Yes they have equal rights, to the function of their own bodies. It would be no difference between a car accident for a man, or cancer causing a woman to lose her ability to have children it is an unforeseen incident.
2007-01-27 16:25:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cherry_Blossom 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
It's definitely a tough call. As a woman, I could argue that it is her body, and she does have the right not to be a mother if she doesn't feel ready. However, I do agree that it is infair that men have so little say in matters of abortion. It's unfair on both sides and it seems like there is no real compromise. It's either 9 months of a woman's life she'll never get back or a man without a child.... =/
2007-01-28 00:26:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by dolce 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
To play "what if" is a terrible game and leaves no room for actual debate.
Of course in an ideal world a women and a man should discuss an unplanned pregnancy and their actions before hand. Of course women should take into account the feelings of their partners and try to compromise. But, then again, we don't live in an ideal world, do we?
Abortion is a very hard thing to compromise on though, because it does, ultimately, take place with the women and her body.
But, since you want to play the what if game... perhaps we think about how he promised to take care of the child... but he decides that he doesn't want to take care of it in her 7th month of pregnancy and he bolts. Suddenly she's left alone, without health insurance (because she had a high risk pregnancy she had to quit her job and was receiving health insurance through his job), can't get any medical help for her twice monthly ultrasounds, so are paying those out of pocket, can barely afford the rent, that she's paying for from savings, oh, and she's about 500 miles from any family. Oh, and she's a minority, and her baby might have downs, so she decides not to put her up for adoption because she knows there's no way anyone will adopt her. So, she has the baby, has no college degree, has to spend her time taking care of the baby because she did indeed have downs, but she was able to get Medicaid, so that's good. But she ends up on welfare and Medicaid and food stamps for the next 20 years, until she's finally able to scrap enough money together to go to community college to get an associates in medical billing so she can make slightly over minimum wage, but still not receive benefits. And the guy? Remarried, but decided that he was childfree, and didn't have any more kids, and is living in Reno somewhere.
2007-01-28 17:24:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by RantingLover 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
I can't believe some of the asinine answers here. It's ONLY the woman's choice??? Ummmm, how in the hell did she get pregnant? IT IS NOT JUST HER CHILD! Men have to pay child support in divorce cases so right there proves they have obligations to the baby. What the hell is the difference? This feminazi shi* ticks me off.
My husband and I were just talking about this tonight and we both agree with your question. It is a valid question and thanks for asking it. It takes two to tango. Unless she has immaculate conception, then that man has no choice, but God has a choice.
Why do people think it's ok to murder an innocent helpless baby yet save a life of a cold blooded murderer? I will never understand that.
I just cannot imagine being pregnant, thinking about an abortion and not giving my husband a voice!! Now if the woman wants to keep the baby and he doesn't, then he can leave but he is obligated to pay. It clearly shows that he is responsible, doesn't he have the responsibility also for the welfare of his unborn child.
Thanks for this very valid question!!
2007-01-28 00:55:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by patrioticpeladac 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Currently, only women enjoy the “get out of jail free card” that is abortion-on-demand. What about equal rights? What about men? They have no legal say as to whether a pregnancy they helped to create is carried to term. Many may want the pregnancy terminated. Many want the baby to be allowed to be born, especially in the context of a marriage. However, if a woman chooses to kill a man’s unborn child against his will, he has no legal recourse. Conversely, if she decides to carry the baby and give birth, the father also has no choice but to financially support the baby, by law. How is this fair? And isn’t the next step to allow men to financially abandon their children all in the interest of fairness?
Women have so many choices today. Many women can choose whether or not to work or stay home with their children. Most men do not have that choice. Women can choose whether or not to have sex. Men are basically at the mercy of women when it comes to whether or not they’re going to have sex. Women can choose whether or not to kill their unborn babies, with or without any reason under the sun. Men have no say in it, if the mother chooses not to give him a say, even though the baby IS HIS CHILD GENETICALLY. The father has every interest and stake in determining the fate of HIS child. Nine months of discomfort and inconvenience for the mother does NOT outweigh the loss of a life.
With regard to unplanned pregnancy, women have all the choices; have the baby and raise the baby; have the baby and give the baby up for adoption; have the baby and drop the baby off at a hospital or fire station with no further obligation; kill her unborn baby and forget about it.
If everyone would just admit that abortion is about women wielding power over men as a form of revenge, then we would all be more honest. The only problem with that is that abortion has only succeeded in rewarding men for using women as sex objects by destroying the predictable result of sex. There are only two directions to go from here; reversal of Roe v. Wade and restoration of the sanctity of human life, or: allow men to abandon their children and the mother if they see fit. After all, isn’t being “wanted” the only reason to value human life? If a man doesn’t “want” his child or the child’s mother, then why should he be “forced” to deal with them?
2007-01-30 15:33:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
The man's choice in the matter is chosing the right woman in the first place. If he was a little wiser picking a wife, the problem would never come up. ALL couples who have sex or marry, regardless of birth control need to have contingency plans. No birth control method is 100% effective.
To quote Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way."
2007-01-28 00:30:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by John H 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Wait a little while longer, maybe science will develop a way for the egg to be taken out of the woman and deposited into the man and he can carry it to term. Do you think the man will be willing to do that?? or would it be against his religion to carry it to term??
Let me also add. A man has less of a chance of getting hit by a car and losing his ablity to produce. Then a woman does have of being given an STD that will prevent her from having children in the future!
2007-01-28 00:32:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by wondermom 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
The man doesn't get a choice in the abortion. It is the woman's body and the woman's right to choose. If a wife wants to have more children, and the husband does not, it is his choice to go and get a vasectomy, regardless of what his wife wants. See, it can work both ways...
2007-01-28 00:30:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by rshegv 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
Men Ultimately have no choice! Our liberal self centered left wing has created an atmosphere that berates the importance of men. Not all men are pigs, More and more we are seeing that women are just as selfish and self centered as any man. The question should be, What about the child. Medicine has proved that the embryo is able to feel pain. If the Non person can register pain than there is awareness and conciousness. Thus making this non person a person. Murder is murder.
2007-01-28 00:29:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by musicman2513 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
abortion is wrong either way, but if someone one wants to have the right to an abortion, then the man should have equal say in decision. the argument of abortion from the stand point of unwanted babies is bull, especially when one of the parents is willing and able to take care of child when born. that woman murdered her child. to bad her parents didn't have an abortion.
2007-01-28 00:41:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