View Poll Results: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to abort his baby?

Voters
101. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, but only during the first 20 weeks, same as a woman.

    3 2.97%
  • Yes, but only during the initial period when a non-invasive technique works.

    0 0%
  • No, but he should have the right to be legally relieved of all responsibility.

    50 49.50%
  • NO! Only the woman has this right and he remains responsible.

    21 20.79%
  • I oppose all abortion, so neither have the right.

    22 21.78%
  • I Don't Know.

    5 4.95%
Page 135 of 150 FirstFirst ... 3585125133134135136137145 ... LastLast
Results 1,341 to 1,350 of 1494

Thread: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

  1. #1341
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    I don't support violating a person's fundamental human liberties to save tax money. What other liberties do you support suspending in order to save the State money?
    There is no fundamental human liberty to not support your child
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #1342
    Sage
    Phys251's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    12,734

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    I don't buy the whole "they could have kept their legs shut" thing for either sex. People are allowed to have intimacy in their lives without being punished by force birthing or force servitude.
    Which is exactly what the misogynists don't accept, at least for women.
    "A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons." --Hillary Rodham Clinton
    "Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections." --Mitt Romney

  3. #1343
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    10-24-13 @ 02:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    913

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Point to anything in your messages on this topic that show you give the slightest damn about the child and you may have a point.


    Messages?

    I posted one message.

    That one message said I opposed all abortion.

    How you took that to mean I don't give the slightest damn about children is beyond me.

  4. #1344
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    You said that "having sex is not consenting to have a child." Then you went on about custody. So you did not clearly answer the question at all.

    So answer this simple question, yes or no:

    Should a man who does not "consent to have a child" be on the hook for supporting that child if the woman decides to have it?

    Once you've answered with a simple yes or no (because that's all that's required), if the answer is yes, tell me why he should be forced to support a child he did not consent to.

    (This is your opportunity to be crystal clear and dispel any possible confusion about your position.)
    Yes, you are on the hook. And I will tell you why. Every situation where at least one parent retains custody, both parents retain some responsibility for that child. Unless it is completely given up, such as with adoption, both are still responsible. Regardless of which parent has custody. Regardless of how either parent feels about it. That's how the law works. There are sometimes exceptions, based on specific circumstances.

    What you are seeking is a special exception, simply for being male, based on the societal bias that women should be the ones raising children. You not only want to enjoy the privilege where that is not expected of you, but add more privilege onto it where you don't even have to support the child. You are only seeking to make gender disparity worse. You want to really shift it around? You want to prove something for men? Get custody yourself. And then don't make her pay any support. Then you can come back and whine about things being unfair. As it stands, you're just trying to benefit even more from stripping women of their choices.

    You do not get to opt out unilaterally any more than she does. The two of you together could agree that you don't have any part in supporting the child. The two of you together could agree to give the child up. But you do not get a special dispensation that she does not, simply for being male.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #1345
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,499

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Is CONDITIONAL, UNILATERAL CONTROL to decide the fate of a conception SLANTED? YES!

    Is CONDITIONAL, UNILATERAL CONTROL to decide the fate of a conception UNFAIR? YES!


    And it's especially unfair to a kid born into Freak World where one of it's creators don't give a **** about its welfare.

    The standing provisions that allow unilateral control to exist is built around "best interest"...period.

    As of today there is no existing legal device to make it fair.

    But this is what's most amazing about this thread:

    All of the bitching in the past 1343 post...and not one single person has come up with a legal solution or legislated solution with is TRULY EQUITABLE. WHY?

    PUT THE **** UP OR SHUT THE **** UP! What is a solution in which no party involved is injured (meaning welfare compromised) by the decision of the other?

    I posted earlier that a LEGALLY BINDING SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP CONTRACT, which can define all of the variable which two people AGREE is the only way I can think of to level the equality issue. And even that doesn't guarantee that one of the parties involved won't be injured from the agreement. But it will remove the fundamental legal dispute about what happens when an unintended conception occurs. And this process removes government from intervention...unless the contract is broken. Then a court action will occur.

  6. #1346
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:41 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,545

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Yes, you are on the hook. And I will tell you why. Every situation where at least one parent retains custody, both parents retain some responsibility for that child. Unless it is completely given up, such as with adoption, both are still responsible. Regardless of which parent has custody. Regardless of how either parent feels about it. That's how the law works. There are sometimes exceptions, based on specific circumstances.
    What you're saying is that they should be on the hook because they currently are on the hook.

    What you are seeking is a special exception, simply for being male, based on the societal bias that women should be the ones raising children.
    That's poppycock; it's not what I'm saying in the slightest.

    What I'm saying is that if a woman decides to have and keep the child, when she doesn't have to, putting an unwilling father on the hook for it is hypocritical when the woman has the absolute choice to be a mother or not.

    It has nothing whatsoever to do with the "bias" that women should be raising the child. If she has the child, it's entirely by her own choice.


    You do not get to opt out unilaterally any more than she does.
    She has the absolute right to opt out, by aborting the child. At no point does the man have that ability.

