Should a man be allowed to stop a woman from having an abortion?

[groundpounder]

why is that sexist? its true :confused

If he meant it literally, then he's implying that women don't have the ability/power to make decisions at any other point in their lives. Or maybe it's social commentary.

Either way, it's borderline, so gracie was asking for clarification.

 

[GraceAbounds]

why is that sexist? its true :confused

Like I said - I may be misunderstanding him which is why I didn't assume and asked HIM to elaborate.

 

[NightWarrior]

Maybe I am reading this wrong but that sounds extremely sexist or narrow minded or both. Please tell me I am reading that statement wrong. Elaborate if you don't mind.

It was meant as a sexist statement. Women have been held back in their ability to make decisions since the dawn of man. With this single case, they have the final say. If that is sexist, so be it. I didn't mean I was sexist. I was just stating an observation.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Ok, I see your intention with the statement. On the Internet where you can't see people's mannerisms or hear their tone of voice many things typed still leave a lot to be interpreted. Thanks for elaborating.

 

[NightWarrior]

Ok, I see your intention with the statement. On the Internet where you can't see people's mannerisms or hear their tone of voice many things typed still leave a lot to be interpreted. Thanks for elaborating.

No problem. I may be a lot of things, but sexist is not one of them.

 

[groundpounder]

So it was social commentary on the sexist treatment of women, not AV's views. WHEW!!

 

[GraceAbounds]

No problem. I may be a lot of things, but sexist is not one of them.

I would never start to label you and think I could put you in a nice little box over a single statement made on the Internet anyways. That isn't my style.

 

[NightWarrior]

So it was social commentary on the sexist treatment of women, not AV's views. WHEW!!

Absolutely. I have two daughters. I have to be the best role model for them possible.

I would never start to label you and think I could put you in a nice little box over a single statement made on the Internet anyways. That isn't my style.

Glad to hear.

 

[NightWarrior]

I'm digging this multi-quote thing. LoL.

 

[Maritxu]

In a perfect world, couples would decide together if they want to not don't want to keep the baby. But because we don't live in a perfect world, and basing my answer in the possibility of abortion just being a woman's right to have control of her body and life, I think a woman should be the one choosing. She is the one who is going to be pregnant 9 months, not the man. It's easy to have a baby when you only need to wait...

 

[Maritxu]

It is not his fault that he was lied to. But sex, even with birth control is not a sure safeguard. People need to really grasp this. I don't understand why they don't. The only way to prevent pregnancy 100% is abstinence, plain and simple - as much as people don't want to hear it is true. My sister in law who got her tubes tied - guess what? She got pregnant. I'm not saying I like that answer - but it is what it is.

So you should never have sex if you don't want babies?
For example, just imagine that you are in a very stable relationship, even married, to the love of your life. But in this moment, you're still studying and your economic situation is not that good to support a child. Should you go for abstinence?

 

[GraceAbounds]

In a perfect world, couples would decide together if they want to not don't want to keep the baby. But because we don't live in a perfect world, and basing my answer in the possibility of abortion just being a woman's right to have control of her body and life, I think a woman should be the one choosing. She is the one who is going to be pregnant 9 months, not the man. It's easy to have a baby when you only need to wait...

No, in a responsible world couples decide together. It doesn't have to be a perfect world for people to use some common sense. They know that the possible consequence of sex is a child and they should discuss that possibility before hand as to how they would handle it 'if' they created life - even if that is not what their intentions are. They shouldn't wait until afterward and act all shocked.

 

[GraceAbounds]

So you should never have sex if you don't want babies?
For example, just imagine that you are in a very stable relationship, even married, to the love of your life. But in this moment, you're still studying and your economic situation is not that good to support a child. Should you go for abstinence?

No one stated that people should not have sex.

It is not difficult to grasp this, just TALK about the possible outcomes before hand. All it takes is some responsibility, some common sense, and some communication.

