Oklahoma : Women who want an abortion face needing the father’s written consent

[Faenskap]

It is the women's body.

Gestation takes place inside the women's body,.

She is at risk for life-threatening conditions or sudden death due to eclampsia or amniotic embolism.

It is her body that will bear the stress of pregnancy.

It is her that will possibly bear the brunt of post-partum depression.

It is her that can possibly form a rectovaginal fistula during childbirth which is both painful and unpleasant.

What did the father donate to this whole process? Oh yeah a single sperm and not having to endure any of the aforementioned. I haven't even listed half of the things a woman goes through before and after pregnancy and what else can go wrong.

It's great that you want to champion father's right but they will never ever be equal or supersede a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

You wrote it better than me! I wish the actual physical and mental issues women face during pregnancy/birth would be a bigger part of the abortion dilemma, but it saddens me that it isn't the case.

And these rich Christian men in suits with a posh education, do they assume that every woman out there will just automatically become good mothers? Because I can testify that isn't the case.

[Tinykong]

I don't think having children you can't afford is the least bit responsible, but this isn't about whether the mother was responsible or not.

The mother is responsible for bringing the pregnancy to term as it is her choice.

[Hopebringer]

I would define Medical Treatment as something that is required not something you opt into.

I do, somewhat, applaud this motion. I believe, in a situation where a man impregnates the woman, that the man should equally be able to walk away completely from the situation if he chooses to do so in the same way that the woman, as of this moment, can choose, on her own, to get an abortion without consulting with the man.

[Total Crica]

Yet, have you ever thought of that??

Do you know Women? I mean beyond some co-worker or "friend-of-a-friend"?

If so, I'm sure you would, and should know that if situations were the other way 'round, women would yell & scream & fight for their rights to "half" of a baby.


And since when the fuck has that tired argument of "oh it's their body" ever stopped, or solved anything?
It takes TWO to make a baby.. (and you know damn well I'm not talking about Invetro. or any other procedure, obviously in that case, it's pretty clear)
Barring all that shit. It takes Two. Physically, one MUST carry. Any one. But just one. Does that negate ANY contribution from the one that does not carry??
Would the situation be different if nature made the woman carry for 4 & 1/2 months, and then (by some weird fuck of a twist of nature) the man has to carry for 4 & 1/2 months?

I don't fucking think so.

That whole "its my body!" argument is flawed from birth, and should be aborted at conception.

I am a 44 year old woman. I came from a family that had both men and women in it as far back as my great granny and pappy that I was able to know and as far forward as my brother and his SO and kids that I was able to know.

So, yes, I know women.

As for solving a problem, there must be a problem to solve.

Here is a problem for you to solve:

Someone wants to force you to use your body for their own reasons.

How do you solve this problem?

[Hopebringer]

Father rights have long been flung completely out the window since like 1880ies because people assume the child is entirely the right of the mother. Ironically, we then invented child support, and then despite the father having no legal rights to the child, he is legally bound to pay for it.

Despite being constantly crushed by Feminists, this idea is gaining traction, Men are shackled to childbirth by what is basically fiscal slavery, and in some countries can't even ask for Paternal tests.

What the OP suggests is wrong, but suggested a woman has the right to control a mans fiscal future for 18 years simply because of what grows in her vajayjay is utterly stupid and sexist.

On so many levels agree with the section of your statement I've formatted as bold.

[Total Crica]

She should lose the right to parenthood.

And she will. If she can't pay. (payment can come in the form of "physically taking care of the child", not just tossing money at it)

That doesn't solve the issue of you wanting society to pay for the risk you took before you do.

[shonist]

lol americans, father can gtfo.

[Violent]

I am a 44 year old woman. I came from a family that had both men and women in it as far back as my great granny and pappy that I was able to know and as far forward as my brother and his SO and kids that I was able to know.

So, yes, I know women.

As for solving a problem, there must be a problem to solve.

Here is a problem for you to solve:

Someone wants to force you to use your body for their own reasons.

How do you solve this problem?

See? There's your flaw right there...

