Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
michaelandjimi
Isn't Even Playing
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:21 am UTC
Location: Citizen of the World
Contact:

Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby michaelandjimi » Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:44 am UTC

In the most idiot move ever, this happened:
COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio lawmaker has introduced a bill that would prevent a woman from having an abortion unless she gets written consent from the biological father.

The proposal by State Rep. John Adams, R-Sidney, has stirred up controversy across the nation, 10TV's Kevin Landers reported.

"What does the father have to say in the abortion of his child? He has nothing to say (under current law)," Adams told 10TV News.

In the case where the father isn't known, House Bill 252 would compel the woman to provide a list of names of people who may be the father in an effort to determine paternity. The bill also would make it a crime for women to lie about who the father is, and make it illegal for doctors to perform abortions without the father's consent.

The bill would force a woman to have a child if the father does not agree to an abortion.

"That child should be born, not killed," Adams said.

The proposal has created a fire storm among pro-choice advocates.

Pro-Choice Ohio issued a statement saying Adams' bill is "completely out of touch with Ohio's mainstream values. The measure is a clear attack on a woman's freedom and privacy.... It does absolutely nothing to reduce the need for abortion."

The group Feminists for Choice released a statement saying "...this is ridiculous. It's just another mechanism for demonizing and isolating women who have sex."

Planned Parenthood vows to fight the legislation if it becomes law.

"It would require written informed consent of the potential father," Gary Daugherty, executive director of Planned Parenthood of Ohio, told 10TV News. "The (U.S.) Supreme Court has already spoken on the issue. It is clearly unconstitutional."

Adams' bill is not considered likely to gain approval in the Democratic-controlled House.
SOURCE

There are so many things wrong with the Bill, it's hard to know where to start. Female autonomy, pregnancy from rape, reinforcing patriarchial stereotypes...
I'm just glad it doesn't look like going ahead. Looks like the worst thing ever.
Whelan wrote:Relax, have a good time, and hope for the bees ;)

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:53 am UTC

michaelandjimi wrote:In the most idiot move ever, this happened:


I don't know about ever. Abortion used to be illegal in most of America.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Lycur
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:06 pm UTC
Location: Nutopia

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Lycur » Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:56 am UTC

The group Feminists for Choice released a statement saying "...this is ridiculous. It's just another mechanism for demonizing and isolating women who have sex."

Is there a Feminists Against Choice group?

Anyways, this basically amounts to "man proposes very stupid idea that will never go anywhere".

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:58 am UTC

Lycur wrote:Is there a Feminists Against Choice group?


Ask and you shall receive. Eek.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:03 am UTC

Lycur wrote:"man proposes very stupid idea that will never go anywhere".

Yeah it's pretty stupid. I wouldn't get too upset unless the bill got some legislative force behind it.

Are the details of abortion legislated on a state-by-state basis, in which case this would just be an Ohio law (in the impossible event it is passed)? Or is he aiming nationally? If the latter, enter political suicide.

Also, how do you prove paternity inside the womb? Sounds like some very expensive and potentially painful testing on the mother. Who's paying for it?
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:05 am UTC

Well, the SCOTUS precedent is based on female autonomy, so I think this is unconstitutional.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:09 am UTC

This bill will go nowhere, but it is really such a radical concept that a father should have rights as it pertains to his unborn child?

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:14 am UTC

Justice Blackmun, in the Roe v. Wade decision wrote:For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.


Unconstitutional bill is unconstitutional.

Aetius wrote:This bill will go nowhere, but it is really such a radical concept that a father should have rights as it pertains to his unborn child another person's body?


Yes. Yes it is.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:20 am UTC

Aetius wrote:This bill will go nowhere, but it is really such a radical concept that a father should have rights as it pertains to his unborn child?

As soon as my boyfriend can carry our child to term, has to worry about birth control pills every day lest he become pregnant, shops for maternity clothing when that happens, and has to worry about pregnancy as the price for enjoying himself sexually with or without the use of birth control from puberty to menopause, I'll let him make the decision.

