Men and Abortion

Originally posted by JackofBlades
What can he do? Physically keep the woman from leaving the house or contacting the outside world?
If he did restrain her he would be persecuted even though he was technically trying to save a child from being killed.

Yeah imagine that! Being persecuted for kidnapping and false imprisonment! Poor guy. If she tries to escape he could tie her up! If she screams he could gag her! After all.. the life of the fetus is so much more important than the woman's.

I think the word you were after was 'prosecuted'.. not 'persecuted'. I sincerly doubt though that you really care about life anyway.. you don't seem to have a problem with the idea of taking free will away.


[edit on 22-7-2006 by riley]

I did mean prosecuted and I do care about life.

I was implying that if I knew that you were going to commit a murder and kept you in my house to prevent you doing it I would be rewarded and praised.
If you try and stop a woman from killing your unborn child you are infringing on her rights, or ruling her life or any number of other things.

No one really considers abortion to be what it really is. It is (as previously alluded to) a medical condition. However, as with other major medical decisions (specifically those involving the taking of life) other factors, beside personal reasons, should be considered. As I stated earlier, if I had a terminal disease I would choose to die in the manner of my choosing rather than suffering for a long time. But I would put the feelings of my family and friends first. I would choose to live with the disease, no matter how much it hurts or how painful a death I will be subject to. If I pleased the ones I care about, it would be worth it.

Originally posted by JackofBlades
Now, I understand completely that women carry the child, and give birth to it....but does this mean that the father who, although not yet physically connected to the child, feels just as much (if not more) love towards it has absolutely no control over the fate of his unborn child.

It is always going to be hard as the woman will inevitably get the final say, but how is our legal/medical system set up to accomodate the men?

To strip a person of the most basic right of autonomy, is to tread on dangerous ground. Let's flip the original premise of this thread around. Let's say that a woman wants to have a child, but the man doesn't. Should a woman who wants to bear a child have the right to force her partner against his will to donate his sperm?

I imagine there are several people answering this question with a resounding "NO!" In this case, the man is to be stripped of his autonomy, and forced to donate his sperm. Heaven forbid, that a man should be stripped of his autonomy.

This scenario is not far-fetched. It is all boils down to reproductive rights. There are so many variables involved when it comes to reproductive rights, that it will never be equitable for both men and women.

Originally posted by JackofBlades
No one really considers abortion to be what it really is. It is (as previously alluded to) a medical condition.

Actually it's a procedure not a condition.

But I would put the feelings of my family and friends first. I would choose to live with the disease, no matter how much it hurts or how painful a death I will be subject to. If I pleased the ones I care about, it would be worth it.

Each to their own. My family and friends would prefer that I not suffer.

WOw, i'm gonna refrain from participating in this conversation anymore because one of the posters is making such a retarded argument that I know I won't be able to bite my tongue and this will turn into an argument.
Anyone with common sense knows who I am talking about, but I won't say their name.
Have fun people.

(I just hope this particular person never has any position of any kind of authority)

EDIT: Spelling

[edit on 22/7/2006 by JebusSaves]

Originally posted by JackofBlades
How would you guys feel if your partner told you that she was pregnant with your very first child, then immediately says she plans on aborting it?

If I were a man and this happened (BIG IF) I would be really sorry that I wasn't more careful about birth control. I would be hurt and I would probably do everything I could to convince the woman to have the child, up to and including legally absolving her of all financial and physical resposibility (How many of these men are willing to do that?). If she still wanted an abortion, I would have to live with it and LEARN FROM IT. I would do my very best to never let it happen again.

Originally posted by JackofBlades
As I stated earlier, if I had a terminal disease I would choose to die in the manner of my choosing rather than suffering for a long time. But I would put the feelings of my family and friends first. I would choose to live with the disease, no matter how much it hurts or how painful a death I will be subject to. If I pleased the ones I care about, it would be worth it.

Wow. To me, that is just way out of my realm of reality. I would not do that. Nor would I ask a sick relative to continue living because of selfish reasons. That sounds like co-dependence to an extreme!

Originally posted by riley
Each to their own. My family and friends would prefer that I not suffer.

So would mine. But I know that while they would want me to be at peace, they would be hurt if I died. So I would live.

Nor would I ask a sick relative to continue living because of selfish reasons. That sounds like co-dependence to an extreme!

Yes but they would still like to 'stick around' for a while though wouldn't they? Before my nana died (I'm 18 and still think of her as nana) she refused to act like anything was different. She always moaned that she was fine and treated us kids like usual. If I was going, I'd know my family wouldn't want me to suffer, but at the same time I wouldn't want them to. I would stay as it is the only thing I can do to delay their pain.

WOw, i'm gonna refrain from participating in this conversation anymore because one of the posters is making such a retarded argument that I know I won't be able to bite my tongue and this will turn into an argument.

I take it that was directed at me? Fair do's. I know it sounds like I'm basically saying tie her up til she gives birth, but thats not what I mean. I know what I mean but I can't explain it properly. Sorry if I have offended anybody but this kind of thing always happens to me.