Women are NOT being chained down in basements and used to pop out as many kids against their will as their bodies will manage.
Women are not being FARMED for their eggs & built-in incubation room.

The problem is that some of you look at child-birth or a woman being pregnant as JUST that. And quite frankly it is a disgusting insult to men. Do it your fuckin selves then if you feel that's the way it's happening.. Find your own sperm, find your own money.


If a Woman and a Man lie down and make a baby together, she is IN NO WAY "forced" into anything and FREELY makes the decision to. (AGAIN, Barring some wired, wrong, or fucked up situation)

How is anything up to JUST the woman.. But yet, you then have the double standard to say that the Woman is being used or forced in some way!?

HOW THE FUCK, is that even possible?

[Total Crica]

See? There's your flaw right there...

Women are NOT being chained down in basements and used to pop out as many kids against their will as their bodies will manage.
Women are not being FARMED for their eggs & built-in incubation room.

The problem is that some of you look at child-birth or a woman being pregnant as JUST that. And quite frankly it is a disgusting insult to men. Do it your fuckin selves then if you feel that's the way it's happening.. Find your own sperm, find your own money.


If a Woman and a Man lie down and make a baby together, she is IN NO WAY "forced" into anything and FREELY makes the decision to. (AGAIN, Barring some wired, wrong, or fucked up situation)

How is anything up to JUST the woman.. But yet, you then have the double standard to say that the Woman is being used or forced in some way!?

HOW THE FUCK, is that even possible?

Your body being forced to remain pregnant, how do you solve that problem?

And yes, if you don't allow a pregnant woman's body to stop being pregnant if she wishes it to then you are forcing her body to remain pregnant against her will.

It would be the same as forcing you to use your body continue to help someone you started to help even if you wanted to stop using your body.

[Tinykong]

Let's keep pretending we don't understand how sex and pregnancy work.

Until you understand that a pregnancy doesn't have to result in a baby, you are incapable of making an argument here.

[Elliebae]

This is not an attempt to influence anybody's views on this issue, it's very complicated and can easily go both ways - I would pray that people are responsible in cases of consensual sex to not get pregnant when not wanting a child. Just wanted to a share a personal story that shows the damage that can be caused to the father in this issue.

Two years ago my life was derailed when I awoke early in the morning to hear my SO driving away, she did not answer her phone and did not tell me where she was going. She was 18 weeks pregnant at the time. Two days later she came back in the early afternoon , no longer pregnant , packed up her stuff and left the home. Prior to this discussions were had about potentially adopting , and I voiced my opinion against abortion, and also made it known I would make a 100% effort in raising the child. We were young, still in school and both of us had goals that would be challenged through having a child, I was honest and let her know I felt it would be extremely difficult , however rewarding, and if we were scared that we couldn't meet the challenge, adoption to a more prepared family was always an option. She decided that it was , after all, her body to do what she wanted with and going through a pregnancy was something she wasn't prepared to go through with, ignoring my own words against abortion. Hard to argue with that, it is her body to do with what she wants - however my feelings weren't considered, the fact I was looking forward to a child didn't matter, it was her body her decision, the only problem I have with it is that she made the choice to have sex with me, and it was only because of me that she got pregnant, shouldn't that decision be made prior to the act of sex via contraception? (really don't want to get into the ethics of this, and want to keep this about how it made me feel so I'll end here about what's right and wrong about this, because this argument can literally go on forever)
The past two years of my life have been the absolute worst you can imagine, I have never been so depressed in my life, I have been suicidal and have seen no hope for my future that was once so clear to me. I was a military Veteran with a clear sense of direction, and high hopes and goals for myself - I dropped out of school, started abusing drugs and have adopted a very negative attitude about life, I could not do homework go to class or socialize at all, my mind was consumed by thoughts of what had happened, how I wanted things to be different and I needed to do anything I could to take my mind off of it. Fortunately I am on a more positive direction in the past month or so, and I am starting to see light at the end of this tunnel of despair this situation has caused me. Sometimes I cry when I see friends on facebook with their newborns and wonder what could of been. I often think I would of been a great father, and would of been capable of raising the child on my own. I would do anything to go back in time and stop her from walking out of the door that morning. My life would be 100% different if a law like this was in my state at the time this happened, and our society would have added to it, two more productive, happy, and good people - as for her, maybe having that child would of ruined her life as much as her aborting it has ruined mine but I can't see how going through the pregnancy could do that - but I am not one to say it couldn't, though I'll go with a utilitarian approach and say 2 happy people > 1 .

