Why the abortion debate is never black and white...

[elfag]

WTF do you mean its not black and white. All abortions, all the time, at any time. Problem solved. If you dont like it then GTFO.

[Bossy]

But child support money can not be waived currently. They have it half right.

I look at that, like this:

Either way, if that child is going to live and be in this world it deserves to have a decent life. If you don't want to be apart of that child's life, no one can make you. But just because he/she is alive, he/she deserve the best possible start.

The mother will still be a primary provider for that child, but you will be ensuring he has a winter coat and enough to eat. He shouldn't suffer because you both couldn't make a decision. As a living breathing part of you, you should feel an obligation to ensure he at least has the bare necessities of life that no child should have to go without.

You may hate the mother, but it isn't the child's fault.

[cupocity303]

Honestly, your logic would be clever if it was on some alter universe where everything was backwards and different. Reality on this planet is something else.

First off you make claim after claim that men foot the bill, men have to pay, men have to be held accountable when it's not something he did alone, we get that.

What you fail to understand or just are ignoring because it destroys your entire argument is that money isn't the only thing of worth in this relationship as far as having to "pay". It's much easier to write a check or hand out cash than it is to wake up in the middle of the night and feed the kid, change the kid, clean his/her puke etc. Being a house wife or a single mother, while they don't technically get paid for doing that, don't think it's still not an incredible JOB being done.

Be there in the most difficult times of a small child and how incredibly taxing it is on a woman doing this on her own. You are 100% right in saying it's both the man and woman but unfortunately for you, it's the woman who carries the child inside of her and that's something that changes the dynamics of this and makes your argument pointless.

When two people have sex, it's MUTUAL, we agree on that right? So if both the male and female agreed to have sex but then all of a sudden the male decides he doesn't want to have the child that come from that sex, he can't FORCE the female to have an abortion.

You're making a emotional argument. NObody said that they don't appreciate what a woman has to do, to raise a child, if she is the stay-at-home parent.

Has nothing to do with the CENTRAL POINT WHICH IS: You're pregnant what should we do? And the woman being the only in control of going left or right.

But that still doesn't excuse his responsibility in the matter if she doesn't agree to it, I don't know what part of that you don't get.

It's like if you commit a crime and then go to the judge and say, ok I'm truly sorry for what I did, it still won't get you off even if you are truly sorry. You still have to pay for your actions regardless.

Clever example but not clever enough. Again your little hypothetical scenario takes the woman's side from the get-go with the Court example. No crime was being committed unless he raped her.

And even if we go along with your example, then the Judge in this case would be the Baby Mamma. And the judge could be lenient on you and let you off with a fine/community service, which would be paying for the abortion or freeing you of any long-term financial responsibility for the child.

[Ragnar Lothbrok]

if a person is not hurting herself or another human being, nobody has a right to tell them wtf to do. I look at abortion in the same light as a woman getting a boob job. If woman wants to get one, fine by me.

There are actually young children, infants that are OUT LIVING IN THE WORLD that need religious nut jobs help, are not getting it, because the religious nut jobs are worried about a person not even out in the world but inside another human being.

[elfag]

US was not supposed to be a theocracy but it is.

99% of politicians and lawmakers are christian idiots.

Anyone who wants an abortion should be allowed to have one. If you dont like them, fine, nobody will ever force you to have one. Dont enforce your obsolete ideas on everyone else.

[SkillspayBills]

What I always hated was people thinking being pro-choice means pro-abortion. I hate abortions, I wouldn't want to have one myself but I feel that it isn't my choice to tell a woman what to do. I believe in her CHOICE to choose what to do with her own body.

[squealpiggy]

There's a few comments about men's rights which seem to suggest that some of you expect zero risks. Comments like "what if the condom fails" for example. For every human activity there are risks and with risks come consequences. A risk of having protected sex is the contraceptive failing and the consequence of that risk is possible pregnancy. And yes, you might have to live with that risk. That doesn't mean you should then have any rights to a woman's reproductive system nor does it mean that you should be indemnified against financial responsibility for the child.

It would be like falling badly playing sport (risk) and being paralysed (consequence) and then claiming that you shouldn't be paralysed because you didn't consent to being paralysed. All this talk about how fair and unfair it is is bull because sometimes life isn't fair.

And I'll reiterate: Men have things significantly easier than women do in most aspects of their lives, including and especially child rearing.

[cupocity303]

I look at that, like this:

Either way, if that child is going to live and be in this world it deserves to have a decent life. If you don't want to be apart of that child's life, no one can make you. But just because he/she is alive, he/she deserve the best possible start.

The mother will still be a primary provider for that child, but you will be ensuring he has a winter coat and enough to eat. He shouldn't suffer because you both couldn't make a decision. As a living breathing part of you, you should feel an obligation to ensure he at least has the bare necessities of life that no child should have to go without.

You may hate the mother, but it isn't the child's fault.

This is all true except it still should be voluntary. We've seen some scenarios being used in this thread by different posters, to make their point. I.E. the bad mothers who use their kids as a safety net. The deadbeat guys who aren't responsible prior to and afterwards.

One can spin it in every which way, but if we really want equality then the perception can't always be in the woman's favor and call that equality. If the woman wants to join the military, then I don't think one should take it easy on her, she should pass all the physical tests that every other male has to. That's equality. Maybe with that, both extremes will get their way, by women technically being allowed to join the military BUT maybe less women in the military because they just can't pass the required tests (and they can't complain that they're being treated unfairly unless they contradict themselves and ask for easier standards).

And we all know about the rape accusations, and how one sided that has become in society. In an effort to help women (which is legitimate) the script got flipped, and the women are abusing it by falsely accusing and getting away with it. The male teacher gets ostracized while the female teacher gets sex symbol status (or if unattractive dismissed and ignored) FINE, nothing we can do with that.

But on this issue, as BoxTech suggested, it's a two way streak and voluntarism should be a right for both, and not hold it against the male for simply being born a male and not having to go through a pregnancy, therefore the only one responsible for casual sex and the after effects.

Yeah it's a child and not the child's fault. BUT just a while ago we were arguing about Pro-choice vs Pro-Life, and all of us Pro-Choicers dismiss this same argument if a Pro-Life person makes it.

[Boxingtech718v2]

There's a few comments about men's rights which seem to suggest that some of you expect zero risks. Comments like "what if the condom fails" for example. For every human activity there are risks and with risks come consequences. A risk of having protected sex is the contraceptive failing and the consequence of that risk is possible pregnancy. And yes, you might have to live with that risk. That doesn't mean you should then have any rights to a woman's reproductive system nor does it mean that you should be indemnified against financial responsibility for the child.

It would be like falling badly playing sport (risk) and being paralysed (consequence) and then claiming that you shouldn't be paralysed because you didn't consent to being paralysed. All this talk about how fair and unfair it is is bull because sometimes life isn't fair.

And I'll reiterate: Men have things significantly easier than women do in most aspects of their lives, including and especially child rearing.

Oh please save me your comments because instead of having a viable solution all you do is make the same tired excuses. Your recourse is for the man to be quiet and accept oppression because it makes you feel good inside. You have yet to offer a logical solution, or refute my argument with clear arguments. Life isn't fair so like you said so forget my support for the other social injustices. Men should boycott and vote against every abortions rights issue until our equal rights are realized.

[Bossy]

This is all true except it still should be voluntary. We've seen some scenarios being used in this thread by different posters, to make their point. I.E. the bad mothers who use their kids as a safety net. The deadbeat guys who aren't responsible prior to and afterwards.

One can spin it in every which way, but if we really want equality then the perception can't always be in the woman's favor and call that equality. If the woman wants to join the military, then I don't think one should take it easy on her, she should pass all the physical tests that every other male has to. That's equality. Maybe with that, both extremes will get their way, by women technically being allowed to join the military BUT maybe less women in the military because they just can't pass the required tests (and they can't complain that they're being treated unfairly unless they contradict themselves and ask for easier standards).

And we all know about the rape accusations, and how one sided that has become in society. In an effort to help women (which is legitimate) the script got flipped, and the women are abusing it by falsely accusing and getting away with it. The male teacher gets ostracized while the female teacher gets sex symbol status (or if unattractive dismissed and ignored) FINE, nothing we can do with that.

But on this issue, as BoxTech suggested, it's a two way streak and voluntarism should be a right for both, and not hold it against the male for simply being born a male and not having to go through a pregnancy, therefore the only one responsible for casual sex and the after effects.

Yeah it's a child and not the child's fault. BUT just a while ago we were arguing about Pro-choice vs Pro-Life, and all of us Pro-Choicers dismiss this same argument if a Pro-Life person makes it.

Trust me, I wholeheartedly understand what he is saying, I honestly do, but regardless of the parents there is still a child who will be the only one who truly suffers.

I'm not pro-choice, pro-life, anti-abortion, I feel like it is up to people in that situation to make the right choices for themselves. Granted they may not be the choices I would make for myself, but they are their choices and I don't have to live with them.

I will say if it is a situation where a woman of modest to no financial means purposefully 'traps' a wealthy man with the sole purpose of living off her child, she shouldn't be award some insane judgement of funds because she happened to dig her nails into a rich guy.

Alternatively, I don't think many people actually look at what a woman does get in child support. My friend has 3 children, was married and is now divorced, her husband pays her $265 a month; if he pays it at all. That works out to $2.94 per day, per child. The notion that women are somehow making a decent living out of having kids for child support money is offensive to me.