Why doesn't anyone question the motives of men in pro-choice?

Question

It has occured to me that it is quite convenient for men who create unplanned pregnancies to be advocates of pro-choice. If men are not also responsible for this unborn child then this argument has nothing to do with men and should be a gender specific debate. So, if women are the only ones with any choice to be made (according to pro-choice advocates) then why isn't it a women's only debate? And further, if only women get the choice of pregnancy then why is any man responsible for the financial support of this child once it is born? If he doesn't have a say on its gestation and it becomes the property of the woman then his role should be done for good.

If men are also responsible for the creation of babies then why are they not also required to approve an abortion procedure?

Answer 1

And if the woman wants an abortion, should the man have any say if he disagrees? I dont really know how to give you an answer of why people don't question men's motives, but I agree it is a somewhat sexist institution, as far as child support laws and precidents sex by past Roe v Wade have gone (I'm not arguing the point one way or the other, as far as the legality of abortions, I'm just looking at the issues involving men's rights in it all, as our friend who asked the question just pointed out)

Answer 2

The issue is that people want to play but not pay. There is a cost to everything that people do. Having sex with someone that you do not want children with involves a risk. Sometimes that risk is between people who are married but not to each other. In the end it is about not wanting the responsibility for one's irresponsible behavior.

I've heard the yelps from the pro-camp regarding getting pregnant when raped, incest blah blah., Geting pregnant under those circumstances is rare, very rare and pales when compared with the typical circumstances, that being recreational or casual/consentual sex.

Chilldren are NOT property, They are not extensions of the mother; they ARE humans, individuals that did not ask to be created. Where is THEIR voice, oh mighty ACLU mouthpiece of the pro-choice crowd? The woman had the right to just say no up front, and having ssaid yes the obligation to take measure against getting pregnant, as did the man. But when they said "yes" and got pregnant, who paid the priice? The weakest of the bunch- the unborn. Who is fighting for the rights of those who did not have a choice in their creation? And who is fighting to right the lies told to aborting mothers by the pro-choice crowd? How many women are suffering depression and other ills associated with the voluntary termination of a preganncy- enough women that the numbers would shock you.

The other part of your question:
When women are required to PAY child support and are treated as men are in that regard then things may change. The women's "rights" people want it both ways- abortion on demand with men having no say in the deal, or the resulting child stays with the "mother" and the man pays the support with limited rights of visitation if any. The movement hailed as causing "equal rights" was and is based upon lies. There ARE inherent differences in men and women. Too bad it has only been recently that psychologists are getting brave enough to speak out and say so.

As always, the children- or unborn children pay the price for the selfishness of the "adults". There are no free rides, there is always a cost.

Answer 3

You've raised some valid questions here, but the point is, that whether or not the father "wants" the child or not, he should be responsible for the financial support.

A man does have the choice of having sex with a woman, so the question I have to ask in return is, if the guy doesn't want the responsibility for financial support of the children, then why not use a condom or better yet, not have sex with a woman they are not willing to have children with?

Answer 4

Life is life no matter if it is relying on the mother to live. As for the father if he is not ready for a child then he shouldn't be having sex. The questions you should be asking is why are these women not in jail. If someone where to hurt a women that was pregnant and god forbid something happen to the child that person would be in jail for murdering an unborn child. NO matter how the child came about adoption should be your only option if you don't want a child.

Answer 5

That's a good question. I have the same issue with men who are pro-life. If you ask me...fair or not...it's the woman's body and her choice. I see a whole lot of men protesting abortion....yet it's not their bodies. And it's also a good point you raise...where are some of these men once these children are born..true they are obligated to pay child-support, but it often doesn't come through. The pro-life vs. pro-choice debate is a hot topic and it's easy for people to argue and never reach an agreement. And by the way..pro-choice is not the same thing as pro-abortion. Personally, i consider myself pro-choice...however it's because i respect a woman's right to choose and I have no right to judge others and their situation they are in. though i know i personally would not want an abortion.

Answer 6

I agree with you.

The only thing that would bother me about this that could potentially be a problem, is if the man father's a baby that he doesn't want, can he make his woman kill that unborn baby if he has an equal say in it?
I would hope not.

I say adoption is the best answer if both parents don't want the child.

Otherwise, you have a very very good and valid point that really should be addressed and made more known!

Answer 7

the priority is that folk favor to play yet no longer pay. there's a fee to each and every little challenge that folk do. Having sex with someone that you do not favor little ones with features a risk. each and every so often that risk is between those who're married yet to no longer one yet another. in the top it fairly is about no longer wanting the job for one's irresponsible habit. i have were given heard the yelps from the pro-camp on the concern of having pregnant even as raped, incest blah blah., Geting pregnant lower than those circumstances is uncommon, very uncommon and pales even as placed next with the common circumstances, that being leisure or casual/consentual sex. Chilldren are truly no longer resources, they don't seem extensions of the mother; they're human beings, persons that did not ask to be created. the position is THEIR voice, oh remarkable ACLU mouthpiece of the pro-decision crowd? the female had the major acceptable to in reality say no up the front, and having ssaid particular the criminal responsibility to take degree antagonistic to getting pregnant, as did the guy. yet even as they suggested "particular" and performance been given pregnant, who paid the priice? The weakest of the bunch- the unborn. who's battling for the rights of people who did no longer have a call of their creation? And who's battling to genuine the lies recommended to aborting moms through the pro-decision crowd? what volume women all and various is suffering melancholy and various ills linked with the voluntary termination of a preganncy- sufficient women individuals human beings that the numbers might want to ask your self you. the diverse component to your question: even as women individuals all and various is had to PAY toddler help and are dealt with as adult males are in that regard then topics might want to change. the ladies human beings's "rights" human beings like it both recommendations- abortion on call for with adult males having no say in the deal, or the consequent toddler keeps to be with the "mom" and the guy pays the help with restricted rights of visitation if any. The stream hailed as causing "equivalent rights" grew to develop into and is predicated upon lies. There ARE inherent differences in women individuals and adult males human beings. Too undesirable it has in reality been at present day that psychologists are transforming into courageous sufficient to communicate out and say so. As continually, the more youthful little ones- or unborn little ones pay the cost for the selfishness of the "adults". There aren't any free rides, there is regularly a fee.

Answer 8

I agree with most of your points. However, both parents made a decision when they had unprotected sex. My thought is that the egg is implanted in the woman's body and that then makes it her right to choose. She has to live with either the pregnancy and raising a child or giving it up, or has to live with a decision of aborting. HIS body is no longer involved. I don't know how else to do it. That may be unfair to a man who doesn't want a child or even one who DOES, but ultimately he cannot have the right to choose something that affects her body once he helped cause the instance. In addition to that, I do feel for men who want their babies and who may not get that chance because the woman wants to abort. But, he did choose to have sex with a woman before talking about raising a child.

Don't lay down with someone unprotected unless you are prepared to either make this decision for yourself, or be totally left out of the right to make the decision.

Answer 9

I had a child out of wedlock 25 years ago. He wanted me to abort but I wouldn't. I also supported her and had medical insurance, she attended Catholic Schools, gymnastics and high school mascot. I never recieved child support and didn't want it.
I let her Dad see her. It was important to them to have daughter-father relationship. She is very pretty, did some modeling and has her own business now. I am glad I made the right decision for us.

Answer 10

This is a fallicy of logic; removing a group from the discussion because of something other than their ideas.
A man (single or not) can have good or bad ideas on abortion even though he will never go through an abortion. I may never have a member of my family murdered but I can have good ideas on the morality of murder, can't I?
And yes, the mother should have the liberty of choice. It's usually better to stand on the side of liberty rather than the side of restricting liberty when the morality is so undecided.