Should father have any say about abortion?

[anisadora]

Let me fix that sentence for you...

soo... are you just going to put the father in a coma for his entire life so he doesnt have to deal with the physical, emotional, mental stress of having his unborn child murdered against his will? After all, we dont want to leave any psychological scars on the father, that's something money cant fix. and please, describe this matrix machine we can hook the father up to so he can do something mentally while hes in the coma.

Also, if the father can find a surrogate and it is safe for the baby, that is a better course of action to take. Problem is, the responsibility of the child belongs to both barents, it does not belong to anyone else so nobody can be forced to become a surrogate.

---------- Post added 2012-12-11 at 04:40 PM ----------



Indeed they can. I don't have to read that because I agree with you. In that case, it is unfortunate once again that between the mother and father, the mother is the only one capable of incubating the child. What is also unfortunate is too bad that women got knocked up by choice of her own, and now she needs to take responsibility for the parts of child birth that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the father to take.

funny thing? this whole argument/thread wasnt about whether or not the woman should be able to force a man into child support. I fully believe that the man should be able to, while she's pregnant (and still able to get an abortion) sign away his parental rights and all financial responsibility if she refuses to get an abortion. However, we are actually talking about whether the male has any right to force a female to carry a parasite for nine months in her stomach, Spin Doctor.

[Myrrar]

You literally came into this thread telling me I "wanted to force women to have babies" when I just said men should have the final say because the current system is abusable garbage. Then you went off topic and I didn't know how to respond to you so I stopped replying to your posts.

Read the majority of the women's positions in the last 10 pages (if not the entire thread) and tell me what it looks like women are saying.

Just because you changed your opinion doesn't mean everyone else has.

You said women think they should have the choice of getting an abortion AND making a man pay if he wants to bail before the abortion period is over. Link to one post since you started posting where a woman has said that? Every woman posting Ive seen wants control over their body but rights for men too when it comes to not having to pay if they bail before the abortion period is over.

Are you reading a completely different thread?

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

You literally came into this thread telling me I "wanted to force women to have babies" when I just said men should have the final say because the current system is abusable garbage. Then you went off topic and I didn't know how to respond to you so I stopped replying to your posts.

Read the majority of the women's positions in the last 10 pages (if not the entire thread) and tell me what it looks like women are saying.

Just because you changed your opinion doesn't mean everyone else has.

Taking the position that men should have the final say is to take a position that will force women to have babies. Letting men have the final say would be even more abusable garbage.

[anisadora]

Indeed they can. I don't have to read that because I agree with you. In that case, it is unfortunate once again that between the mother and father, the mother is the only one capable of incubating the child. What is also unfortunate is too bad that women got knocked up by choice of her own, and now she needs to take responsibility for the parts of child birth that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the father to take.

You also realize that men lie as well? Men lie about wearing condoms. Men lie about having vasectomies. Men lie about whether or not theyll stick around when the child is born. Women dont always get a choice in whether or not theyre knocked up - and thats what abortions are for. If I dont want to carry a parasite to term with all the wreckage that it causes to my body, my mental and emotional wellbeing.. well, little fetus, nobody promised you a rosegarden. good luck next time.

did you all hear about the woman that DIED in Ireland because the hospital refused her an abortion? She wasnt even carrying a viable fetus, and both her and the husband were TRYING to get doctors to give her one. They didnt, and she died. Just this year.

[LiiLoSNK]

Taking the position that men should have the final say is to take a position that will force women to have babies. Letting men have the final say would be even more abusable garbage.

The final say for the abortion itself. If both people aren't agreeing to have a child (man says no, woman says yes), the man should have full right to order an abortion. It's a team thing. Both people should be equally responsible, but time and time again, we are seeing women use this as a leeching tactic. Women are the ones FORCING men to pay them by birthing their child.

How is that in any way me wanting men to force babies into women?

[john duo]

If the father wants an abortion and the mother wants to keep the baby, too bad dad, you literally 'screwed' up. In this case the father must chose either to take care of the baby with the mother OR (ONLY if the mother agrees) sign a document relinquishing FULL custody to the mother and also pay child support until the child is of legal age..

thats a complete utter BS!
first, no one has screwed up more than the other - they both screwed up equaly.
second, if the woman wants to keep the baby against the father will, she should sign a doc saying she will have the baby and provide for it without asking the father for child support for 18 years.

i have never heard ,on the other side of the same coin, that if the father wanted the baby and the woman didnt and went for abortion behind his back , he sewed her and won the case.

if she found out she is pregnant only but a few weeks after the sex for example - the father shouldnt be blackmailed for 18 years over a cluster of a few cells smaller than a micron.

you cant have double standard about this saying that against the father will you will keep having the baby and then blackmail him for 18 years and if the father does want the baby and the woman doesnt - than thats "her body" crap and go have an abortion behind his back and he can do nothing about it.

[Angella]

I'd be OK with men having the right to opt out of financial support by signing away their rights to the child if the woman is unwilling to have an abortion. That way women keep control of their bodies and men don't get forced into supporting an unwanted child.

Bottom line it takes two t tango. Both should have some say.

[Deleted]

The final say for the abortion itself. If both people aren't agreeing to have a child (man says no, woman says yes), the man should have full right to order an abortion. It's a team thing. Both people should be equally responsible, but time and time again, we are seeing women use this as a leeching tactic. Women are the ones FORCING men to pay them by birthing their child.

How is that in any way me wanting men to force babies into women?

No, the man should not have the right to order an abortion. This is however what I believe he should have the right to do. (Quote from myself since you obviously didn't read my link earlier.)

On the other hand I do believe that if a woman gets pregnant and chooses to keep the baby against the fathers will he would have no part in the babies life and this has to be stated early in the pregnancy. No money to pay to the woman, no right to socialize, no obligations towards the woman and the baby at all. I find it to be wrong to force someone who unwillingly became a father to be forced to pay money until the kid is 18.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

The final say for the abortion itself. If both people aren't agreeing to have a child (man says no, woman says yes), the man should have full right to order an abortion. It's a team thing. Both people should be equally responsible, but time and time again, we are seeing women use this as a leeching tactic. Women are the ones FORCING men to pay them by birthing their child.

How is that in any way me wanting men to force babies into women?

Ok, it's forcing women to have abortions. Either way you swing it, you're still forcing women to do something with their own body. Why in the fuck would you ever argue for such a violation when you could instead argue for the man to have another option? Like, a way out?

[Varyk]

Her body = her rules. If you didn't want a kid, shouldn't have stuck your dick in her.

I wasn't aware having a child was the reason for having sex the majority of the time.

9 months of being pregnant isn't even close to having to pay to raise a child for 18 years that could have been avoided.

Of course we're assuming the birth was 'accidental' and that contraception either wasn't used or didn't work. It should be up to BOTH of the parents to be. Favoring one or the other is ridiculous.

[ecthrund]

A man shouldn't be able to stop a woman from having an abortion if she wants it (and it is permitted by law). There really cannot be an argument about this. The consequences for the woman, both in terms of intensity and duration, are very significant and incomparable to the consequences for the man.

But if they are not married and hadn't planned to have a baby, the man should have every right to not have to pay for the child's care if the woman wants to go ahead with pregnancy. But he will also lose all future rights to the child, as if he gave him/her up in an adoption.

Her body = her rules. If you didn't want a kid, shouldn't have stuck your dick in her.

That is a very slippery argument. Pretty much what the extreme anti-abortion lobby says. Remember that both parties agreed to the 'sticking of the dick'.

[LiiLoSNK]

You said women think they should have the choice of getting an abortion AND making a man pay if he wants to bail before the abortion period is over. Link to one post since you started posting where a woman has said that? Every woman posting Ive seen wants control over their body but rights for men too when it comes to not having to pay if they bail before the abortion period is over.

Are you reading a completely different thread?

Those things are one and the same dude. You keep arguing something completely different. I'm saying by current law, it needs to be done a certain way.

You are saying that if the laws were different, it could be done a certain way. This is why I stopped arguing with you in the first place.

You aren't talking about the same thing as me.

[Myrrar]

How is that in any way me wanting men to force babies into women?

So if I tell you you HAVE to eat this cookie and you have to comply that isn't forcing you to eat it? Just because currently you can make me pay for the cookie you are eating doesn't mean I wouldn't be forcing you t eat it.