This scenario is not far-fetched. It is all boils down to reproductive rights. There are so many variables involved when it comes to reproductive rights, that it will never be equitable for both men and women.

.

Heaven forbid, that a man should be stripped of his autonomy.

I know what you mean (especially about that last bit!). To tell someone that they must give birth is offensive. To actually make someone give birth is wrong.

I don't know. It just feels to me that in these reproductive cases there is only black and white. Man and woman. Power and powerless. There needs to be some kind of mediation (although what kind I don't know)

Again I apologise if I offended anyone but I really didn't mean what it sounded like.

[edit on 22/7/06 by JackofBlades]

I don't see where you've offended anyone, Jack.

The fact is that the man's choice about having a child comes BEFORE intercourse. He has a choice, but once he engages, he gives that choice to the woman because that's the way people are made. Men can't carry and birth babies.

It's not 'fair', but it's the way it is. If men want to exercise their choice, they can. They just better be damn sure they're willing to face the consequences if they decide to take the chance of making a baby.

Being a man I have only one thing to say about abortion.

I personally do not believe in abortion, but, I do not believe in stopping others from doing it. My wife and I agree that even though we are not planning on having kids; we will not have an abortion if she gets pregnant.

If a woman wants to end a pregnancy that is her right. Whats funny is alot of the pro-lifers want to save every fetus.. but seem to care very little for the people already alive. Also the prolifers never seem to want to take care of all the unwanted children.
I personally, AM Pro-life... but not to the extent of wanting to stop everyone else from making their own decisions/mistakes. It is the womans body it is the womans soul she must decide what course to take. NOT THE STATE! This govt is too concerned with our personal lives. They always want to govern our bodies, when in fact they should leave us all alone to self govern our own physical and mental health.

and thats my $.02

Originally posted by TONE23
This govt is too concerned with our personal lives.

The way things are going abortion ain't gonna be a problem much longer anyway.


Can anyone say "clonesgrowninlargevats'????

Jokin of course (I hope at least)

TONE you and your wife seem to have a good arrangement. You don't actively want kids, but if any come along you won't stop them.

I think abortion has now become (at least to some) the newest form of contraception. People have sex, create life and destroy it. Rinse and repeat.
Here in the UK, the number of teenage mums having multiple abortions has risen, and the blame is again placed on men for not taking any sort of precaution to ved with them. Can't females keep a few condoms at hand if they plan on fornicating?

Originally posted by JackofBlades
Can't females keep a few condoms at hand if they plan on fornicating?

They can and they should. I did before my husband and I got married. I was using the patch at the time, but I still made him wear a condom. It only makes sense. I don't agree with using abortion as birth control. But as was said before, the government has no place trying to dictate what a person does with their body.

Originally posted by TONE23

If a woman wants to end a pregnancy that is her right. Whats funny is alot of the pro-lifers want to save every fetus.. but seem to care very little for the people already alive. Also the prolifers never seem to want to take care of all the unwanted children.

I know i said i was out of this conversation, and I am for the most part, i just wanted to comment on a couple of these particular comments.

Just wish to make clear that you aren't speaking for all 'Pro-Lifers'.
On the contrary, I volunteer at a pro-life sanctuary where mothers who don't abort but don't wish to keep the child, come and stay until the child is born and then when the child is born, the mother is only then needed when the child(looked after by the owners of the Sanctuary) has been sent to a good caring(and checked out) home, when she has documents to sign.
The owners have also adopted 5 of the Children themselves.
I do believe that if a Pro-Lifer is so concerned with the welfare of the child that is about to be aborted, they should also be willing to take it in.

Originally posted by TONE23
I personally, AM Pro-life... but not to the extent of wanting to stop everyone else from making their own decisions/mistakes. It is the womans body it is the womans soul she must decide what course to take. NOT THE STATE! This govt is too concerned with our personal lives. They always want to govern our bodies, when in fact they should leave us all alone to self govern our own physical and mental health.

and thats my $.02

I couldn't agree more. The State itself has NOTHING to do with this. Its the decision of the Mother AND Father.
While i'm 100% against Abortion in general, i'm 100% against Governments having any say over this intimate part of society and I would fight just as hard to keep it that way as i would for the unborn foetus' life.

I definately agree that there are some that use abortion for little more than contraception. This has to be curtailed. I dont know about the UK... but here in America, it seems, both sides weant all or nothing.... It feels like there is no middle ground except for some of us here on ATS.

Maybe there should be a limit on how may abortions one can have... like three strikes kind of deal. Also I do not agree with late term abortions unless there is the mothers life at stake.

On the whole though, since men cannot get pregnant.. they need to shut up and support the woman they impregnated(whatever her choice may be) IMHO.

Originally posted by TONE23
Maybe there should be a limit on how may abortions one can have... like three strikes kind of deal. Also I do not agree with late term abortions unless there is the mothers life at stake.

I'm not certain but doesn't excessive aborting create biological problems with the female reproductive system? I'm sure I heard it did.

I'll start digging.

Originally posted by TONE23
On the whole though, since men cannot get pregnant.. they need to shut up and support the woman they impregnated(whatever her choice may be) IMHO.

I agree. Couldn't have put it better myself.

Originally posted by JackofBlades
I'm not certain but doesn't excessive aborting create biological problems with the female reproductive system? I'm sure I heard it did.

I'll start digging.

I think it does, but I'm not certain either. But really, if someone is actually using abortion as birth control I don't think that person should become a mother at all.

Originally posted by hogtie


Just so you know where I am coming from, I am not pro-choice. I am pro-abortion. Some people just should not have children.

Just clarifying on this: Pro life is what it is. Pro choice is "I don't really want to have to make a decision." Pro abortion is what it is, without the wishy-washy.

original quote by: JebusSaves
Just wish to make clear that you aren't speaking for all 'Pro-Lifers'.

Being that My wife and I are practicing pro-lifers.. It would be somewhat hippocritical of me to be talking about ALL pro-lifers. No I am only referring to the ones that try to force their own beliefs on the matter on everyone else. aka... through law and such. The ones that cannot mind their own gosh darned business and wish to control everyone elses bedroom behavior. The ones that use god as their motivator to control others lives. No I am really only talking about a select few that speak louder than the majority of us.

original quote by: JebusSaves
I couldn't agree more. The State itself has NOTHING to do with this. Its the decision of the Mother AND Father.
While i'm 100% against Abortion in general, i'm 100% against Governments having any say over this intimate part of society and I would fight just as hard to keep it that way as i would for the unborn foetus' life.

We are in 100% agreement here.

original quote by: JackofBlades
I'm not certain but doesn't excessive aborting create biological problems with the female reproductive system? I'm sure I heard it did.

I'll start digging.

You are probably right on this point.

Also thanks to everyone in this room for keeping what is usually a very firery topic very cool-headed. I applaud us all.

Some things in life just are not fair, and never will be. If life was fair than we'd all be driving BMW's, we'd all be millionaires and look like movie stars. So, I think in the Creator's infinite wisdom we have a compromise between men and women which goes something like this:

- Women have to put up with monthly periods for roughly 35 to 40 years of their life - with all of the attendant headaches, backaches, crankiness (I do realize this affects the men too!), fuzzy thinking, fatigue and bloatedness.
-Women give birth under very painful circumstances.
-THe 9 months of pregnancy are no fun, either.

In exchange men are generally required to:
-support the baby, even if they don't want it.
-Put up with cranky and sick pregnant women.

Neither side has it perfect. But the sad truth is, the woman is the one who has the baby, it affects her body and the rest of her life. Men just simply don't have the option to become pregnant even if they want to and I know plenty who would love to have the experience. The woman also is responsible for the care and well-being of that baby, unless the man CHOOSES to be part of it and help out. While I can sympathize with men who want to keep the baby and are very much against abortion, the reality is that as a woman, it is MY body that will have to deal with the pregnancy and if the guy runs out on me, I still have to support said baby.
Personally, woebetide any mortal who tries to force me to do something with my body that I absolutely don't want, such as forced to endure a pregnancy I absolutely do not want. IMO, it would be the same as rape, not having any say so with what happens to my body. Women have been raped enough throughout history, it's time to drop that kind of mentality.
Many women have an abortion and just don't tell their husband, partner, etc. since they don't want a child.

One more point: I do not think that if someone is old enough to have sex that they are old enough or mature enough to make good decisions about pregnancy. Most young people have no idea what it really means to care for a child. 12 year olds can be old enough to have sex but would you really expect a 12 y.o. to make a mature decision about ANYTHING?

I agree with you forestlady on the subject of underage abortions. However, a girl who went to my school had a child at about 13-14 and she has become a very capable parent.

Oh and I was right. It seems abortion (not the actual procesdure) is startlingly dangerous, particularly to said young mothers. Link

I was planning on summarising it but I am clueless as to what alot of it actually means! Hopefully someone wiser than I can help.

[edit on 22/7/06 by JackofBlades]

I think there are two distinct questions to this debate :-

1. Does one partner have the right to "force" an abortion?
2. Should the wishes of the mother AND the father hold equal weight?

To the first question, I say no. Both the mother and the father have parental rights, and that I believe should include the right to protect their unborn child.

To the second, I say yes. When a man has sex, everyone would accept that he should take on the responsibility to raise and support that child for at least the first couple of decades of that child's life. By the same token, when a woman has sex, she should accept the possibility that she may have to support that child for at least the first 9 months, baring any medical reasons as to why child-bearing could be particularly dangerous of course, and one would have to allow for certain special cases like this.

If both parents want an abortion, then I believe it is their right to do so, but if at least one parent wants to raise the child, they should have that right. Once the baby is born, either parent can do an equally good job of raising the child, with or without the other party.

The current laws are based on outdated assumption that men are somehow less capable of looking after children than women..... which is as ridiculous as saying women haven't got what it takes to succeed in the boardroom or in politics.



[edit on 22-7-2006 by nowthenlookhere]