    You say "having sex is not consenting to have a child," but when you put the man on the hook for the woman's sole decision to have the child, you very much say that it IS so consenting.

    There's no "special privilege" about it, and in fact, it's the woman who has the "special privilege," because she alone is the one who decides if the child is born or not. She's making the decision to be a parent for both.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  7. #1347
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    This isn't just a post to you, minnie, but to a lot of people who seem unclear about what is being discussed here.

    As far as I am understanding it, we are discussing men relinquishing ALL parental rights, and not paying child support.

    That is different from simply being a non-custodial parent. A non-custodial parent still has legal rights to the child, and thus may pay child support if requested. They are still, oficially, a parent -- just not one the child is living with on a significant basis.

    We're discussing a man who basically gives up his child for "adoption" (presumably to the woman, or perhaps to someone else if she doesn't want it either). He has relinquished all of his parental rights.

    A woman who gives up all rights to a child does not pay child support.

    What we're arguing about here is, basically, the fact that men are generally not allowed to give up parental rights.
    No we're not. A man can always "give up parental rights."

    We are discussing the ability for a man to unilaterally eliminate all his parental obligations towards his biological child. He can give up his "rights."

    Any person can give up his/her rights. What he can't eliminate is parental obligation, nor can she, once the child is born.

  8. #1348
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by specklebang View Post
    No. I'm also pro-choice but that baby doesn't grow inside my body. If I didn't want a baby, I could have put my horse in a trojan. Or I could have been "fixed" (I am). Once I fire my missle then I'm responsible for the result even though it's not growing up in MY refugee camp
    That argument is a 2 way street.

    But I guess to be inline with the topic, I'm prolife and I say neither side gets reprieve. Wrap it up or accept the consequences.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #1349
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,554
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    I will overlook your repeated appeals to emotion and veiled ad hominem "maoist" statements and focus on the points you raise.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    A man and a woman sign a loan to buy a car together. BUT then the woman leave and takes the car with her, and there is no clue where the car is at - yet the man is still liable for the loan.
    Here is where your argument first fails. In order to buy a car together (as you propose) both parties must not only agree they wish to own a car, they must also agree to go through all the legal processes required to assume joint custody and pay for it. As I've already pointed out in the comment you quoted, sex is neither an agreement to conception nor a guarantee a baby will be born.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    HOW THE HELL IS THAT FAIR?! OMG the INJUSTICE! Obviously the man should be able to stop making payments and have the government pay the loan. Why should the government pay the loan? Because it is unfair that he has to.
    It is fair because the two parties have actually agreed to enter into such a contract. Here is where your second fail occurs. There are rules of joint property ownership and the male does have legal recourse to alleviate his share of the financial burden in the event the female attempts to assert full ownership of joint property. This does not occur when a female makes a unilateral decision about having a baby or not, or abandoning the male in order to have the baby and put it up for immediate adoption.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    That is essentially what you and many others are claiming. A man's child is absolutely nothing other than an object the woman and man feud over. If the man loses the feud, then the child becomes the governments/MY responsibility.
    You appear to be arguing from an essentially pro-life position. However, the fact remains that under current law during a clearly defined iniital period a woman has the absolute right to abort the baby. Your third fail is forgetting that under current state laws a woman has the right to legal abandonment (baby drop off) in some states, and immediate abandonment (giving it to the hospital to place in an orphanage) in others. In these scenarios even a pro-life woman can have the baby and then opt-out for both parties merely by not informing the male she was ever pregnant and then placing it up for immediate adoption.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Finally, apparently you see no difference between a ZEF and a 10 year old child. Thus, you conclude if the woman can abort the ZEF her parental duties during the first few months of pregnancy, then the man gets to abort his parental obligations for his child for 18 years after birth. And you call that "fairness." Explain how your view is fair to the child?
    I am Pro-Choice! Of course I find a difference between a "ZEF" and a 10 year old child. The first is only a "potential" child and the law allows a woman the absolute right to abort during the initial stages of it's development in the womb. The second is a human being fully protected under the same laws that protect you and I from abuse, assault, murder, etc. That was your fourth fail.

    Beyond that we do not know the condition of this "10 year-old child." Did the parent(s) put him up for adoption at birth? Did the mother abandon the father and choose to raise the child alone? Did the parents marry and elect to try to care for the 10 year-old together? Was there a divorce? Are one or both parents still alive? There are all sorts of other conitions we would need to know to discuss a "10 year-old child" that your overly simplistic appeal to emotion fails to provide for a complete analysis of "explain how the view is fair to the child." That was your final fail.

    Your false analogy fails, sorry.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 09-20-13 at 04:10 PM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  10. #1350
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,147

    Re: Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    No we're not. A man can always "give up parental rights."

    We are discussing the ability for a man to unilaterally eliminate all his parental obligations towards his biological child. He can give up his "rights."

    Any person can give up his/her rights. What he can't eliminate is parental obligation, nor can she, once the child is born.
    Yes, she can. She can sign that baby over, someone will take it away to be put up for adoption, and she will have no further obligation towards it. Happens every day.

    Why is he beholden to her demands, where she isn't even beholden to the child?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •