a child or not (abortion), and a man doesn't have that
option. I'm not saying that a woman shouldn't have the
right to make that choice, but if she decides to have the
child why is it fair to force the man into fatherhood and
a financial responsibility that he didn't choose!
2007-12-27
10:57:24
·
18 answers
·
asked by
WorldClassPlayer
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
I think everyone's missing the point.
If a woman has a right to do what she
pleases, she also has a responsibility.
Since women get pregnant shouldn't
she exercise caution. If I have a fractured ankle, shouldn't I be the one
to protect it if I'm playing football, not
the tackle. Isn't it the woman making
the decision on fatherhood rather
than the couple?
2007-12-27
11:39:58 ·
update #1
And concerning the "keep it in your pants " comments, the same could
be said if you "keep your panties on"
and your thighs closed! Right!
2007-12-27
11:42:52 ·
update #2
OUTTA HERE: same could be said
she was dragged and
raped either!
2007-12-27
13:11:40 ·
update #3
OUTTA HERE: Same could be said
she was raped either, but it
appears that she has all of the
"say so" although she partici-
pated in unprotected sex also.
Read my comment about the
football player again!
2007-12-27
13:13:41 ·
update #4
Main reason behind the question is to
enlighten the yahoo public that there
are millions of unwanted pregnancies
occuring every year. Whether due to
carelessness of both parties or one,
or deception by the female to entrap
the male. In either case there is
a considerable amount of birth control
availble to women today. Although
less for men the condom is still available. Of course condoms can
break, but ultimately the responsi-
bility lies upon the female, whom is
the one most likely to experience the
greatest emotional turmoil. Doesn't
it make sense that she should take
better precaution in preventing an
unwanted pregnancy. Just makes
common sense. Maybe that's why
there are so many pregnancies from
unprotected sex. Relying on someone
else to be responsible for your body
but I thought that's what the abortion
law was NOT about!
2007-12-27
13:22:00 ·
update #5
Yes, it is absolutely fair. If a man wants the mother to keep a child, and she wants a termination, then it's her body and she should have the right to control her own reproductive cycle.
Now, if they didn't plan on a child, and the man doesn't want it, and she decides to keep it, then the same thing applies - she gets to keep it. But what is wrong in this case is that the man is still on the hook for child support. He has to pay to support a child he didn't want, and that he recommended should be terminated. I think in this case, although she has a right to keep the child, she should not have a right to any child support.
2007-12-27 11:37:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The father only assumes a portion of the financial responsibility. The mother has to assume every single bit left over after that, as well as every other part of parenting that the father doesn't help with (which might be 100% of it). So it's wrong for you to say "keep your panties on" as if the woman is free from any financial or parenting obligations afterwards.
Additionally, it is a well known fact that (in general) men have a higher sex drive than women (in general). This is because the drive comes from the hormone testosterone, which men have much more of. So if it was just up to women, there would be a whole lot less procreation going on, and so a whole lot more of babies are due to men's desires than to women's desires.
2007-12-27 11:59:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by zgsweb 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Probably because when most abortions are performed, the "fetus" (it's not a baby) is only 1.5 grams in weight and the size of a kernel of corn. It is undifferentiated tissue, with no brain, features, nervous system or independent blood supply. It is, in fact---in biological fact----part of the woman's body, like her kidney (at this point in time).
So really I don't think a husband has a right to decide if a woman wants to have a tooth removed. If the "woman" was a child, perhaps a parent would have some rights.
But an adult woman I think has the constitutional right to control over her own body parts.
It's not pretty but it's the only way to look at it that makes any sense, unless you get into religious "beliefs", and you can't base laws on faith-based concepts of reality.
I think in a healthy marriage or partnership, BOTH partners would be talking this over seriously anyway, so the question is moot in that case.
You must be referring to a dysfunctional situation here.
2007-12-27 11:08:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The "man" has choices.....he can use a condom when he decides to hop on top of some woman.
If he choses to have unprotected sex, he knows that pregnancy may occur. Therefore, he has made the decision to accept any responsibility that arises from that pregnancy.
And your crack about "women and their panties"....is plain dumb. A woman is responsible for her OWN body.....a man is responsible for HIS OWN body.
She didn't drag you kicking and screaming into her bed and force you to have unprotected sex...you made that decision...
You could have chosen "no" as an answer.
2007-12-27 12:49:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think that the answer to this is that he did choose financial responsibility when he had sex. pregnancy is a consequence of sex. even protected sex has risks / nothing is 100 safe except abstinence. both parties the man and woman consented to the sex and consequently the financial responsiblity belongs to both. aside from financial responsibility , is the responsibility for a relationship and a parenting role for both ! sex is a huge decision that is taken much too lightly. it is intended for marriage really / and there are reasons the manufactuer who created God designed it. it is for pleasure and procreation between a married couple. unfortunatly the media has sold the majority of people a incorrect idea of what it is really about / intended for. always best to follow the manufacturers instructions with anything.
2007-12-27 11:07:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mildred S 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Many women and children are in poverty in this country on account of men who don't live up to their end of the bargain. Sorry, but you once let your &*&* out of your pants, you're asking for a pregnancy to occur.
MANY women raise children ALONE. Shame on men that can't be adults and support the children THEY made when they slept with the mother. It's 50/50, take your share of the blame and be a man, even if you are a cheap jerk that can't afford to feed your own kid.
Truth is, no one "forced" any man to have sex, choices have consequences, for BOTH sexes.
2007-12-27 11:04:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Crystal S 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
What do you mean he didn't choose? If you are having unprotected sex, what do you think is going to happen? Unless there is another bright star in the sky, it takes two people to make a baby! If he didn't want the responsibility of fatherhood or the fiscal part of it, then don't have sex.
2007-12-27 11:04:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by avidreader 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
If he didnt want the financial responsibility then dont sleep around. It's simple. Ever thought how hard a decision is for the women? HAVING A BABY IN HER AND THINKING OF GETTING RID OF IT !! - a decision a man can ignore.
It works both ways.
2007-12-27 11:05:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lou 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Normally the argument made by women is that because its their body, they have the option of what to do with it. Which is pretty much the same way the law sees it.
2007-12-27 11:03:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by UTLonghorn(Pre-Med) 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
"force the man into fatherhood and
a financial responsibility that he didn't choose" - No one is forcing him in to father hood. He entered fatherhood on his own when he had sex.
2007-12-27 11:04:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by davidmi711 7
·
1⤊
1⤋