Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Abortion For Men

1…1112131416

Comments

  • #452
    Potatoeman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,544 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    ash23 wrote: »
    All the experts would say that having both parents in their life is for the best.

    To me, once a child is born it's a person and has the same rights as any other person. Seeing as the child had no say in the manner it was born, it is the one who should be protected. Whereas the man and woman who created it both made a choice to have sex and as adults both knew the consequences of that action.

    All these arguements sound like prolife mantra. I know its not what you mean but it sounds like it.


  • #453
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    ash23 wrote: »
    All the experts would say that having both parents in their life is for the best.

    To me, once a child is born it's a person and has the same rights as any other person. Seeing as the child had no say in the manner it was born, it is the one who should be protected. Whereas the man and woman who created it both made a choice to have sex and as adults both knew the consequences of that action.

    No not all the experts would say that. There are a myriad amount of experts who have different perspectives. There are experts for examples who say people with aspergers should not be parents or have access to their kids.

    To YOU maybe, but not to the law at all. You think minors can sit on a jury. I certainly would not give my child that right. You think they should vote? Drive? Order a pint? Get a job? EH EH. No way mamasita.

    You as an adult have the right to refuse medical treatment or vaccinations, your child does not have that right should you insist on it.

    There is no arguing that children have or should have the same rights as adults.


  • #454
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Potatoeman wrote: »
    All these arguements sound like prolife mantra. I know its not what you mean but it sounds like it.


    It definitely isn't. It's actually more from a fathers rights stance really.
    If you would argue that the role of a father isn't important in a childs life to enable a father to get out of his duties to his child, then how will any progress be made with fathers rights?

    Essentially saying it doesn't matter to the child if the father never bothers is giving credence to the argument that mothers should hold all the cards once the child arrives. Which in turn makes some women think a child can and should be used against a man. And that results in more men wanting to get out of the childs life.

    It's a vicious circle and men who abandon their kids or would argue the right to abandon their kids are doing not only the child a great disservice, but men in general.


  • #455
    Strong Life in Dublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 487 ✭✭Strong Life in Dublin


    BeerWolf wrote: »
    It's the woman's body... she gets the final say - how about the man in question doesn't stick his dick in unprotected next time ?

    Yeah okay that's fair enough but if you want to keep it THEN the man should not have to pay for child support etc if he doesn't want to


  • #456
    tinz18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭tinz18


    Maybe there should be something like a pre-coital legal binding document signed where both parties state what their stance is if an accidental pregnancy happened and what precautions being taken to prevent said happening. In order to have sex, they'd have to agree that if the woman got pregnant they would agree on such and such action and if there was a disagreement in views they'd have to walk away without having sex and find someone who agrees with their life decisions. A lot of guys I know would walk away knowing a girl was going to opt for an abortion and a lot of girls I know wouldn't sleep with a guy if they knew that they'd legally abort. Then there could be no complaints of "I didn't want" and "he said/she said" if he/she wanted to go ahead with the pregnancy/abortion because both parties would know what they're getting into from the get go.

    Would never happen but could be an option...


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    Potatoeman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,544 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    ash23 wrote: »
    It definitely isn't. It's actually more from a fathers rights stance really.
    If you would argue that the role of a father isn't important in a childs life to enable a father to get out of his duties to his child, then how will any progress be made with fathers rights?

    Essentially saying it doesn't matter to the child if the father never bothers is giving credence to the argument that mothers should hold all the cards once the child arrives. Which in turn makes some women think a child can and should be used against a man. And that results in more men wanting to get out of the childs life.

    It's a vicious circle and men who abandon their kids or would argue the right to abandon their kids are doing not only the child a great disservice, but men in general.

    It comes back to the initial issue where the father is excluded from having a
    say on whether he wants the child or not.


  • #458
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    tinz18 wrote: »
    Maybe there should be something like a pre-coital legal binding document signed where both parties state what their stance is if an accidental pregnancy happened and what precautions being taken to prevent said happening. In order to have sex, they'd have to agree that if the woman got pregnant they would agree on such and such action and if there was a disagreement in views they'd have to walk away without having sex and find someone who agrees with their life decisions. A lot of guys I know would walk away knowing a girl was going to opt for an abortion and a lot of girls I know wouldn't sleep with a guy if they knew that they'd legally abort. Then there could be no complaints of "I didn't want" and "he said/she said" if he/she wanted to go ahead with the pregnancy/abortion because both parties would know what they're getting into from the get go.

    Would never happen but could be an option...

    People change their minds. Happens more than you might think.


  • #459
    The Purveyor of Truth
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭The Purveyor of Truth


    Strong Life in Dublin wrote: »
    Yeah okay that's fair enough but if you want to keep it THEN the man should not have to pay for child support etc if he doesn't want to

    And who should financially support the child then? The tax payer?

    I think men should always financially provide for the children they are responsible for and should never have an opt out option in that regard. I also feel men should have no right to request that a woman have an abortion. Not for any nonsense and sanctimonious reasons of body autonomy but just because it is morally the right thing to do and if one parent wants to keep the child, then that should be more than sufficient reason to bring him or her into the world.


  • #460
    crossmolinalad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭crossmolinalad


    Export wrote: »
    they're called condoms

    use the ones with semen killing paste


  • #461
    tinz18
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 329 ✭✭tinz18


    diveout wrote: »
    People change their minds. Happens more than you might think.

    I know that's why I said it would never happen... I know more than one person saying they'd get an abortion and changing their mind when they get pregnant. I was just suggesting it to stop the blame game that seems to be going round in circles on this thread. Personally and I've said it to my boyfriend, I'd like the idea of him signing away his rights if we broke up while I was pregnant and if he wasn't willing to be a father - I can't imagine the awkwardness and pain that dealing with an ex stepping in and out as he sees fit can wreak, however I'm not blind to the emotional implications involved with the child always wondering about their father or the pains of my boyfriends parents who would want to be active in their grandchilds life.


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Potatoeman wrote: »
    It comes back to the initial issue where the father is excluded from having a
    say on whether he wants the child or not.

    He has a say. It's called a condom. Or abstaining. That's the time for him to have his say.


  • #463
    Potatoeman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,544 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    ash23 wrote: »
    He has a say. It's called a condom. Or abstaining. That's the time for him to have his say.

    Again this is the prolife argument. Its a double standard. You could make the same agrument for any abortion after all she had her chance too.


  • #464
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    The Purveyor of Truth wrote: »
    And who should financially support the child then? The tax payer?

    .

    the taxpayer does support children
    and if one parent wants to keep the child, then that should be more than sufficient reason to bring him or her into the world

    so if the woman doesn't want to have the child but the man does she should become a single mother to meet that desire?


  • #465
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    ash23 wrote: »
    He has a say. It's called a condom. Or abstaining. That's the time for him to have his say.

    showing true colours at least at this stage

    man's fault

    punish man


  • #466
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Riskymove wrote: »
    showing true colours at least at this stage

    man's fault

    punish man


    You're seeing things that aren't there.

    Can a man force a woman to have an abortion? No.
    Can a man walk away from his child with no responsibility? No.
    Can a man choose to use a condom? Yes.
    Can a man choose to abstain? Yes.

    You say a man has no choice. Yes he does.


  • #467
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Potatoeman wrote: »
    Again this is the prolife argument. Its a double standard. You could make the same agrument for any abortion after all she had her chance too.

    I guess it could be twisted to that agenda yes. But that's not what I am saying and you know that. You've taken it out of context.

    I was replying to a post saying a man has NO choices. Yes he has.

    A woman has another choice that a man has not. Abortion. I am pro choice. I am just aware that in the case of a pregnancy men and women have different choices based on biology.

    There is no sense in saying a man has no choice. He does. And the sooner men accept this and realise their choice about a pregnancy ends at conception, the better off they will be because they will be more careful about contraception BEFORE it becomes too late for them to make a choice about a child they don't want.


  • #468
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    ash23 wrote: »
    You say a man has no choice.

    you know that the discussion is not about the "choice" to have a pregnancy but how to deal with one

    your comments only show your bias, which is fine, but as I say it is not going to lead to any proper debate

    If everyone took the same fixed logic you could have statements like:

    "the woman had unprotected sex so is partly to blame and should accept that she has a responsibility to have an abortion"


  • #469
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    ash23 wrote: »
    But that's not fair either. Nobody "wins" in an event like an unplanned pregnancy. Not the woman OR the man. But that shouldn't matter. Once the child is actually here, IT should be the main concern and what is best for the child should be the priority and the main aim of any law.

    Not a pissing contest between the parents.

    In that case you must be against abortion if you are to be consistent with the belief that the main concern should be what's best for the child.


  • #470
    Sweet Rose
    Closed Accounts Posts: 206 ✭✭Sweet Rose


    Riskymove wrote: »
    showing true colours at least at this stage

    man's fault

    punish man

    It's not about blame and punishment. It's about choices and responsibilities. We all have them. Not all of us shy away from them.


  • #471
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Fabreo wrote: »
    In that case you must be against abortion if you are to be consistent with the belief that the main concern should be what's best for the child.

    I've stated many times I'm pro-choice. Abortion means there is no child. I've been fairly clear on that point. I don't believe that a foetus and a child are the same thing. That's usually the difference between those who are pro-life and pro-choice.


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    Sweet Rose wrote: »
    It's not about blame and punishment. .

    unfortunately some comments are about that
    It's about choices and responsibilities. We all have them. Not all of us shy away from them

    absolutely

    exactly what the discussion is about


  • #473
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Riskymove wrote: »
    you know that the discussion is not about the "choice" to have a pregnancy but how to deal with one


    And my point is that taking that attitude is like locking the door when the horse is bolted.

    There will never come a time that a man can force a woman to have an abortion. So there's no point in harping on that she should or shouldn't have one or that she has more choice.

    How should we educate young men about preventing unwanted pregnancy? Encourage them not to take responsibility for their contraception as there's always the MAP and abortion? Or teach them that really, they NEED to use protection even if the girl says she's on the pill or whatever.
    We NEED to teach them that the time to make their choice is at conception because beyond that, they have no further palatable choices other than to face and abortion, raising a child or abandoning a child but being responsible for it financially.

    Or we can tell them that it's so unfair that a woman can't be made have an abortion whinge whinge whinge. Or that it's perfectly acceptable to abandon a child and not bother with it. I'm not sure this is the kind of men we want to be raising is it?

    It's a fact of life that the mans choice is made at conception. Maybe it's unfair but hey, I don't like that women have to give birth or that we are mainly responsible for contraception. But there it is.

    It might be unpalatable but there are better ways of broaching the subject than giving young men the choice of having a child he doesn't want or abandoning it. Prevention is better and so long as we keep ignoring the fact that mens choice ends at conception because its SO UNFAIR whinge, we will have more and more men leaving the onus of contraception on women and just assuming it won't happen to them.

    Just look at the thread about Children and houses on AH. Men writing about having unprotected sex with women. Of course though, the mindset is that the woman is trying to get pregnant on purpose.

    IMO any woman who has sex without protection is trying to get pregnant. But so is any man.


  • #474
    The Purveyor of Truth
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭The Purveyor of Truth


    Riskymove wrote: »
    the taxpayer does support children

    I never said they didn't.

    My point was that if there was an opt out option, the tax payer would end up supporting a large proportion of the children effected. The fact that the tax payer currently financially supports some children in no way excuses the burden of what you propose.
    so if the woman doesn't want to have the child but the man does she should become a single mother to meet that desire?

    Not sure why you are assuming the couple are separated, but assuming that they are, I personally feel yes she should have the child if the boyfriend or husband wants her to and perhaps even consider the option of letting him raise the child in fact and then go on to pay child support to the father, in the very same way millions of men currently do. Not a popular opinion, granted and I understand that it would be a hard thing for a woman to do, but I don't really see why it would be harder thing for her to do than have an abortion. Perhaps an abortion before 12 weeks, maybe, but I do not accept that a woman having an abortion when she is between three and five months pregnant would be emotionally and physically less of an ordeal for her than having the child and allowing the father to raise it.


  • #475
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    ash23 wrote: »
    You're seeing things that aren't there.

    Can a man force a woman to have an abortion? No.
    Can a man walk away from his child with no responsibility? No.
    Can a man choose to use a condom? Yes.
    Can a man choose to abstain? Yes.

    You say a man has no choice. Yes he does.

    A woman can choose to abstain so why allow her to have an abortion?


  • #476
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    The Purveyor of Truth wrote: »
    The fact that the tax payer currently financially supports some children

    all children

    in no way excuses the burden of what you propose.

    what have I proposed?


    Not sure why you are assuming the couple are separated, but assuming that they are, I personally feel yes she should have the child if the boyfriend or husband wants her to and perhaps even consider the option of letting him raise the child in fact and then go on to pay child support to the father,


    fair enough


  • #477
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Fabreo wrote: »
    A woman can choose to abstain so why allow her to have an abortion?

    Because it's an option for her. :confused:

    A proposed "man abortion" is a very different thing to a woman's abortion. Namely the existence of the child afterwards.


  • #478
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    ash23 wrote: »
    Or we can tell them that it's so unfair that a woman can't be made have an abortion whinge whinge whinge. Or that it's perfectly acceptable to abandon a child and not bother with it. I'm not sure this is the kind of men we want to be raising is it?


    the fact that you think I support either of those notions pretty much shows your approach to the discussion as I have mentioned before

    IMO any woman who has sex without protection is trying to get pregnant. But so is any man.

    agreed


  • #479
    ash23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭ash23


    Riskymove wrote: »
    agreed


    But would you still maintain that the man should have no responsibility for the resulting pregnancy?


  • #480
    Riskymove
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,900 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    ash23 wrote: »
    But would you still maintain that the man should have no responsibility for the resulting pregnancy?

    "Still"

    where have I maintained such a thing?


  • Advertisement
  • #481
    Fabreo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Fabreo


    ash23 wrote: »
    Because it's an option for her. :confused:

    A proposed "man abortion" is a very different thing to a woman's abortion. Namely the existence of the child afterwards.

    Yes and what's being proposed is making it an option to men to absolve themselves of their rights and responsibilities over the child.


Advertisement