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 146 of 150 FirstFirst ... 4696136144145146147148 ... LastLast
Results 1,451 to 1,460 of 1494

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

  1. #1451
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,550
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    I cannot state that all men do what I have done, but I can state with certainty that their actions were ones that they chose to engage in. Men have choices.
    Not quite correct. The male may have chosen to engage in sex, but as has been pointed out time and again this does not mean he has chosen to engage in the creation of a baby. Neither has the woman. Even you have argued in this very thread that conception does not produce a child until it is born.

    Life offers choices, true. I can opt for chocolate or vanilla ice cream; I can live in New York or Los Angeles. Such choices often result in unexpected consequences like food poisoning, getting mugged in Central Park, or car-jacked in Hollywood. I did not CHOOSE to be poisoned, mugged, or car-jacked simply because I chose to eat ice cream or live in one of those cities.

    Somehow, under your logic, a man has no obligations and responsibilities until the child is actually born. Then suddenly he is fully obligated simply because he had sex with a woman, even if he used contraceptives which clearly indicated he had NO intention of having a child. Even if he was no longer involved with the woman and thus unaware, suddenly she can present him with a child and demand he take full responsibility.

    When you've talked about the "law requires" you are making a fallacious appeal to the consequence, because LAW can be changed. When you state "there is a child' you are making an appeal to emotion; ignoring many instances where children are raised and fully supported by a single parent alone. When you state he must accept responsibility simply by having sex, you are merely affirming the consequent; i.e. If he has sex he might have a baby, he has sex; therefore he agrees to having a baby.

    All fallacies and none address the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And I focus on child support because that was the issue your OP focused on
    I repeat, incorrect. That is what YOU think the focus is on, primarily because it is the most obvious concern men have when dealing with a unwanted child. It is not the ONLY concern as my OP pointed out:

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    In the alternative, should he be granted relief from all legal responsibility if it is his clearly stated wish to abort but the woman decides not to?

    The dilemma occurs when the woman unilaterally decides to have the baby, even when the male does not wish to accept that long-term responsibility.

    When a woman makes the unilateral decision to keep the baby this then compels lifelong legal and emotional obligations on the part of the unwilling father. This creates resentment and recriminations in both parties. By attempting to force the man to marry and/or support both her and the child this only serves to create a negative environment for all concerned, especially for any child to grow up in.
    It is not only the child support issue, it is all the emotional and legal baggage that comes with it; as well as all the other emotional and personal responsibility that comes with dealing with the existence of ones child.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 09-24-13 at 06:21 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.

  2. #1452
    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 Captain Adverse View Post
    Not quite correct. The male may have chosen to engage in sex, but as has been pointed out time and again this does not mean he has chosen to engage in the creation of a baby. Neither has the woman. Even you have argued in this very thread that conception does not produce a child until it is born.

    Life offers choices, true. I can opt for chocolate or vanilla ice cream; I can live in New York or Los Angeles. Such choices often result in unexpected consequences like food poisoning, getting mugged in Central Park, or car-jacked in Hollywood. I did not CHOOSE to be poisoned, mugged, or car-jacked simply because I chose to eat ice cream or live in one of those cities.
    Correct! A person can make choices without the consequences being intended.

    However, the responsibility to support ones' child is not contingent upon intent. Both mother and father have such a responsibility regardless of intent.


    Somehow, under your logic, a man has no obligations and responsibilities until the child is actually born. Then suddenly he is fully obligated simply because he had sex with a woman,
    Untrue. Having sex with the mother is not why he has the obligation. For all the law cares, the mother could have had sex with more than one man, but only one (ie the actual father) would be responsible for supporting the child produced.

    even if he used contraceptives which clearly indicated he had NO intention of having a child. Even if he was no longer involved with the woman and thus unaware, suddenly she can present him with a child and demand he take full responsibility.
    Again, intent has nothing to do with his responsibility. His further involvement (between the sex act and birth) has nothing to do with it. The responsibility is the result of the birth of *his* child.

    That's all there is to it.


    When you've talked about the "law requires" you are making a fallacious appeal to the consequence, because LAW can be changed. When you state "there is a child' you are making an appeal to emotion; ignoring many instances where children are raised and fully supported by a single parent alone. When you state he must accept responsibility simply by having sex, you are merely affirming the consequent; i.e. If he has sex he might have a baby, he has sex; therefore he agrees to having a baby.
    My position is not only supported by the law. Morality supports my position too.

    And it dishonest of you to misrepresent my position as "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby". If you rposition weren't so weak, you would not have to resort to such fictions.


    All fallacies and none address the issue.
    I prefer to call what you posted "fictions", not "fallacies"


    I repeat, incorrect. That is what YOU think the focus is on, primarily because it is the most obvious concern men have when dealing with a unwanted child. It is not the ONLY concern as my OP pointed out:
    This is just another fiction of yours.

    Your OP mentions two issues:

    1) Whether men should be able to force a woman to have an abortion, and

    2) Whether men should be able to dodge their responsibility to support their children

    When Jerry said the issue was about the first, you clearly and explicitly denied that, and went on to state that your real focus was on #2


    It is not only the child support issue, it is all the emotional and legal baggage that comes with it; as well as all the other emotional and personal responsibility that comes with the existence of ones child.
    You're still focusing on the fathers' responsibility to support his child.

    And you wonder why my posts have addressed the issue you focus on
    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..

  3. #1453
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,550
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Correct! A person can make choices without the consequences being intended.

    However, the responsibility to support ones' child is not contingent upon intent. Both mother and father have such a responsibility regardless of intent.
    And the mother can absolve BOTH of the obligation by unilaterally opting to abort, or have the baby without the male's knowledge and then simply put it up for adoption. This is the first point we keep going round and round on because you refuse to see the inequity and instead keep throwing up the same false objections (he will KNOW if she's pregnant, he can prevent adoption...).

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Untrue. Having sex with the mother is not why he has the obligation. For all the law cares, the mother could have had sex with more than one man, but only one (ie the actual father) would be responsible for supporting the child produced.
    Another evasion. We are not discussing issues of "paternity," the argument is based on the given: the child was produced by his sperm and her egg.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Again, intent has nothing to do with his responsibility. His further involvement (between the sex act and birth) has nothing to do with it. The responsibility is the result of the birth of *his* child.
    Again with the appeal to emotion.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    My position is not only supported by the law. Morality supports my position too.
    That is arguable. Being Pro-Choice, in MY moral view it is often better to cease a birth than to bring an unwanted child into the world to face all the repercussions of not being wanted by the parents.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And it dishonest of you to misrepresent my position as "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby". If you rposition weren't so weak, you would not have to resort to such fictions. I prefer to call what you posted "fictions", not "fallacies
    Please do not project a characteristic of debate that you yourself exhibit. There is no dishonesty on my part at all, you have made such statements in past comments. In fact, here is a chain that clearly shows your position on that point:

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    If you don't want to pay child support, keep it in your pants
    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Because the child was created as a result of a decision the father made
    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    If the father didn't stick it to the mother, she wouldn't be a mother
    As you can see from the above, not fictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    This is just another fiction of yours.

    Your OP mentions two issues:

    1) Whether men should be able to force a woman to have an abortion, and

    2) Whether men should be able to dodge their responsibility to support their children

    When Jerry said the issue was about the first, you clearly and explicitly denied that, and went on to state that your real focus was on #2
    Incorrect both in regards to what I stated to Jerry, and as to your assumptions:

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    This thread is about a Man's right to choose. More specifically; acknowledging that a woman has absolute control over her own body and thus the absolute right to decide whether or not to have a baby, it is really more focused on a man's right to choose NOT to take responsibility for HER unilateral decision.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    This thread is about forcing her to have an abortion, not carry to term.
    The thread title was meant to inflame interest, the actual thesis is made clear in the OP.
    Thus my actual statement to Jerry is in keeping with my recent statement to you, and so not another "fiction." If you are going to point out what I said, please be accurate because I will research it.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You're still focusing on the fathers' responsibility to support his child.

    And you wonder why my posts have addressed the issue you focus on
    I respond, as the OP, to many more members than you do here; addressing all sorts of arguments and counterarguments. I try to focus on each issue raised separately by each member rather than constantly repeating ALL points over and over since all may not apply to the current argument.

    Your focus is on child support. You have made the following claims:

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    There is no responsibility to support the unborn. The responsibility to support begins when the child is born
    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Mothers can not opt out of supporting their child

    Neither can fathers
    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Women are required to support their children

    They can't opt out, so men shouldn't be able to either
    It has been shown that there are several circumstances where the woman’s unilateral decision allows her to opt out of “required” child support; she can give up the baby for adoption at the hospital, at a baby-drop-off point; or by simply selling it to the highest adoption bidder. All this can be accomplished by keeping the male completely unaware of her pregnancy.

    True, she cannot do this without some difficulty if the male is aware she has had HIS baby. But that’s not the point. It is clear that she CAN opt-out of child support, while HE cannot.

    So, by your own words he should have a right to opt-out. Since Women are [NOT] required to support their children then men shouldn't be either.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 09-24-13 at 08:58 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.

  4. #1454
    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 Captain Adverse View Post
    And the mother can absolve BOTH of the obligation by unilaterally opting to abort, or have the baby without the male's knowledge and then simply put it up for adoption. This is the first point we keep going round and round on because you refuse to see the inequity and instead keep throwing up the same false objections (he will KNOW if she's pregnant, he can prevent adoption...).
    Wrong again

    An abortion does not absolve anyone of any responsibility because at the time of the adoption, there is no baby to be responsible for.

    And the father can prevent an adoption of his child.

    Another evasion. We are not discussing issues of "paternity," the argument is based on the given: the child was produced by his sperm and her egg.
    I don't think you know what the word "paternity" means.

    You claimed that a man can be held responsible for a child simply because he had sex with a woman who later gave birth to child. You are wrong.



    Again with the appeal to emotion.
    Wrong. It's an appeal to fact. It is a fact that the reason why father is responsible for supporting his child is because he is the father of that child, and not because he had sex with the mother.


    Please do not project a characteristic of debate that you yourself exhibit. There is no dishonesty on my part at all, you have made such statements in past comments. In fact, here is a chain that clearly shows your position on that point:




    As you can see from the above, not fictions.
    Those comments were in response to claims that men have no choice, and do not get to make any decisions. None of those statements say or mean "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby".

    Incorrect both in regards to what I stated to Jerry, and as to your assumptions:


    Thus my actual statement to Jerry is in keeping with my recent statement to you, and so not another "fiction." If you are going to point out what I said, please be accurate because I will research it.

    In the quote of yours that you just posted, you say that your OP was about the man's right to choose to not pay child support.

    I am right. You are wrong.

    I respond, as the OP, to many more members than you do here; addressing all sorts of arguments and counterarguments. I try to focus on each issue raised separately by each member rather than constantly repeating ALL points over and over since all may not apply to the current argument.

    Your focus is on child support. You have made the following claims:
    I did not deny that I have focused (though not exclusively) on child support. It is because that was what your OP, and your comments in this thread have focused on. Your own words (quoted above by you) prove that I am right, and you are wrong.



    It has been shown that there are several circumstances where the woman’s unilateral decision allows her to opt out of “required” child support; she can give up the baby for adoption at the hospital, at a baby-drop-off point; or by simply selling it to the highest adoption bidder. All this can be accomplished by keeping the male completely unaware of her pregnancy.
    Again, at the time of an abortion, there is no child support "required" and men can prevent a woman from adopting out his child.


    True, she cannot do this without some difficulty if the male is aware she has had HIS baby. But that’s not the point. It is clear that she CAN opt-out of child support, while HE cannot.
    Wrong again. Neither the mother nor the father can opt-out of child support for their children without the other parents cooperation and consent.


    So, by your own words he should have a right to opt-out. Since Women are [NOT] required to support their children then men shouldn't be either.
    Both parents are required to support their children so men do not and should not have the ability to opt out of paying child support.
    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..

  5. #1455
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,550
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    As usual you simply pick apart and piece together any points in order to make any argument you wish. You cannot see the forest for each tree you focus on.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    An abortion does not absolve anyone of any responsibility because at the time of the adoption, there is no baby to be responsible for.
    And the father can prevent an adoption of his child.
    If there was a birth, then there was a baby that was the “child” of the two parents. One parent can make the unilateral decision to put the child up for adoption. The father can only prevent this if he knows about the baby. People have already explained that the “father” does not always know.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You claimed that a man can be held responsible for a child simply because he had sex with a woman who later gave birth to child. You are wrong.
    Actually you and other’s are using that argument to support your position that merely because a man has sex which results in the birth of a baby he is morally and legally obligated to support the child. I’ve always recognized that this is current law, it is one of the issues concerning equity.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    It's an appeal to fact. It is a fact that the reason why father is responsible for supporting his child is because he is the father of that child, and not because he had sex with the mother.
    LOL! Nice attempt at evasion, but he is the father because the mother got a sperm donation, either directly from sex with him or through a sperm bank.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Those comments were in response to claims that men have no choice, and do not get to make any decisions. None of those statements say or mean "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby".
    Another attempt at evasion! Meanwhile those statements seem pretty clear to me and anyone else who read them. On the basis of your clear statements a man is the “father” because he donated his sperm through “deciding not to keep his legs closed and sticking it in the mother.” Your words, paraphrased.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    In the quote of yours that you just posted, you say that your OP was about the man's right to choose to not pay child support. I am right. You are wrong.
    Once more, simply asserting your opinion does not make it a fact. The quote does not refer to child support, but rather "responsibilities." Anyone following my arguments throughout this thread will see my position touches upon many areas of “responsibility” including child support. The thread is not only about child support.

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Both parents are required to support their children so men do not and should not have the ability to opt out of paying child support.
    Again with your assertions? Both parents are only required to support their child if, and only if, the woman has the child with his knowledge and at least one parent agrees to keep it. In that case under current law, the other parent is bound to provide child support if he/she earns enough to do so. However, if the woman has the child without the man’s knowledge, then she can unilaterally place the child up for adoption and neither parent is responsible for child support.

    Therefore, since the woman can opt-out of child support via unilateral adoption, then the man should be allowed to unilaterally opt-out of all care and responsibility for an unwanted child also. Since the woman can unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility at all via abortion, then the man should have legal recourse to unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility for an unawanted child.

    Now, there is no point in arguing around in circles. I have made clear, rational, logically sound and valid points. If and when you bring up a new point I'll be happy to address it.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 09-24-13 at 11:37 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.

  6. #1456
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:03 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,854

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

    Quote Originally Posted by opendebate View Post
    Apparently logic is subjective, because in my opinion your posts are lacking it.
    Logic isn't subjective. It is objective. My posts are filled with it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  7. #1457
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:03 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,854

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

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    And if a woman could chose to opt out or not opt out the man would more careful, selective and safe.

    Oh snap.... Women do have a choice but men are still being careless, non selective and are still having unprotected sex with women they don't want to have children with.
    Yeah.. they are being stupid. Agreed. That doesn't negate the argument though... Women should not be allowed to hold a man captive because of her choice. A choice that he has no say in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  8. #1458
    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 Captain Adverse View Post
    If there was a birth, then there was a baby that was the “child” of the two parents. One parent can make the unilateral decision to put the child up for adoption. The father can only prevent this if he knows about the baby. People have already explained that the “father” does not always know.
    If there is an abortion, there is no baby

    If the father does not know, that is the result of decisions he has made. Furthermore, if the child is put up for adoption, then the father does not have to pay child support, which is what your OP whined about.



    Actually you and other’s are using that argument to support your position that merely because a man has sex which results in the birth of a baby he is morally and legally obligated to support the child. I’ve always recognized that this is current law, it is one of the issues concerning equity.
    I'm glad to see that you've added the words "which results in the birth of a baby". Now, you're longer making up crap about how a man is responsible for a child simply because he had sex with the mother.

    And there's nothing unfair about it. Both parents had sex "which results in the birth of a baby" and both parents are responsible for supporting the child. How is that unfair?

    LOL! Nice attempt at evasion, but he is the father because the mother got a sperm donation, either directly from sex with him or through a sperm bank.
    This is dishonest. He is not the father merely because he ejaculated inside of her. He is the father because his sperm fertilized her egg. I'm sure you know how reproduction works, so why do you post such ridiculous drivel?

    And it is dishonest of you to suddenly bring up the matter of sperm donation. You must be desperate.


    Another attempt at evasion! Meanwhile those statements seem pretty clear to me and anyone else who read them. On the basis of your clear statements a man is the “father” because he donated his sperm through “deciding not to keep his legs closed and sticking it in the mother.” Your words, paraphrased.
    My comments were clearly in response to claims that the father has no choice in the matter. Posting lies like you just did isn't helping your argument


    Once more, simply asserting your opinion does not make it a fact. The quote does not refer to child support, but rather "responsibilities." Anyone following my arguments throughout this thread will see my position touches upon many areas of “responsibility” including child support. The thread is not only about child support.
    I am asserting fact. The "responsibilities" you're referring to is child support. It is the only responsibility the law can compel a father to have.



    Again with your assertions? Both parents are only required to support their child if, and only if, the woman has the child with his knowledge and at least one parent agrees to keep it. In that case under current law, the other parent is bound to provide child support if he/she earns enough to do so. However, if the woman has the child without the man’s knowledge, then she can unilaterally place the child up for adoption and neither parent is responsible for child support.
    Again, if the child is put out for adoption, then the man does not have to pay child support which is what you whined about.


    Therefore, since the woman can opt-out of child support via unilateral adoption, then the man should be allowed to unilaterally opt-out of all care and responsibility for an unwanted child also. Since the woman can unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility at all via abortion, then the man should have legal recourse to unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility for an unawanted child.
    A woman can't hide a pregnancy unless the man just doesn't care and makes choices that demonstrate that he doesn't care.

    And whether a child is wanted or not, both parents are obligated to support their children.

    Most importantly, even if what you said was true, the fact that diffferent people get to make different decisions does not mean the law has to step in and ensure that everyone gets to make the same decisions.

    I noticed that you never answer my question the first time I asked it, so I'll ask you again:

    Do you think the law does or should ensure that everyone gets to make the same decisions?


    I'm pretty sure you won't answer that question (you'll just ignore it, or maybe edit it out of your response) because you know the answer to that question proves why you're wrong
    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..

  9. #1459
    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 Bodhisattva View Post
    Yeah.. they are being stupid. Agreed. That doesn't negate the argument though... Women should not be allowed to hold a man captive because of her choice. A choice that he has no say in.
    Should the law ensure that everyone gets to make the same choices?
    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..

  10. #1460
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:03 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,854

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Because men can't choose to have a vasectomy or no sex.

    Those are beyond his control
    a vasectomy... which I have, is not 100% Care to step up to the plate again?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Posting Permissions

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