Should men have the right, for legal-abortion?

[Halyon]

Yes because the government knows exactly what males DNA to test to see if it matches the baby...
if she tells them she doesn't know who the father is, does she get strung up and beaten until she gives a name?
Or do they just ask if she's sure and leave it up to her to tell them...

you seem to be missing the whole point of what Davillage is saying, which is, regardless of if she knows the fathers name or not, how in the bloody heck is anyone going to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt if she denies knowledge???


---

OT: Yes, Men should be able to opt out.
No responsibilities, and ABSOLUTELY NO privileges.
No seeing the kid, no helping raise the kid, no asking about the kid(unless in contact with mother asking as anyone else would.)

if she can abort without his permission why can't he opt to not have anything to do with it... :/

Medical records most likely, I dunno. Didn't get to discuss it much over dinner, although I did try to get it clarified. And I said a name is not always needed, that's what I know, the rest is uncertain, so I won't press that argument further. Throw in a murder and it could be an interesting crime episode on TV. I'll take this defeat due to lack of more knowledge about it.

Regardless of that, governments aren't known for being very willing to part with their money, that was the main argument I wanted out of that really.

It's going off on a tangent either way, so I'm not particularly motivated to do research on it right now, as it isn't all that relevant to the original argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Only if you are Male!
Because woman would throw children in trash bins if we wouldnt allow them the easy opt out.

Its no can of worms its the elefant in the Room.

Because some woman are too dumb to lie about the father and give them up for abortion we gave all woman the legal framework to drop all responsibillity without any consequences.

Thats like handing out free prostitution coupons to prevent rape.

I think you need a break.

[Karadros]

Only if you are Male!
Because woman would throw children in trash bins if we wouldnt allow them the easy opt out.

Its no can of worms its the elefant in the Room.

Because some woman are too dumb to lie about the father and give them up for abortion we gave all woman the legal framework to drop all responsibillity without any consequences.

Thats like handing out free prostitution coupons to prevent rape.

Rape is horrible the dumping of infants in Trashbins more getting a fucking gender biased reward for the possibillity is horrendous.

http://i.imgur.com/EmGrj1s.gif

Infracted - please post constructively

[KeirAdish]

Medical records most likely, I dunno. Didn't get to discuss it much over dinner, although I did try to get it clarified. And I said a name is not always needed, that's what I know, the rest is uncertain, so I won't press that argument further. Throw in a murder and it could be an interesting crime episode on TV. I'll take this defeat due to lack of more knowledge about it.

Regardless of that, governments aren't known for being very willing to part with their money, that was the main argument I wanted out of that really.

It's going off on a tangent either way, so I'm not particularly motivated to do research on it right now, as it isn't all that relevant to the original argument.

hmm, True, though DNA tests like that(from medical records) take a lot more time than TV/Movies would indicate and could hold up the court by an awful long time.

But I unno, My government seems perfectly happy to let its money go, as long as its not to those in need... >_> lol
Wrong topic for that discussion however.

[Halyon]

hmm, True, though DNA tests like that(from medical records) take a lot more time than TV/Movies would indicate and could hold up the court by an awful long time.

But I unno, My government seems perfectly happy to let its money go, as long as its not to those in need... >_> lol
Wrong topic for that discussion however.

Well, since when had the government been known for being effective? Especially for those who're in need. I know all about that, had enough scuffles of my own in that department, but completely unrelated to the issue at hand, and entirely anecdotal, so who cares, eh.

[Arcanist]

So what's the "right" thing? Bringing a child into poverty and burdening unwilling third parties as well as society as a whole? Because some woman, in her arrogance, wouldn't do the necessary thing and seeks all others to pay for HER choice?

[Zecora]

So what's the "right" thing? Bringing a child into poverty and burdening unwilling third parties as well as society as a whole? Because some woman, in her arrogance, wouldn't do the necessary thing and seeks all others to pay for HER choice?

There's no third party in this.The third party only enters the equation when someone selfish and irresponsible enough dodges the child support and leaves the tax payers with the bill.

[PizzaSHARK]

There would not be any of those mothers or children or fathers if the woman did what someone living in poverty should do.

Living in poverty tends to be hand in hand with lack of education.

Particularly here in the US, we aren't even taught about contraceptives and other means of avoiding pregnancy in school - we just get a little bit about how pregnancy works, and they try to scare us into not having sex by talking about STDs, and that's about it.

Kids aren't taught where to get rubbers or how to use them, or where to get the pill (and how to use it properly), or anything like that. So we should be surprised when teenagers (particularly poor ones) are getting pregnant?

[pucGG]

If the man can prove that the woman punctured wholes in the condom or there's reasonable doubt as to whether she lied about being on the pill or other preventions, I think it's fair that the man can file for fraud and by rule of court be relinquished of his duties towards the mother and the child.

I don't support the idea that a man can opt out of child support of a baby he had willingly (at the time) for any reason.

[Tzalix]

hmm, True, though DNA tests like that(from medical records) take a lot more time than TV/Movies would indicate and could hold up the court by an awful long time.

And are quite expensive to perform.

[RicardoZ]

Isn't that what most men do anyway? I don't see any benefit to legally enabling deadbeat dads. If you're not responsible enough to handle the consequences of sex, then don't have it.

[dez1216]

And it today's modern day world (we have doctors now, did you hear?) that decision would be made long before birth. Honestly, you have a better chance of being struck by lightning than randomly being killed giving birth. The risk would be brought to your attention before you even go into labor.

There is a woman at my work, who prior to having her first child had no idea she would have issues with excessive bleeding. She was a female hockey player so she had many injuries and the like prior to getting pregnant but they healed fine and all was well so it's not some kind of blood issue or something that she would know about like hemophilia or something. When she gave birth to her first child she almost bled to death from it. She had to be given massive blood transfusions just to make it through. Apparently she is actually very prone to hemorrhaging. She had no idea prior, and nor did her doctors. So no, the decision is NOT always made long before birth. With her particular issue it even makes it extremely unsafe to have an abortion due to the risk of hemorrhaging. She ended up having 2 more children I believe, but at least after the first one the doctors knew about her issue and could be ready with transfusions and the like. But she was very close to death with her first child because of this issue.