Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The NFL Shield At Midfield

40 Years of Legal Abortion

45 posts in this topic

My words didn't require a shift key and a number.

no, but the filter did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure. Also the father should have the right to demand an abortion. If the mom refuses, he should not be required to pay child support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure. Also the father should have the right to demand an abortion. If the mom refuses, he should not be required to pay child support.

Forced abortions. Nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not saying he can force an abortion...he's saying that the man should have a say and if he wants no part (yet willing to pay for the abortion), that he shouldn't be forced to pay child support.

I somewhat agree in principle, but I feel douchebags out there impregnating everything they can get should be forced to support monetarilly or through public service. Pay the state back for the costs you are incurring on society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ that. otherwise every lowlife deadbeat sticking his dick in some chick and knocking her up could just say "yeah I demand an abortion" and by default never spend a dime of money on his kid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I agree and don't agree with is not relevant to this discussion, IMO

What a woman does with her body is her choice.

Her sins are her's to deal with in her own way.

this is where i'm torn. it's ultimately a philosophical decision regarding where life begins, and the answer is what separates the issue from being one of women's rights from being one of human rights. either way it is a social issue that men can not simply be removed from the conversation, as even the most fully-extended women's rights should in no way exclude a holistic dialogue to hash out a conclusion.

I'm not entirely sure that "I'm a guy therefore I have no say" isn't just a cop-out (tempting on so explosive an issue.)

but as with most things I'm still filtering information and attempting to determine where I stand, so I'm open to data and arguments that expose my reasoning as faulty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling as science advances and we find more out about consciousness, we'll see people not being able to have late term abortions or eat much in the way of meat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off...people need to come to a decision if they care when life begins when contrasted against the wants of the host mother.

Probably 95% of all Americans see the need for instances where life of the mother is something that has to be mandatory in any legislation. But sadly, liberals lump mental states and all sorts of other issues that equate to "life" of the mother. Make it simple and direct to having to be a direct threat to the physical health of the mother.

Rape legislation could be done too, but I'm of the opinion that in cases of rape...a police report MUST be filed, if the alleged father is known prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. Again, a vast majority of Americans would be for abortion in cases of rape, but even with current laws requiring Planned Parenthood to turn all rape cases into the authorities for statutory rape or violent rape investigations...PP chooses to thwart the law and refuse to report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a fairly well defined line between an actual life and a potential life. When you get into the late stages of a pregnancy those lines start to get blurred, but for the first trimester or so that fetus is surely not a person.

If you want to give full life rights to a 2 month old fetus thats going to require a lot more than just stopping abortions- you would need protections against the mother's actions. Having a miscarriage would be a crime (unless you could prove a medical reason), and drinking or smoking while pregnant would need an assault charge at least (I wouldnt mind this anyways)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is where i'm torn. it's ultimately a philosophical decision regarding where life begins, and the answer is what separates the issue from being one of women's rights from being one of human rights. either way it is a social issue that men can not simply be removed from the conversation, as even the most fully-extended women's rights should in no way exclude a holistic dialogue to hash out a conclusion.

I'm not entirely sure that "I'm a guy therefore I have no say" isn't just a cop-out (tempting on so explosive an issue.)

but as with most things I'm still filtering information and attempting to determine where I stand, so I'm open to data and arguments that expose my reasoning as faulty

Im not particularly copping out, as much as I have strong feelings on telling people what they can and can not do with their own bodies.

But like you I am torn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites