Since women can legally get abortions without a mans consent, why is he responsible for the baby?

Question

It's an interesting quirk in the law that nobody ever talks about. Women claim that they should have the right to get an abortion whenever they want, without the man having any rights, yet the man is supposed to have all the responsibilities of the woman once the kid is born? Wouldn't it make more sense to allow both the man and the woman to be able to force an abortion since its half his, or at the very least the woman sign a waiver if she keeps the baby. (I actually consider abortion to be wrong under all but the most extreme situations, but as women so elegently put it (grow ovaries then talk) How do you justify making a man take care of a baby he doesn't even have the right to protect from murder?

Answer 1

I don't agree with one partner forcing an abortion on the other. BUT i DO AGREE with what you say about how the man should be able to sign a document of intent upon finding out the women is pregnant if he doesn't want it. But if he does or doesnt, he can't just change his mind once the baby is born and either run off, or want in.

However, don't you think its time the hypothetical man and women in the equation realised that the moment they had unprotected sex they WERE BOTH consenting to having a baby????????????????????????????

Answer 2

I think that I agree with you. I don't believe in abortion unless there are dire circumstances. I don't believe that a child should be aborted if either parent wants the responsibility of a child. With that said I don't know if a woman can carry a baby that she really wants to abort safely. I don't know, that is one of those things that makes us question the necessary evil of science.

Once the baby is born it is up to the mother to decide what to do if the Dad doesn't want to be involved. I had my first child alone, her father made it clear he didn't want her. I did it on my own for 13 yrs before I married and had another. I have the pride of showing my daughter that if you want success you can achieve it no matter the challenge and I never took a dime from her biological father.

I could support us, with 2 now I would need child support for my son.

I don't think this can be a black and white issue.

Answer 3

If you dance you gotta pay the fiddler! LOL

You are wondering what is wrong with this picture? I suppose you think a man's responsibility is to do nothing?

Well the simple matter of fact is that men can knock up a gal and walk away not claiming any responsibility. A woman on the other hand, if she doesn't believe in abortion, has to carry the child for nine months and spend roughly the next 20 years raising the child. When a woman has a child....it changes her whole life! A man can father a child, claim no responsibility to it and go around knocking up other women.

Now is that fair?

Answer 4

Stepping on a bunch of crackers (things) here. But you ask an interesting question!

I suggest that it is the right of both parents to decide the outcome of a yet to be born child. It is not the woman's right alone, since she cannot do this without the assistance of a man.

As I have explained to my young daughter, the father has as much right as the mother, to choose the outcome of the yet to be born, as both took part in the initial action needed to make this happen.

Should the father decide that a full birth is warranted and that he will assume all parental duties from the moment of birth (and before - Doctor bills, etc...) on. He has every right to allow the child's birth. The woman can renig her rights(forever) if she so chooses. The father is the soul parent.

Just My Humble Opinion,

The Ol' Sasquatch Ü

Answer 5

I am against abortion, but I think the father doesn't have a say so because in most cases, a woman chooses the abortion because the father denied support himself. That's one of the reasons why I am against abortion, because in most cases a woman sees herself rejected from boyfriend, and/or without support from parents, I mean totally under emotional distress and under psycological preassure. I am sure that the rate of abortion would drop considerably if all the stupid men decide to love and take responsibity for what they did, at least with compassion, as well as parents be loving and forgiving.

Abortion is not something so easy and cool. No matter how much society agrees with that, that will always be a trauma for a woman. Abortion should be the last option, not the first. It is not like take an acne from a face. It is dangerous, risky and brutal.

All of us have a part on this. We should fight for:

- sex education in school
- parents taking their daughters to gynecologist at age 12 and every year from that day on.
- condoms for free
- more psycological and financial support from government.

We should support single mothers first of all, instead of reinforce abortion at first place.

An unborn child is a spirit that returns to the spiritual world carrying suffering with him/her. A conceived child is a person planned to come. We can't stop that for our convenience. Terminate a life in the uterus is like taking away the chance of someone to change the world.

Peace!

Answer 6

The problem in your argument is that it's not a "baby". It's a fetus, which is way different than a baby, both biologically and legally.