I'll kill the first person who makes a Schwarzenegger reference :evil:
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:21 am UTC

Let's also not forget that just because a man says you can't get an abortion doesn't mean he will help out.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
scrovak
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: Harford County, MD [USA]
Contact:

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby scrovak » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:24 am UTC

This bill basically solidifies (if passed) the age-old stereotype of women being baby-making machines.

and if she's forced to have a baby she doesnt want, she'd sooner kill herself than have the baby. This shit is, in so many ways, fucked up.
MrGee wrote:I would never eat a person. Have you seen the conditions they're raised in?
kapojinha wrote:You're amazing, which is why I'm going to marry you.

Angua wrote:coordinated baby attacks

User avatar
michaelandjimi
Isn't Even Playing
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:21 am UTC
Location: Citizen of the World
Contact:

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby michaelandjimi » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:24 am UTC

Lycur wrote:Anyways, this basically amounts to "man proposes very stupid idea that will never go anywhere".
Yeah, I posted it as more of a "Look how stupid this dude is" than an "Oh no, bad shit is about to happen in Ohio" story.
Whelan wrote:Relax, have a good time, and hope for the bees ;)

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aikanaro » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:34 am UTC

Odd question: If Woman A becomes pregnant, but doesn't want to carry the child to term (for whatever reason), is it possible to transplant the fetus somehow to Woman B, who would rather carry the child to term herself than see it aborted?
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:37 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Aetius wrote:This bill will go nowhere, but it is really such a radical concept that a father should have rights as it pertains to his unborn child another person's body?


Yes. Yes it is.


I love when an issue as morally and legally complex as snuffing out a potential human life is boiled down to a caricature. It adds so much to the discussion.

I am not for outlawing abortion, but if you think the issue is as simple as a pure medical issue you have missed the plot. I'm not supporting this bill, as it leaves a great number of issues and complications unaddressed, but I do think that the creation and raising of a child is both a joint responsibility and a joint right.

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aikanaro » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:40 am UTC

Oh, another weird, but semi-related question I just thought of: Let's say there's a couple that's incapable of conception, for whatever reason, and they make arrangements for a female friend of theirs to serve as a surrogate mother. After a few weeks of pregnancy, however, for whatever reason, the surrogate decides she can't take it, and wants to have an abortion. Does the couple have any say and/or rights in the matter?
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:46 am UTC

Aetius wrote:I do think that the creation and raising of a child is both a joint responsibility and a joint right.

The world country in which we live does not enforce that raising a child is a joint responsibility. In cases where custody is disputed, our courts favor putting the child with its natural mother, unless that mother poses a serious danger to the child. And please don't get me started on the laughability of child support, as though money (when you can find the father to collect it) could possibly make up for complete absentia in a child's life.
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:48 am UTC

Aetius wrote:I love when an issue as morally and legally complex as snuffing out a potential human life is boiled down to a caricature. It adds so much to the discussion.


Caricature? Any law like this would (unconstitutionally) inhibit a mother's right to control her own body. If you don't think this is an important thing to consider, then I can't do much but roll my eyes at you.

Aetius wrote:I do think that the creation and raising of a child is both a joint responsibility and a joint right.


So the mother has the right to decide whether she would like to take that responsibility. If the father gets to approve her decision, then it's not a right.

Aikanaro wrote:Does the couple have any say and/or rights in the matter?


Depends on the state, I think. For example, here in Michigan, Wikipedia says that the state "not only hold[s] them unenforceable, but also impos[es] fines and jail time on anyone who enters into such a contract (up to five years and $50,000 for some)," so the issue couldn't come up in a legal context.

zug wrote:The world in which we live does not enforce that raising a child is a joint responsibility. Our courts favor putting the child with its natural mother, unless that mother poses a serious danger to the child. And please don't get me started on the laughability of child support, as though money (when you can find the father to collect it) could possibly make up for complete absentia in a child's life.


Cool story: a lot of MRAs say that the typical custody pattern is evidence of discrimination against men.

Spoiler:
Not really that cool, actually.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:53 am UTC

zug wrote:
Aetius wrote:I do think that the creation and raising of a child is both a joint responsibility and a joint right.