Not really understanding how that can be taken any other way.

Also the current laws are shit, thats the whole basis of this conversation. Again, its like saying straight people shouldn't be allowed to get married to take care of the gay marriage debate instead of just letting everyone marry who they want.

[Vellauno]

If a man wants a child then he should find a woman who wants a child aswell. Not force a woman who does not want a child to give birth which could potentially put her life at risk.

I agree here. However, if a man does not want a child but would rather save the life of his unborn child rather than kill it though abortion (because he does not believe in abortion ethically), he should have the right to deny the abortion as long as it is deemed safe for the woman to bear the child.

The second a man and women mutually decide to have sex, they are both agreeing to be equally responsible for any unforeseen accidents. It IS unfortunate that should a pregnancy occur, ONLY the woman can incubate it (thus part of the responsibility is unfairly ONLY hers yet unavoidable), but none the less, it is part of the mutual agreement of having sex.

That being said, if the women dies giving birth even though she was deemed fit to bare a child. Then yes, too bad for her. She knew that was a risk she had to bare alone when she got pregnant, just like every other women in the world who gets pregnant, willingly or not.

To deny the father this right is to deny the ownership of the baby as being equally between the father and mother. If you deny this right, then no fathers have any responsibility to any birth they cause legally (not rape).

[Deleted]

As has been said no doubt several times.

Both want the baby, there is no problem both get what they want.
Both want an abortion, there is no problem both get what they want.

Its the split decisions;
If the man wants the baby aborted but the woman wants it, then the man should be able to opt out of having any rights to see his child and the responsibility of having a baby.The woman is making a life decision to affect her own life,not his. This has exactly the same effect as men being able to veto abortions, all be it if men could veto abortions they control a woman's life for 9 months, if a woman ignores a man's request for an abortion she controls his life for 18 years due to child support.

[Deleted]

I agree here. However, if a man does not want a child but would rather save the life of his unborn child rather than kill it though abortion (because he does not believe in abortion ethically), he should have the right to deny the abortion as long as it is deemed safe for the woman to bear the child.

No, he should not.

The second a man and women mutually decide to have sex, they are both agreeing to be equally responsible for any unforeseen accidents. It IS unfortunate that should a pregnancy occur, ONLY the woman can incubate it (thus part of the responsibility is unfairly ONLY hers yet unavoidable), but none the less, it is part of the mutual agreement of having sex.

That doesn't give the man the right to control the womans body.

That being said, if the women dies giving birth even though she was deemed fit to bare a child. Then yes, too bad for her. She knew that was a risk she had to bare alone when she got pregnant, just like every other women in the world who gets pregnant, willingly or not.

You what? If a woman is forced to give birth, by a man, that kills her then I'd call that murder.

To deny the father this right is to deny the ownership of the baby as being equally between the father and mother. If you deny this right, then no fathers have any responsibility to any birth they cause legally (not rape).

The fathers right ends where a violation of the woman begins.

[Varyk]

If a woman gives birth to a baby, and it lives with the father (for whatever reason) and not the mother, is she required to pay child support?

[ImpTaimer]

Nope.

The father only has a say in if he should take care of the child and/or pay alimony or not.

Until that baby comes out of her womb and detached from the umbilical alive and kicking, the father has no say. It's her body, not his. It's that simple.

I would hate to be the man or woman in the society that says otherwise.

[LiiLoSNK]

So if I tell you you HAVE to eat this cookie and you have to comply that isn't forcing you to eat it? Just because currently you can make me pay for the cookie you are eating doesn't mean I wouldn't be forcing you t eat it.

Not really understanding how that can be taken any other way.

That is the most confusing out of place analogy ever. I'm not forcing you to eat cookies (have babies). I'm saying you can't make the cookies if i'm not willing to supply my half of the cooking ingredients. The cookies are under a joint copyright and without my approval, you have to terminate bakery of a formentioned cookies.

[Myrrar]

If a woman gives birth to a baby, and it lives with the father (for whatever reason) and not the mother, is she required to pay child support?

Currently law wise, yes. Unless she opts out of being in the child's life before it's born thats how it should be.