Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most definitely. One thing I've found odd about some women who've chimed in on this topic over the years: they want a man to stick around after she becomes pregnant. In fact, they expect him to. I agree with that wholeheartedly.
However, with equal responsibility, comes equal say in the matter. If the woman expects the man to be just as much a parent as she is (and to have an equal say in where the child goes to school, how the child is raised, etc), and to make equal financial contributions in raising the child -- then that woman better be prepared to extend equal say to all facets of the decisions regarding the child.
And yes, that includes whether or not to abort the pregnancy.
So, one says to abort the pregnancy and the other says to carry the pregnancy to term.....who gets the deciding vote?
Most definitely. One thing I've found odd about some women who've chimed in on this topic over the years: they want a man to stick around after she becomes pregnant. In fact, they expect him to. I agree with that wholeheartedly.
However, with equal responsibility, comes equal say in the matter. If the woman expects the man to be just as much a parent as she is (and to have an equal say in where the child goes to school, how the child is raised, etc), and to make equal financial contributions in raising the child -- then that woman better be prepared to extend equal say to all facets of the decisions regarding the child.
And yes, that includes whether or not to abort the pregnancy.
So, she has to risk death, risk permanent medical issues AND permanently alter her body while he gets to hand out cigars? How is that fair?
You cannot force a woman to continue a pregnancy.
The minute a fetus can be removed and implanted in a man is the minute he gets a final say.
what human life? Im sorry but a fetus is far from having a recognizable "human life" as is a fetus in a pregnant whale is a recognizable "animal life".
Forcing a woman to continue with an unwanted pregnancy is equivalent to forcing them back into the kitchen, with no rights or choices at all except those some man has allowed to give her.
Backwards step people.
Instead of harping "pro-life" why don't you all become "pro-education" instead.
NO WOMAN WANTS TO BE PREGNANT UNLESS SHE WANTS A BABY.
Pregnancy is uncomfortable at best, and some women can't even get out of bed they are so ill.
Who would choose to go through that unsupported for a parasite you never wanted?
Why do people like you have the power to **** me off?
You know, women (most women) don't think about how uncomfortable pregnancy is when they are enjoying themselves, if you know what I mean.
Rape/incest is different; I don't believe in abortions under any circumstances, but I can see why this would be acceptable. I have recently come to terms with the sad fact that abortion won't be outlawed. But I believe that it is one of the main things in this country that needs to be regulated.
I am very pro-life and pro-education.
It's a baby when it's wanted and a parasite when its not. How ****ed up is that?
You are the one who bought it up. You think the taxpayers should be able to take a child away from its mother if she needs taxpayer dollars to care for it.....if that isn't welfare, what is it?
Why shouldn't the taxpayer also be able to take a child away from a husband and wife who need taxpayer dollars to care for their child? They also could have decided not to have a child they could not support.....they could have aborted or put it up for adoption. If they decide to keep the baby, they should pay. It is their responsibility to carry the burden. If they can't, and want the taxpayers to carry the burden, than I, as a taxpayer, demand that the baby be taken away from them and given to a couple who can. Right?
Why should a couple be allowed to use taxpayer money and keep their child, but a single woman has her child taken away?
That is NOT a fallacious question.....it is a valid question.
It is a fallacy. Why? The point in discussion is abortion. I linked it with welfare as you correctly mentiobned it above. However, you tried to make a link between welfare and other situations also. The point in discussion is not welfare, it is abortion. Because two different situations are linked to welfare it does not mean they apply the same. That is why it is a fallacy so I do not agree to justify or not one or the other because the point is abortion, not the other situations you state. Take care.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