So your argument should be whether a man has a right to regulate a woman's bodily processes that might contain within it some microscopic embryo....in other words, can he legally control the internal workings of her uterus.

I don't say this lightly---because as say a 4-week old fetus, this "growth" is entirely dependent upon, and in fact is PART of, the woman's body, like her kidneys, etc.

There's nothing wrong with your argument if you frame it properly, and you may have a point but you can't call a fetus a baby---that's just wrong biologically, medically and legally.

No one would uphold such a claim except religion, which is not legal or scientific or even rational.

so maybe you need to frame it by asking if a woman has a religious obligation to allow the man to help decide.

Answer 7

You are correct. This is an inequity that is difficult to reconcile.

The theory is that the woman has special rights, and deservedly so. In practice though, the male has no say-so in the matter after conception. He might be a pro-lifer that wants to have the baby and is willing to pay and actively father the child. Or he might not want to have the child and possibly cannot afford one, yet he can be forced, like a slave, to provide money for both the child and the mother without getting any rights to visit or influence the child's welfare.

The only fair way to view this is, if a woman chooses to terminate a pregnancy within the first trimester, she must be allowed that right. If she does not choose to do so, and the father doesn't want to contribute, she should be required to raise the child by herself. Obviously, this solution angers both sides of a sensitive issue.

There are arguments in favor of both parties and the child has no rights until it is a viable human fetus. This is an anathema to pro-lifers, and women's libbers alike. Yet, no other legal solution has yet surpassed this for fairness to all parties.

The other obvious article here is; no man should ejaculate in a woman he doesn't trust and who has different philosophical ideals than his. Likewise, no woman should allow herself to become pregnant with a man she doesn't trust or who has a differing philosophical system that hers. She also must consider the Male's financial capability before she conceives.

The ultimate responsibility belongs to the adults who can procreate. After a certain time, like it or not, the fetus becomes a baby, and must be considered a human being and therefore, must have rights.

There is no philosophical, biblical or scientific reason to consider the fetus a human until after the first trimester. The supposedly real fetal pictures that pro-lifers use on bumpers and billboards to promote their rigid agenda are propaganda and evil lies. Stem cell research suffered a blow because of wide-spread ignorance caused by this type of propaganda. The reasoning of pro-lifers is spurious at best, and their methods of convincing people with emotion and lies over logic and facts are cruelly immoral. In their misguided attempt to protect a multiplying cell group, they have confused their religious dogma with falsified scientific facts.

It all boils down to this.
NOBODY WANTS to have a baby if they are not ready to be good parents. The woman has the most to lose because of the emotional attachment women have with their children, so the woman MUST have the right to choose, to a point. After that point, the fetus is a person and must be treated as a human with human rights to life. No man should have unprotected sex with ANY woman he is not ready to support in the event of a pregnancy. However, if he does, the rights still fall almost exclusively in the woman's favor because the government wants to insure we make more tax-paying slaves and government officials are afraid of religious lobbies that immorally, illegally and unconstitutionally enforce a religious agenda on public policy.

Answer 8

Well there is one way that guys won't have to take care of the baby's for the next 18 yrs....It's called keeping your pants up. and your zipper locked.

I don't believe in abortions either. That is if it's do to a life or death situation. But I don't think a guy should tell or force the girl into having one.

If you don't want to have a child. Then don't have sex, easy as that. It's not the baby's fault that he or she is being born.

Answer 9

well. the mother is the one having it, she has the decision in that because its her body. It's like asking what should I eat today because its her who is going to deal with the process of having the baby...

also the father has no right in this because he is suppose to support her decision because they both have fault in the making of the baby, if you didn't want the kid then you should of protected both of you in this case you have no right she has more then the guy does because she shares the more important part HAVING the baby!!!

If the father wants an in the KID that HE wanted because he just wanted to have fun and didn't think if he needed to protect him self so he has to deal with the responsibility as she did having the baby.

Answer 10

Because of our screwed up laws. Why should a man (or woman) have to give up half of everything after they catch their spouse playing pelvic pinochle with someone else? Because the law says we have to. Why do people argue that a fetus is not a life, but if someone kills an unborn fetus (other than an abortion doctor) they are charged with murder?