Yes, but only during the first 20 weeks, same as a woman.
Yes, but only during the initial period when a non-invasive technique works.
No, but he should have the right to be legally relieved of all responsibility.
NO! Only the woman has this right and he remains responsible.
I oppose all abortion, so neither have the right.
I Don't Know.
So unless both partners have agreed to actively pursue having a baby, merely engaging in sex for pleasure does NOT incur "automatic consent to conceive" on the part of either party. Thus such conception is clearly an accident unless either party intended to entrap the other in order to have a baby for their own reasons. That is not rare for females, as Lizzie attempted to point out in some of her replies. In such a situation even oral sex can be problematic since a mere transfer of the goods can result in a male facing a completely unexpected conception. Then there are also men who desire children where the women do not...examples exist of men intentionally damaging condoms to increase the chances of pregnancy in unsuspecting women.
In any case arguing that the mere fact of sex incurs permission to conceive is disingenuous. The woman is always in control, can always require preventive methods as well as use them herself, and can always act immediately thereafter to insure no pregancy occurs. (I.e. morning after pill, medicinal abortion, surgical abortion.)
If she has the absolute right to opt-out of keeping a baby, then the male should also have the right. Since most agree that he cannot force her to abort since it is her body and he was just a short-term "visitor," then the law should allow him to act as if HE legally aborted by opting out of all personal and financial responsibility. That is a rationally equitable solution, rightly dismissing "guilting" or "public policy" claims.
Last edited by Captain Adverse; 09-16-13 at 07:58 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.
That was then....this is now. "THE RULE" has become "THE EXCEPTION".
You've got it backward. For eons now sex was, is, and probably always will be performed many, many, many, many more times for pleasure than for reproduction.
Today...when people have sex...it is automatically regarded that each sexual event IS FOR PLEASURE ONLY...NOT for reproduction UNLESS DECLARED to be for reproduction.
The "intended consequence" for having sex is "orgasms"...well, some women might add "expressing love"....UNLESS DECLARED to reproduce.
So now the NORM would also be: The "unintended" consequence of sex is conception unless declared otherwise!
And...nooooo, it's not a "You made your bed so now lay in it" world anymore. We're way, way past that concept.
That's as nonsensical as "keep peckers in pants" or "Keep legs closed". That's not going to happen.
There is 7 billion folks here now. How many folks existed before that? Humanity isn't at risk of extinction or even negative growth population problems.
All is good with populations.
Last edited by Korimyr the Rat; 09-16-13 at 10:13 PM.