both parents are ready, the man could find another partner, et cetera - than the former)..

9 months is a long time for a woman to be pregnant with a child she doesn't want, my hair isn't as thick as it was before I got pregnant, I was anemic and narrowly escaped a blood transfusion, I was ill and uncomfortable all the time, needing to pee constantly, the smell of cheese made me throw up, I went off tea and chocolate and I had insane cravings for broccoli and chicken

I think it IS only fair if you are in a RS that the decision SHOULD be a joint one, but ultimately if the woman does not want the child, its hard cheese for the bloke.

Oh and child birth isn't pretty either, try being scalpelled open without pain relief because you are squeezing out a baby through a small hole and you are about to tear, THEN getting stitched back up, THEN when you have finally GIVEN borth you throw up EVERYWHERE, and then its a case of not getting any sleep until you either give the baby up or for the next however many months before the kid gets into a routine. IT WAS THE MOST PAINFUL 18 HOURS OF MY LIFE

Also take into consideration, that a woman who has a baby because her bloke wants it and she doesn't, that there will be a HIGH chance of PND which will follow

Which is why, although I think its fair for the man to be consulted, I don't feel its fair to expect it to be a 50/50 decision. You have NO idea the strain child birth puts on your body

Oh and I was lucky. Mine was just an average pregnancy, I escaped with no stretch marks, I didn't gain weight and my boobs haven't sagged from how BIG they went then back small again

Pregnancy can fuck your body RIGHT up. Why would you DO that to yourself for something you don't want?

Well yes, I agree. Couples SHOULD make a joint decision. As I said 'Ideally, whether or not a baby is kept or aborted would be a mutual decision between both parents.' But unfortunately sometimes they'll disagree, and if this is the case then it'll be the woman who has the final say..

Tl;dr

What she said

 

[Davey Gaga]

If the man doesn't want the child, but the woman has it, then the man's life changes forever without his consent. If the man wants the child and the woman does not, then it's not at all right, in my eyes, to get rid of the child (albeit, the latter situation is more easily adaptable - the couple could get pregnant again at a later date when both parents are ready, the man could find another partner, et cetera - than the former).

Perhaps I understated this part of my last post, so I'll try to make it a little clearer.

In the event of a woman falling pregnant, and the father of the child does not want the child to be born, then the decision should indeed be 50/50 - for the mother to bring the child in to the world without its father's consent is just horrendous. However, in an event where the father does want the child, but the woman does not, I am in favour of the decision being left to her - it is much easier for 1) the couple to get pregnant again when both parents are fully ready and 2) the man to re-think whether or not the woman he is with is the right person for him. It is not so easy for the man to walk out of a potential child's life.

If the father does not want the child, then it's 50/50; if the mother does not want the child, then it's up to her and her alone.

...imo.

 

[bitteroldman]

I'm not saying that women should always have abortions, just that they should be able to chose. As we've both pointed, both options can be detrimental to women's health. If we agree that abortion is legal etc, then it should be the woman's choice.

I will digress except to say that I think abortion should AT LEAST not be readily available like a pizza parlor. Anything that follows is not a concession that abortion is okay, but merely an acknowledgement that it is legal right now, and that some safeguards ought to be in place.

Because it's not alive. If you removed the child/foetus from the mother it wouldn't be dead because it wouldn't have ever been alive. Until whatever is in the womb can survive outside of it, it's not alive.
The only difference between a prophylactic and an abortion is a practical one. After nine months you won't have a child. You'll disagree because you believe that after conception it's a life. Which as you say makes it a moot point.

I'm not going to play the "Whoever posts their opinion last wins" game.

I meant the father of the not yet born child. Both terms I use for convience.
I also don't think a father owns his daughter either. I'm in favour of the daughter having the final say, because you can't say that every father would have his daughters' best interests at heart. And in almost all cases the daughter would discuss it with her father and/or mother.

I'm in favor of a child having legal recourse for a situation that they feel the parent is not living up to their duties. That being said, it should be generally assumbed unless reasonably proven otherwise, that a parent does have their child's best interest at heart. And for a child--who is often ruled by emotion instead of reason, and often hides things from their parents when they're afraid of the possible consequences--to have unquestioning access to a medical facility and procedure is reprehensible. How is anyone supposed to protect their child in these circumstances? First, the setup allows rapists and sexual abusers to get off scot-free. Next, it allows my child (who might just see a road with no visible consequences, much like disposing of a plate she broke, and be totally unaware of the consequences and lacking the maturity to truly weigh them) to put herself at risk without my knowledge and despite my permission. That shouldn't be legal, let alone endorsed by the state. Also, this undermines my ability to parent, and encourages her to run around and repeat the road that led her to that chair. Finally, it leaves me unprepared for the trauma that girls who face this procedure often face.

If a teenage girl (at least a girl under the age of consent) ends up in a doctor's office pregnant, there should be some accountability. Period. Exclamation point. Unquote. Moving on.

Again woman's right to choose > Man's right.
If the woman thinks that the man will raise the child 'well' then I think in some or most cases, the woman would give birth.

Wrong. Woman's right to her body>greater than man's right. But in consensual sex, you are putting yourself at risk with a partner, and the consequences of such are not so simple as one person's choice. If she came down with chlamydia, she has a duty to inform him, and possibly a legal recourse. The same should apply to pregnancy. They did the deed together, so it only makes sense that some accountability should be present for the fallout. And a woman should not be able to withhold a child or kill it regardless of the man's feelings. And if he is willing to parent the child, that's all that needs be said; he can pay the hospital bills and some recompense for the woman's trouble and time off work, and she can give him the child she doesn't want. If the dude's a buttplug that doesn't deserve a child, she should've thought of that before.

When is it good or wise to do something drastic when someone else is willing to take the burden from you?

I've posted (most of) my opinions in previous posts, so I'll only home in on points, which I've yet to cover.

While I agree that the woman should indeed have the final say, I do believe that the man should heavily influence the decision. Aye, the woman bears the burden of pregnancy, and surely has the right to choose what to do with her body, but what about the birth thereafter? When the baby comes in to the world, after 9 months of pregnancy, a lifetime of committment then begins - a responsibility, which is (usually) a joint effort between both parents. For the father to be excluded from the final decision is, to me, highly inconsiderate of him and his life. Half of the baby is his and so half of the decision should be his - without sounding as though I'm dismissing pregnancy as a quick pushing job, the 9 months of carrying the child can't compare to the lifetime of responsibility.

100% pro-choice, btw.

Truth. This is not discounting what women go through in pregnancy and labor.

Ideally, whether or not a baby is kept or aborted would be a mutual decision between both parents. But at the end of the day, if a woman is set on getting an abortion then it's going to be her say that counts. No, it's not entirely fair BUT then again it isn't exactly fair that women have to go through with pregnancy and childbirth in the first place whereas men don't.

It doesn't have to be fair. It's the way it is. If a man is willing to support you and your baby, and willing to hold on to the baby even if you're not, that needs to count for something.
Is it fair that the man can just run off, scott-free? Not at all, and that's why there are legal recourses available for the woman to get his assistance with the children. Things are too often one-sided in this country.

To be fair, I'm sure that most abortions aren't just carried out on a whim, and it would be discussed beforehand. You talk about giving other people a claim, but don't you think this would have already been considered? If a girl didn't want the baby but was willing to go through with the pregnancy to either give it up for adoption or give it to the father, then she would. But if she's completely unwilling to go through with it, then it doesn't matter who else would raise it, because it's her body and her choice. Sure, she may be able to be persuaded, but like I said before, abortions aren't usually carried out on whims anyway and there is often a lot of discussion preceding one, so this would have all been considered.

It's not always considered. Often these things are just hidden and never spoken aloud. And, if I'm understanding right, you can waltz right on in to the clinic and get an abortion the same day. You're talking about abortion being a mature decision that often comes about from transparent people. From my understanding, it's more often someone facing it alone, or with the support of a friend. And even if the father is willing, often, the mother doesn't care. If you can walk in and get an abortion that day (am I wrong about this?), that is set up to be just about as whimsy a decision as one can make. (though, sure, not always)

Yes, it's called paedophilia.

uttahere:
No, it's called teenage sex.
If my niece ends up prego from her boyfriend (she's fourteen), I--if I were bitteroldking--would make him liable for half the medical expenses and half the expenses in raising the child. I would fine him a certain amount. If this happens again, depending on the timespan and whether or not it's the same girl, he might face double the fine, or juvie. Third time is automatic juvie.
If the girl ends up pregnant more than once, she could be fined as well.
If the parents allow this to happen more than once, they would be fined and child services would be informed.
And the beauty of it all? Since I abolished abortion, a DNA test is always available, so that we can always find out who the father really is!
See? I just made a program that inspires kids to keep their pants on, catches sexual predators, and makes me do the dance of joy all in my first day on the throne!

It's good to be the king!

We could start another debate on who has it worse off in life - men, or women - but I think that we can agree that we'll end up firing across equally strong points. I don't think that, simply because the mother carries the child in the first 9 months, she has more of a right to determine the outcome of their lives. If the man doesn't want the child, but the woman has it, then the man's life changes forever without his consent. If the man wants the child and the woman does not, then it's not at all right, in my eyes, to get rid of the child (albeit, the latter situation is more easily adaptable - the couple could get pregnant again at a later date when both parents are ready, the man could find another partner, et cetera - than the former).

It's called being an adult, when you have to face the consequences of your actions. Sex often has consequences, whether pregnancy or disease or emotional trauma.

I firmly believe, in that situation (rape), that he should be forced to support the child, financially.

Yep. And an automatic shipping to another part of the country with an ankle bracelet when he gets out of prison too.

Perhaps I understated this part of my last post, so I'll try to make it a little clearer.

In the event of a woman falling pregnant, and the father of the child does not want the child to be born, then the decision should indeed be 50/50 - for the mother to bring the child in to the world without its father's consent is just horrendous.

That's the weirdest thing I've ever heard. Horrendous to bring a child into the world? Seriously? You empower womanizers this way, y'know. And force the woman to get an abortion she doesn't want/doesn't believe in. I think this would actually be worse than the way things are now. A man's right to choose abortion for his woman? Wow.

 

[The Illusive Man]

and I noticed at no point in your arguments did you quote a word of anything I said?

Is it because you are the Over-Zealous Church goer that refuses to accept things that they dont understand?

Or is it simply because your too damn ignorant to accept the fact that maybe, just maybe you might be actually wrong on this one?

Like I already stated before, theres debating opinions and theres forcing opinions, from what I can see of your style of arguing your no better than one of those brainwashed Taliban maniacs that have been involved in suicide bombing.

We live in a free world and everyone is entitled to an opinion, so stop trying to force yours down peoples throats, there are some that agree with you, there are others that will never agree with you, just accept that fact and move on.....nuff said.