The world country in which we live does not enforce that raising a child is a joint responsibility. In cases where custody is disputed, our courts favor putting the child with its natural mother, unless that mother poses a serious danger to the child. And please don't get me started on the laughability of child support, as though money (when you can find the father to collect it) could possibly make up for complete absentia in a child's life.


I fail to see how enshrining the notion that the father is not an equal partner will do anything to improve the situation with regards to absentee fathers.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:58 am UTC

Aetius wrote:I fail to see how enshrining the notion that the father is not an equal partner will do anything to improve the situation with regards to absentee fathers.

The point is that there are a significant number of fathers who are non-participants in their children's lives. Whether it's created or reinforced by a court order to visit their children once every x weeks, or that the father feels less responsibility to the child since it didn't come out of his genitalia is irrelevant.

When there's absolute equality with regard to rearing a child, men will be granted the right to contribute equally to the decision. In this case, however, that equality is prevented by anatomical restraints. So get on science to make external wombs, or uteruses for men, and then we'll get back to this whole abortion debate.
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby The Reaper » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:01 am UTC

This thread title made me 'wat'. People that think that bill is a good idea still exist? Can we have a law that requires them to stay in the kitchen barefoot as well?

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:03 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Aetius wrote:I love when an issue as morally and legally complex as snuffing out a potential human life is boiled down to a caricature. It adds so much to the discussion.


Caricature? Any law like this would (unconstitutionally) inhibit a mother's right to control her own body. If you don't think this is an important thing to consider, then I can't do much but roll my eyes at you.


Of course it's an important consideration (hence why I said I don't support the bill because I feel it inadequately addresses those rights), but it is not the only consideration. There are two other people (or one person and one fetus-with-a-chance-to-be-a-person if you want to get technical) in the situation whose lives will be profoundly affected by the choice being contemplated.

Your debate tactic in your initial response, as is your pattern, is useless and adds absolutely zero.

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
Aetius wrote:I do think that the creation and raising of a child is both a joint responsibility and a joint right.


So the mother has the right to decide whether she would like to take that responsibility. If the father gets to approve her decision, then it's not a right.


It's not an issue of the father "approving" her decision, it's about reaching a decision that does not lead to a wanted child being aborted. If the father wants an abortion and the mother wants to keep the child, well that sucks for the father. Her decision to keep the child is not subject to the father's approval.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:06 am UTC

There are two other people (or one person and one fetus-with-a-chance-to-be-a-person if you want to get technical) in the situation whose lives will be profoundly affected by the choice being contemplated.

Really? Because I'm looking around, and I see an awful lot of men whose lives haven't been changed much at all compared to the women they impregnated.

It's a fact that a woman takes on the preponderance of the burden when it comes to child-bearing, and child-rearing. Acknowledge it.
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:12 am UTC

zug wrote:
There are two other people (or one person and one fetus-with-a-chance-to-be-a-person if you want to get technical) in the situation whose lives will be profoundly affected by the choice being contemplated.

Really? Because I'm looking around, and I see an awful lot of men whose lives haven't been changed much at all compared to the women they impregnated.

It's a fact that a woman takes on the preponderance of the burden when it comes to child-bearing, and child-rearing. Acknowledge it.


It's a fact that an unacceptable percentage of women are forced to take on the preponderance of the burden, and that is something that we as a society need to address, but your statement is not true universally. I know plenty of equal partnerships (I grew up in one) or families where the father bears a greater burden. I personally feel that the more the law and societal expectations invests the man in the child in terms of both rights and responsibilities, the greater the percentage of men who stay and share the burden will be.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:13 am UTC

Aetius wrote:There are two other people (or one person and one fetus-with-a-chance-to-be-a-person if you want to get technical) in the situation whose lives will be profoundly affected by the choice being contemplated.


So? This doesn't give them a legal right to override the mother's decision concerning herself, unless you can show that they should have one rather than suggesting that it might exist and that we shouldn't rule it out.

Aetius wrote:It's not an issue of the father "approving" her decision, it's about reaching a decision that does not lead to a wanted child being aborted.


Is this a legitimate purpose for a law? Roe v. Wade says no; the mother's rights certainly don't support it.

Aetius wrote:If the father wants an abortion and the mother wants to keep the child, well that sucks for the father. Her decision to keep the child is not subject to the father's approval.


The situations are not analogous, as the father is not going to carry a baby for nine months.

When I want your debate advice, I'll ask for it. But don't hold your breath.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:20 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Is this a legitimate purpose for a law? Roe v. Wade says no; the mother's rights certainly don't support it.


I'm not looking at it legally. Legally I would expect this bill to be crushed in under five minutes, as would any similar bill. I am looking at morally, asking the question, "Is it moral to abort the child of a man whom you know wants to keep the child and is willing to take responsibility for it?" I'm sorry if that doesn't strike me as a "no brainer" moral issue.

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:When I want your debate advice, I'll ask for it. But don't hold your breath.


Don't worry, I would never dream of holding my breath waiting for the day when you debate for any reason other than reading your own words.
Last edited by Aetius on Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:21 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:20 am UTC

Another thing to consider: What if the mother doesn't know who the father is, or where he is?
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:22 am UTC

Intercept wrote:Another thing to consider: What if the mother doesn't know who the father is, or where he is?


That is one of the failings of the bill as written, and that reason alone I would consider enough cause not to support the bill, although there are many others.

Heavenlytoaster
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:21 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Heavenlytoaster » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:24 am UTC

Intercept wrote:Another thing to consider: What if the mother doesn't know who the father is, or where he is?

article wrote: In the case where the father isn't known, House Bill 252 would compel the woman to provide a list of names of people who may be the father in an effort to determine paternity.


As ridiculous as this is, they could have tried to pass it off as sensible, but putting things like this in just make it seem like an onion article.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:27 am UTC

That's just horrible. So what if they can't identify the father? Also, why wouldn't the woman just lie? By the time they find the whole list and test it they'd probably say it was too late for an abortion.

Not that any of this matters, for many more important reasons that this bill is horrible.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:28 am UTC

Aetius wrote:I'm not looking at it legally. Legally I would expect this bill to be crushed in under five minutes, as would any similar bill. I am looking at morally, asking the question...


I read your original post as saying "Of course this will be voted down, but is it really that bad of an idea?" I understand now.

Aetius wrote:"Is it moral to abort the child of a man whom you know wants to keep the child and is willing to take responsibility for it?"


You've alluded to this more than once. What specific moral objection do you have to an abortion which the father does not want?

Aetius wrote:Don't worry, I would never dream of holding my breath waiting for the day when you debate for any reason other than reading your own words.


I'm talking to you right now. Step back from flaming for a bit and we might be able to have a conversation.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Belial » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:33 am UTC

Aetius wrote:Of course it's an important consideration (hence why I said I don't support the bill because I feel it inadequately addresses those rights), but it is not the only consideration. There are two other people (or one person and one fetus-with-a-chance-to-be-a-person if you want to get technical) in the situation whose lives will be profoundly affected by the choice being contemplated.

Your debate tactic in your initial response, as is your pattern, is useless and adds absolutely zero.


No. You literally *can't* do anything about the issue you're describing without violating the right of the mother to control her own body. You can't handwave that. There's no middle on that. So MaJ's response was right on.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:33 am UTC

You mean my response?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
Ryom
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 7:52 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Ryom » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:35 am UTC

I actually support this general idea (without necessarily supporting how the bill is currently setup) if you have two consenting adults in a sexual relationship. Don't want a baby? Don't have intercourse, or otherwise be prepared for the responsibility that comes with it. There are plenty of ways to have sexy times without having the man spray his semen into his partner's vagina. If you really need to have that particular action satisfied, be prepared to accept the possible outcome.

The mother has accepted this responsibility by consenting to have vaginal sex with her partner. This makes the decision to abort the choice of BOTH people. It is not taking away the mother's rights, but it would take away the father's rights if he gets no legal say. The only time a mother should have full autonomy in this choice is where she has been diagnosed with a life-threatening condition by bringing a child to term or she had not engaged in consensual sex.

I would be livid if the woman I had been having sex with chose to kill my child and I had no say whatsoever. Turning it around ladies, how would you feel if the father was the baby-bearer and he could terminate your son or daughter against your will? Aborting a child that isn't threatening your life is being wildly unaccepting of responsibility. But that's an entirely different discussion.
Last edited by Ryom on Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:38 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby SummerGlauFan » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:36 am UTC

Well, what if the woman is seeking an abortion for a serious medical condition, and doesn't know who the eff the father is, then the time it takes to do DNA tests could be deadly.

Also, what if the father is an abusive boyfriend/husband/whatever, and the woman wants nothing more to do with him?

There are a heck of a lot of other bad scenarios, rather than just "well it's his baby, too," which has also already been answered.
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

Aetius
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:23 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Aetius » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:37 am UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:You've alluded to this more than once. What specific moral objection do you have to an abortion which the father does not want?


The fact that it's his child. I don't subscribe to the view that a fetus = full person, like pro-life advocates do, but it is not merely some clump of cells. If you punch a pregnant woman in the stomach, it is punished above and beyond regular assault. Drinking alcohol during pregnancy is considered a moral wrong. Even in a society that has legal abortion, we recognize the fetus as being something more than just a growth or extension of the mother. I don't think it's unreasonable for a father to be invested in the child before it is born, nor do I think it unreasonable to see a moral issue in depriving him of that child. Some may argue that the right of the mother to control her uterus supersedes the father's right to be a father. I personally subscribe to the view that if either of the biological parents is willing and prepared to provide for the child, the moral right is to give the child life.

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:I'm talking to you right now. Step back from flaming for a bit and we might be able to have a conversation.


You'll have to forgive me, the first thing you ever said to me on this board was telling me to go fuck myself.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:39 am UTC

Dear god, no. Women would be just as for abortion if men got pregnant. And though they both consent, only the woman has to carry the baby. People would still have sex, and women would be fucked a lot more often that not when they got pregnant. What if they have sex with a random pro-lifer? He has no intent to raise the child, but he's not going to let her get an abortion. Also, there's the fact that most pregnancies that end in abortion aren't planned or wanted. You can't just say a man gets to fuck up a woman's life.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
Ryom
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 7:52 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Ryom » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:47 am UTC

She does NOT have to consent to vaginal intercourse with him. That solves that problem right there. There are other ways of pleasuring your partner. Use them and save the vaginal intercourse for when you are happily married and planning a baby.

Responsibility goes both ways, the woman has TOTAL power in this regard. She does not need to consent to any action that could result in her pregnancy.

viewtopic.php?p=1699192#p1699192

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby Intercept » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:52 am UTC

It's still her body though. It's pretty easy to say go through with the pregnancy, when you know, you aren't pregnant. Also the woman is the one who would have to keep and support the child.

You're saying, "Let's make it equal, by giving the man more say!" You're taking it the other way though and the woman is now far lower than the man ever was.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:54 am UTC

Aetius wrote:You'll have to forgive me, the first thing you ever said to me on this board was telling me to go fuck myself.


I'm genuinely sorry for that.

Aetius wrote:I don't think it's unreasonable for a father to be invested in the child before it is born, nor do I think it unreasonable to see a moral issue in depriving him of that child. Some may argue that the right of the mother to control her uterus supersedes the father's right to be a father.


I don't see the father's right to be a father that you do. He has that right once the pregnancy is over and he can begin providing equal care for the child. Before that, like Belial said, there's no way to protect this right without overriding the mother's rights over herself.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
zug
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:05 am UTC

Re: Bill Would Require Man's OK For Abortion

Postby zug » Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:57 am UTC

Ryom wrote:I actually support this general idea (without necessarily supporting how the bill is currently setup) if you have two consenting adults in a sexual relationship. Don't want a baby? Don't have intercourse, or otherwise be prepared for the responsibility that comes with it. There are plenty of ways to have sexy times without having the man spray his semen into his partner's vagina. If you really need to have that particular action satisfied, be prepared to accept the possible outcome.

The 1950s are that way ---------->

far, far away from this forum
Velifer wrote:Go to the top of a tower, drop a heavy weight and a photon, observe when they hit the ground.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests