• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Should a Man have an Absolute Right to abort his baby?

  • Yes, but only during the first 20 weeks, same as a woman.

    Votes: 3 3.4%

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

    Votes: 0 0.0%

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

    Votes: 44 49.4%

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

    Votes: 18 20.2%

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

    Votes: 19 21.3%

  • I Don't Know.

    Votes: 5 5.6%
  • Total voters
    89
ChrisL said:
All HE has to do is put on a condom. He has just as much if not even MORE control over his putting on a condom than she does. Actually, I don't think a condom really effects sex for a female and can sometimes even feel better with some of the added features they have nowadays,. A lot of times it's men who don't want to wear a condom for sensation purposes.
Click to expand...

All she has to do is remind him, no sex without a condum.

We are not talking about rape here. In a consentual situation women have the final say. A guy can sniff around all he wants, but a woman must say yes before anything happens down there. The woman has ALL the power. NOTHING can happen down there without her consent in a voluntary sexual encounter.

ChrisL said:
Besides, pregnancies DO occur with condoms sometimes. Accidental pregnancies happen.
Click to expand...

Which is why women should also use contraception and why abortions are and should remain legal.

ChrisL said:
What about if the situation is a man who impregnates a teenage girl, which is often the case.
Click to expand...

Are we talking statutory rape here? Or is it abuse of authority? If the young lady is of consenting age, the man's age should not matter (as long as he is also of the age of consent.) Why? Simply because it is still her body and she is aware that unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy. If he forces her after she say's no? That's rape.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
All she has to do is remind him, no sex without a condum.
Click to expand...

All he has to do is remember. She is no more responsible than he.

We are not talking about rape here. In a consentual situation women have the final say. A guy can sniff around all he wants, but a woman must say yes before anything happens down there. The woman has ALL the power. NOTHING can happen down there without her consent in a voluntary sexual encounter.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. You have no idea of the emotional and other dynamics of all relationships out there. There are plenty of relationships where the woman is not in control but the sex would be considered consensual according to the law.



Which is why women should also use contraception and why abortions are and should remain legal
Click to expand...

No men do not get a pass for being irresponsible. The woman can no more get pregnant without the man's contribution.
 
ChrisL said:
I disagree. If he tells the woman up front that he has no intention of providing for any child that may result from their union, and she goes and has sex with him anyway, he probably shouldn't be held responsible in that situation IMO. .
Click to expand...
I disagree. In that circumstance, he did his share in making a baby. His moral contract is with his baby, not the mother.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry boys, the WOMAN is in control.
Click to expand...
Then why didn't she stop herself from becoming pregnant?

The problem of unwanted pregnancy is a result of people not being in control.

While I agree it would be "wise" for a man to do so on his own...when it comes to sexual matters most young men have no wisdom at all. Since the primary physical risk is to the woman; if she does not want a child she can simply say put on a condom...or contnue to insist on no sex until marriage.
Click to expand...
I have to agree.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry boys, the WOMAN is in control.

While I agree it would be "wise" for a man to do so on his own...when it comes to sexual matters most young men have no wisdom at all. Since the primary physical risk is to the woman; if she does not want a child she can simply say put on a condom...or contnue to insist on no sex until marriage.
Click to expand...
Who knows who you date? Both are in control. Both decide to have sex or there is no sex. (excluding rape).
 
Captain Adverse said:
All she has to do is remind him, no sex without a condum.

We are not talking about rape here. In a consentual situation women have the final say. A guy can sniff around all he wants, but a woman must say yes before anything happens down there. The woman has ALL the power. NOTHING can happen down there without her consent in a voluntary sexual encounter.
Click to expand...
Let's pretend for a moment that men are as powerless as you seem to think. If anything then, they should be even more careful not to get a girl pregnant, for that's when they are truly powerless.
 
ChrisL said:
All he has to do is remember. She is no more responsible than he.
Click to expand...

In this I personally disagree. I've already explained, she has ALL the power and NOTHING can happen down there without her permission. She should remind him because she has ultimate control over what happens with her body...he is just "visiting" it.
 
Captain Adverse said:
In this I personally disagree. I've already explained, she has ALL the power and NOTHING can happen down there without her permission. She should remind him because she has ultimate control over what happens with her body...he is just "visiting" it.
Click to expand...

It's the same for the man. He chooses who he inserts his sperm into and has just as much control over that.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Let's pretend for a moment that men are as powerless as you seem to think. If anything then, they should be even more careful not to get a girl pregnant, for that's when they are truly powerless.
Click to expand...

Circular arguments have no value is a discourse. Please try again.

I don't think men are "powerless," I know this for a fact. All a man can do is try to persuade a woman to engage in sex. The law already prevents him from forcing her.

Women are well-aware that any male they allow to pass their "heavenly gates" is only there on a "visitors pass." Whatever he leaves might end up "trespassing" in there. So it is up to her to control visitation rights.

There are no two ways around it. The WOMAN has absolute control; whether or not she completely surrenders it is up to her.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Circular arguments have no value is a discourse. Please try again.

I don't think men are "powerless," I know this for a fact. All a man can do is try to persuade a woman to engage in sex. The law already prevents him from forcing her.

Women are well-aware that any male who passes the "heavenly gates" is only there on a "visitors pass." Whatever he leaves might end up "trespassing" in there. So it is up to her to control visitation rights.

There are no two ways around it. The WOMAN has absolute control, whether or not she completely surrenders it is up to her.
Click to expand...

That is totally not true. He is no less responsible than she is for where he inserts his penis and sperm.
 
Cephus said:
As a woman, if you don't want to get pregnant, don't spread your legs. Why are you being so biased?
Click to expand...

Lake I have a million times, both have responsibility. The man and the woman because both contributed to the creation of a child. If a guy slips it in without cover he is just as responsible.
 
ChrisL said:
It's the same for the man. He chooses who he inserts his sperm into and has just as much control over that.
Click to expand...

Sorry ChrisL, we are going to have to disagree. No man can "insert his sperm" without the permission of the woman. If he does, it is rape.

In any consensual act, that she allows him to do so is HER choice alone!
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
In this I personally disagree. I've already explained, she has ALL the power and NOTHING can happen down there without her permission. She should remind him because she has ultimate control over what happens with her body...he is just "visiting" it.
Click to expand...

Unless the man is sterile .. he has power too.
 
Removable Mind said:
Okay...let's spice up your scenario.

Guy's out on the town

Guy meets girl

They bull**** around abit and start discussing going to her place

The girl asked the guy..."are you married", he says "No."

He lies....

They get to her place and hop in bed and he says, "are you protected"...which since he's married that's not really something he'd ask...but....

She said yes, but lies...

Kaboom...a pregnancy occurs as a result of these two liars have a wild romp

What do believe should be the legal outcome of that pregnancy be?

__________________________________________

TD...doesn't this issue really revolve around something similar to following?:

Most pro-choice will say that a woman is not giving automatic consent to conception when she has sex. If that's true, then why is a man legally and financially bound to a conception if one occur... especially if the man also didn't give consent to conception when having sex.

The following has been scenario is suggested by numerous men...

What if there was a law...similar to Roe v. Wade...in which it states that in the case of an unwanted pregnancy by a man...and not the woman. Then during the period of non-viability of the embryo or fetus, that the sperm donor can legally declare that he doesn't want to be a father and will have the CHOICE to waiver out of any responsibility for the pregnancy or a child given birth to.

Now, since the declaration must be made during the non-viability period...then the woman can decide if she wants to have an abortion so that she herself doesn't have the burdens involved....or she "chooses" to carry the embryo or fetus to full-term.

If the woman choose abortion...then he pays half.

Now the above sounds simple enough, however.....

What might be the objections of a woman for such a law being enacted?
Click to expand...

tl dr. it comes down to intent
 
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry ChrisL, we are going to have to disagree. No man can "insert his sperm" without the permission of the woman. If he does, it is rape.

In any consensual act, that she allows him to do so is HER choice alone!
Click to expand...

And no woman can get pregnant without the man inserting himself. Those are the facts. It takes TWO to make a baby. Accept it and move on.
 
The man is just a visitor. That's a really stupid excuse to say the least. :roll: He knows darn well that when he has sex with a woman there is always the possibility that she can become pregnant, unless she is too old or has had her reproductive organs removed, or unless he has had a vasectomy.

He should let that woman know beforehand that if an accident occurs, which they sometimes do, that he is not going to take responsibility for any child born from the sexual union. THEN, she can make a truly informed decision and also be a little more informed as to what type of person she is dealing with too.
 
The law should only be concerned with what is best for the child that results, and not what's in the best interest of the man who helped create the child, whether inadvertently and due to his own stupidity as well, or not. Otherwise, you'll have MORE mothers and children collecting welfare benefits. :doh So now EVERYONE pays for this child.
 
ChrisL said:
And no woman can get pregnant without the man inserting himself. Those are the facts. It takes TWO to make a baby. Accept it and move on.
Click to expand...

That's right it takes TWO. Yet only ONE gets to decide? Sorry does not fly.

If I own a house, I decide who comes and goes and what happens within it. Anyone who enters without my permission is subject to legal penalties.

If I have a fireplace in this house then I know that if I place wood in it there is a small chance I will start a major fire if proper safety is not followed. I invite a friend into my house, and give him permission to start a fire while I am right there with him supervising the whole process; however I fail to make sure a fire extinguisher is present and that the grating is properly secured. Then the house catches fire and ends up burning down...who's fault is it?

I can certainly try to blame the guy who built the fire; but it was done with my permission, I was there to control the whole process, and I failed to ensure proper safety requirements were followed. Therefore, It is MY fault that my house burned down.

Sex is no different...the woman has control and can require that all safety measures be observed; if she fails and her house burns down don't blame the visitor.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
That's right it takes TWO. Yet only ONE gets to decide? Sorry does not fly.

If I own a house, I decide who comes and goes and what happens within it. Anyone who enters without my permission is subject to legal penalties.

If I have a fireplace in this house then I know that if I place wood in it there is a small chance I will start a major fire. I invite a friend into my house, and give him permission to start a fire while I am right there with him supervising the whole process; however I fail t make sure a fire extinguisher is present and that the grating is properly secured. Then the house catches fire and ends up burning down...who's fault is it?

I can certainly try to blame the guy who built the fire, but it was done with my permission, I was there to control the whole process, and I failed to ensure proper safety requirements were followed. Therefore, It is MY fault that my house burned down. Sex if no different...the woman has control and can require all safety measure be observed; if she fails and her house burns down don't blame the visitor.
Click to expand...

That's why I said a contract should be drawn up for you to give to women you want to sleep with beforehand. If it held up in court, then you could be absolved of your responsibility.

And in this way, a woman isn't being inadvertently forced to make a decision that she may not agree with because of financial pressure.
 
ChrisL said:
That's why I said a contract should be drawn up for you to give to women you want to sleep with beforehand. If it held up in court, then you could be absolved of your responsibility.

And in this way, a woman isn't being inadvertently forced to make a decision that she may not agree with because of financial pressure.
Click to expand...

I did see that suggestion. The problem is it would not work, because as other members have stated many courts hold that "the needs of the child trump the desires of the father." That's the basis of the case Minnie616 posted; where a lesbian couple placed an ad for a sperm donor so they could have a child. A sperm donor provided a "sample" but the lesbian couple later broke up. Now the "mother" is suing the sperm donor for child support. There may well be other cases where "sperm donors" have been held accountable in state courts for child support, I don't know. But unless there is some legal recourse created, currently even your idea would not work.

It would be nice though. :)
 
opendebate said:
Lake I have a million times, both have responsibility. The man and the woman because both contributed to the creation of a child. If a guy slips it in without cover he is just as responsible.
Click to expand...

Fine, so why are you providing the woman an out? If she's responsible, why does she get to have an abortion if she wants and get out of it?

I'm trying to get you to admit you're being biased. Just admit it and be done.
 
ChrisL said:
That's why I said a contract should be drawn up for you to give to women you want to sleep with beforehand. If it held up in court, then you could be absolved of your responsibility.

And in this way, a woman isn't being inadvertently forced to make a decision that she may not agree with because of financial pressure.
Click to expand...
Since child support is a right of the child the courts will void your contract on the grounds that parents cannot sign away their child's rights.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
You ought to coordinate a march in Washington ... the Million Deadbeat March!

:lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo
Click to expand...

The women seemed to get their rights without calling themselves "the women that want to kill their offspring". Why would this be different?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom