CA...it's not about my concern for child welfare. There is a biological disparity that can't be overridden.
There
is a biological disparity, the person with the greatest risk is the woman which is why it is incumbent on her to be both extremely cautious and responsible when it comes to her own body. This is exactly what Lizzie and Smoke&Mirrors are talking about. The risk of pregnancy is borne by the woman, therefore she has the greater responsibility to prevent a pregnancy from occurring.
However, some members seem to think that just by depositing sperm the male has somehow agreed to have a baby result. Nothing could be further from the truth as exemplified by the fact that even when the male WANTS the baby, the woman can simply say “NO, it’s my body and I don’t want one.”
I guess one way to look at the disparity is myopically, i.e. once a male deposits his sperm he is agreeing that whatever happens the choice is solely the woman’s from that point on. Well, some of us don't quite agree.
All of the "dysfunctional family stories", sad as some might be...it is impossible employ a public policy to coerce a woman into reacting to a conception based on someone else beliefs on when and when they should not reproduce.
Where is the coercion? The woman can still have the baby. The woman can still choose not to have the baby.
The only coercion I see is that imposed upon the unwilling male,
who literally has no choice.
It
is possible to develop a “public policy” creating an equitable solution which empowers the female to accept responsibility for her choice to have a baby, while releasing the male who never wanted marriage and family from the get-go. As possible as all the “public policy” subsequently created after Roe v. Wade in support of a woman’s right to choose.
You have yet to outline just a simple version of what such a public policy's language would look like and how it would be enforced.
That’s because this is a hypothetical discussion including a public poll to see what kind of support the idea has.
It’s not something I’ve been considering legal action on for years and years. It is merely something that has come to mind from time to time in relation to Pro-Choice; and a recent incident in the news prompted me to bring it up in the forum.
I’m not writing an actual bill, I’m simply sounding out my peers.
I've seen nothing but this way of controlling through coercion via a public policy as you call it. Since it's still not possible to create...
I’ve already addressed the possibility. We are not legislators engaged in discussing legislation. We are citizens gathered in a forum discussing issues of interest and concern. It is a “debate” on a particular area of the abortion issue.
I’m interested in hearing what people think. I’m arguing for my position just as you are for yours. The poll (which does not count pro-life votes because they are committed to absolute opposition, hence assume both parties MUST have a child) is to see how many people think the idea is a good one and how many think it is a bad one and why.