We aren't dogs - our brain functions are stronger than our body urges, unless of course there is something wrong with you. (you in general, not you personally Maria)

 

[NightWarrior]

In a perfect world, couples would decide together if they want to not don't want to keep the baby. But because we don't live in a perfect world, and basing my answer in the possibility of abortion just being a woman's right to have control of her body and life, I think a woman should be the one choosing. She is the one who is going to be pregnant 9 months, not the man. It's easy to have a baby when you only need to wait...

If that were only true. Don't believe everything you read on the internet or hear on the news.

 

[Maritxu]

No, in a responsible world couples decide together. It doesn't have to be a perfect world for people to use some common sense. They know that the possible consequence of sex is a child and they should discuss that possibility before hand as to how they would handle it 'if' they created life - even if that is not what their intentions are. They shouldn't wait until afterward and act all shocked.

I used the word perfect because some people are abusive and manipulative and they could bring that to choosing wether have or not an abortion.
I have made no statement about my own personal opinion of sleeping around or abortion. I basically agree with your post above though.

 

[Maritxu]

No one stated that people should not have sex.

It is not difficult to grasp this, just TALK about the possible outcomes before hand. All it takes is some responsibility, some common sense, and some communication.

We aren't dogs - our brain functions are stronger than our body urges, unless of course there is something wrong with you. (you in general, not you personally Maria)

I was doubting wether to answer or not to this post, because I fear we are going to start debating abortion and that is not the point here, but even when you are responsible, and know the outcome of sex (a pregnacy) and accept it, maybe by the time you actually got pregnant it is not the best idea to have kids, and you won't be able to give them what they need. Wether it is good or correct to abort is another thing, but the truth remains there.
Besides, you know that even though you, I and most people here have that level of maturity and responsabily, many don't. People will probably still act irresponsably no matter how irrational it is.

 

[Breath]

SHOULD a man have the right to his unborn child (no matter what stage of development it is)? Of course.
But possession is nine-tenths of the law, as the saying goes. Since the woman carries it, she still controls its destiny.
For those of you who say the united sperm and egg isn't human...what else is it going to grow into? At what point does it change from a clump of cells to a human? This is the problem with thinking that a fetus isn't human. Just because it doesn't function the way you do doesn't mean it isn't human. ALL of us are begun in such a fashion, it's not like some fetuses become human and some don't.
Also, I thought the law was that if you aren't married, you can't just write anyone's name down as the father. I thought that line had to be left blank if the woman was unmarried. Conversely, a married woman can legally put her husband's name as the father even if he isn't? I don't think the father/husband signs the birth certificate either. The law knows who the mother is, so I think she is the only one who signs it.

 

[All Else Failed]

SHOULD a man have the right to his unborn child (no matter what stage of development it is)? Of course.
But possession is nine-tenths of the law, as the saying goes. Since the woman carries it, she still controls its destiny.
For those of you who say the united sperm and egg isn't human...what else is it going to grow into? At what point does it change from a clump of cells to a human? This is the problem with thinking that a fetus isn't human. Just because it doesn't function the way you do doesn't mean it isn't human. ALL of us are begun in such a fashion, it's not like some fetuses become human and some don't.
Also, I thought the law was that if you aren't married, you can't just write anyone's name down as the father. I thought that line had to be left blank if the woman was unmarried. Conversely, a married woman can legally put her husband's name as the father even if he isn't? I don't think the father/husband signs the birth certificate either. The law knows who the mother is, so I think she is the only one who signs it.

A fetus is a human when it gains brainwaves. Its a fleshy shell until then.

 

[NightWarrior]

We should probably make a separate thread for the debate on when people feel a fetus is considered "human".

 

[Peter Parka]

I don't believe the woman should abort the baby in the first place. So in my opinion, by all means let the child should go to the father who desires to love and raise the child.

But abortion is legal, so unfortunately I don't see how the father can stop the woman from getting an abortion since by law the rights and life of the mother are deemed as more valuable than the rights and life of the baby.

Agree with this though most of the time I fail to see how the mothers life comes into the equation.