Sorry for any errors, or illogical flow in my writing - I wrote this quick and didn't proofread it, hopefully it makes sense for some people, and hopefully some may get something from it.

[Total Crica]

Until you understand that a pregnancy doesn't have to result in a baby, you are incapable of making an argument here.

Until you understand that the only person able to decide that is a pregnant woman, then you are incapable of making any argument that a man's choice to risk her making a decision he won't agree with should be a choice society pays for and not her and him.

- - - Updated - - -

I would pray that people are responsible in cases of consensual sex to not get pregnant when not wanting a child.

Praying isn't going to do anything about the fact that ALL current forms of contraception can fail, thereby ensuring that anytime they have sex, a pregnancy can happen, and that if it does, a woman can't be forced to remain pregnant.

There is no talking about it because forcing her to remain pregnant is not an option, just as forcing a man to continue to use their body is not an option.

Either a man wants to accept the risk he could be a father or he doesn't and can decide that at any time before he takes the risk.

He doesn't get to force her to remain pregnant, she doesn't get to force him to risk being a father.

[Tinykong]

Can you please point out where I said pregnancy must result in a baby? I can think of at several places in this thread, including at least one response to you, where I quite clearly indicated the opposite. It's a bit strange that you are convinced I don't understand basic biological function.

You're claiming that consent to sex is consent to parenthood. It's not.

You're making the hypocritical argument that it is consent for a man, but not for a woman.

There are four scenarios for a pregnancy:

Woman and man want baby, baby is born.
Woman and man don't want baby, pregnancy is aborted.
Woman doesn't want baby, man does, pregnancy is aborted.
Woman wants baby, man doesn't, baby is born and man is responsible.

The argument being made against your position that consent to sex is consent to parenthood is that men should have the legal means to dissolve their responsibility to a child similar to how a woman can.

If a woman doesn't want to have a baby, she can abort it. If a man doesn't want to be a father, he should be allowed to say "I don't consent to this" and not be responsible for it. If the mother wants to be a single mother, that is her choice. If she doesn't, that is also her choice. Neither persons choice is forced on the other party, and everyone has a choice.

- - - Updated - - -

Until you understand that the only person able to decide that is a pregnant woman, then you are incapable of making any argument that a man's choice to risk her making a decision he won't agree with should be a choice society pays for and not her and him.

The father's consent to parenthood (and we're talking about the legal obligation here, not the biological qualification of "you fathered a child") should be separate from the woman's consent to parenthood.

Neither party should be able to force the other party into something they didn't consent to.

[Machismo]

You're claiming that consent to sex is consent to parenthood. It's not.

You're making the hypocritical argument that it is consent for a man, but not for a woman.

There are four scenarios for a pregnancy:

Woman and man want baby, baby is born.
Woman and man don't want baby, pregnancy is aborted.
Woman doesn't want baby, man does, pregnancy is aborted.
Woman wants baby, man doesn't, baby is born and man is responsible.

The argument being made against your position that consent to sex is consent to parenthood is that men should have the legal means to dissolve their responsibility to a child similar to how a woman can.

If a woman doesn't want to have a baby, she can abort it. If a man doesn't want to be a father, he should be allowed to say "I don't consent to this" and not be responsible for it. If the mother wants to be a single mother, that is her choice. If she doesn't, that is also her choice. Neither persons choice is forced on the other party, and everyone has a choice.

The last option is incorrect. Both people are responsible. It's exactly the same as the first one, because it also involves the exact same willful action.

[Tinykong]

The last option is incorrect. Both people are responsible. It's exactly the same as the first one, because it also involves the exact same willful action.

It should be assumed that someone who wants something is responsible for it.

[Elliebae]

Until you understand that the only person able to decide that is a pregnant woman, then you are incapable of making any argument that a man's choice to risk her making a decision he won't agree with should be a choice society pays for and not her and him.

- - - Updated - - -



Praying isn't going to do anything about the fact that ALL current forms of contraception can fail, thereby ensuring that anytime they have sex, a pregnancy can happen.

Excuse me but abstinence is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy. Your argument is invalid.

[Tinykong]

No, I'm not claiming that. I explicitly told you I'm not claiming that the last time you incorrectly tried to accuse me of that. I said consenting to an action is consenting to the risks of that action and there's no way to meaningfully consent otherwise. "Risk" is a word that intrinsically implies uncertainty, contrary to your claim that I think parenthood is a necessary outcome of pregnancy.

Having a baby is not a "risk" of sex, because pregnancy doesn't have to result in a baby. The same logic used to justify why a woman can have an abortion is valid for why a father should be able to have a legal abortion, the only counter argument is an appeal to emotion, which you are following up with here:

A man's choice to not be a father is forced on the child, who like it or not is a necessary consideration, and on society. All of this talk of choice while ignoring the financial burden you helped create is disingenuous at best. You can't ignore the facts just because they're inconvenient to your argument and the fact is that you're demanding society pick up the tab for the consequences of your actions, when those actions provide no benefit to society. You may as well demand that we buy you a Lamborghini because it would be fun, but you don't want to pay for it.

The woman who decided to carry the pregnancy to term created the financial burden to society. She could have aborted or given the baby up for adoption, but chose not to.

[Total Crica]

Excuse me but abstinence is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy. Your argument is invalid.

It would be, but we are talking about the choices people make, not the ones people don't make.

- - - Updated - - -

Neither party should be able to force the other party into something they didn't consent to

No one forced a man to willingly risk a woman deciding to have his child.

[Tinykong]

No one forced a man to willingly risk a woman deciding to have his child.

These arguments can have a few words changed, and suddenly, abortion is illegal.

The mental gymnastics people will go through to justify their opinions never cease to amaze me.

[Violent]

Your body being forced to remain pregnant, how do you solve that problem?

And yes, if you don't allow a pregnant woman's body to stop being pregnant if she wishes it to then you are forcing her body to remain pregnant against her will.

It would be the same as forcing you to use your body continue to help someone you started to help even if you wanted to stop using your body.

See, this form of thinking of yours is not something new. Especially with Fems. pushing harder for equality for them, (which is already there) now a days.
Your view is very 1950's, 60's.

It's traveled. Has a lot of miles on it and like the people who grew up in that timing, is on it's way out.
And until you realize that and stop trying to misplace blame on Men. You'll have to keep fighting and struggling to get your misinformed views acknowledged.


If you lay down and get pregnant, it's no man or woman forcing you to carry anything. It's Nature. It's Biology. If you did not want to open that door, and go down that road, you should have chose to have safe(er) sex. Period. You didn't. You, AND the Man, BOTH then, Because you BOTH helped in the creation of it. Are obligated and responsible.

Just because it's her body, doesn't mean you have the right, to then take away the rights of the other person involved. Again. One of you HAS to carry it. You can't BOTH carry, because Nature does not work that way.

So because Nature makes child birth efficient, that then takes away the rights of the Man?

How the fuck do you see that??

And then okay, think about that.. What if neither carries? neither the Man or Woman, but a Tank.

One wants to abort, the other doesn't. Neither persons body is involved at all, except in the beginning to acquire genetic material from.

How does the rights & desires of the female > the Mans???



If anything a woman only provides an egg & environment.

Technically sperm is already alive and moving.. It has to literally SWIM and out compete the others, and make it in the egg to grow into a fetus.

How then, does that living sperm, that came from the MAN, switch to being the Woman's ???

Literally, the Man provides the ACTUAL life. The Woman only provides an egg and Incubates for 9 months.

Life starts with the Man.