Men: Why Do You Oppose a Woman's Right to Abortion?

Re: Men: Why Do You Oppose a Woman's Right to Abortion?


Ok, we are somewhat in agreement on that. Though I think that although it may be easier for a man to focus on the morality of the issue, it does not make it easier or more likely for him to be correct in his moral judgement. Indeed the morality of abortion must be weighed against other morals. There is the morality of providing for existing children, the (in my opinion) immorality of bringing unwanted children into the world. And many other factors, also to do with morals, that women, being the primary caretakers, may have a better view of than men. A man might look at those things I mentioned and say they are a matter of practicality. But a woman knows that providing for children is a moral imperative.



Here's where I was pointing to the second paragraph, as the scenario you provided (what if your daughter gets pregnant) presents a conflict for a man. So it seems you mean that those who are not personally involved (conflicted), regardless of sex, are better able to judge the morality of abortion. But aren't men just as frequently involved as women? Aren't women who are not pregnant or have not had abortions just as removed from the situation?




To a point, it is. But I think that people in general lean towards condemnation. There are two things that would make someone a good judge of a soldier's actions in combat. One is disinterest, as you say, but the other is --what you say would help but I think is necessary-- some experience having been in combat. If we take this and overlay it on the abortion issue, we have the necessary disinterest in men (if they are not the father or otherwise interested) but we don't have the necessary experience of having been pregnant. Therefore, men don't have all the tools necessary to make a moral judgement.



Yes, it is a non-sequitur. It wasn't meant to be part of the argument.
The quote itself does not specify whether a person or action is being judged. I quoted this scripture because it is one of my favorites. It seems to say to me exactly what you interpreted it to mean, and I use it because that's what comes to mind in situations like these, not because I assume you to be Christian. It does not mean (again, to me) that we are not to make judgements of morality -- of course we must make those judgements for ourselves or we would have no guiding morality -- but that we must be careful of judging another's morality in situations that we don't understand. And this is exactly what is done when one purports to be better able to make moral decisions about someone else that affect only that other someone. I snipped the rest of your argument about my quoting of Jesus because I think you misinterpreted my intent.

I see your point a little better now -- thanks for clarifying -- but I still don't completely agree. Maybe you are not taking the argument to its seemingly logical conclusion, that a man, being supposedly better able to judge the morality of the situation, should be the one to make the decision. But are only saying that men take a greater interest in the morality of the decision because they are not required to bear the burden of it. If that's the case, I do agree.

There has been a long standing debate on whether women or men have greater "moral clarity," whatever that means.

Both genders have moral strengths and weaknesses.

The old saw that if women ran the governments of the world, there would be no war was demonstrated to be untrue when Thatcher ran Britain.

That does not mean that men have a stronger record than women in the morals department.

If by moral you mean responsible, then women come out ahead.

This should not be an issue of which gender is morally stronger. It should be an issue of perspective, irrespective of gender.

Several writers here have charged that men are morally superior to women.

How do you feel about fertility clinics. Hundreds of eggs are fertilized and only one is implanted into the mother. The rest are eventually destroyed. Would you consider this mass murder? Should people start picketing fertility clinics?

I'm very interested in your take on this question.

Some people believe that the soul is imprinted on an embryo at the moment it is created. For people that believe this, it could be considered mass murder.

I believe that I posted above what Aquinas had to say about this.

While I am against fertility clinics because I think these people who are having trouble conceiving ought not to conceive, I am not opposed to the activity of said clinics because of wasted eggs.

I am also opposed to organ transplants. Life on anti-rejection drugs is no life at all.

Take a shower. Use lye soap. Burn your clothes. We will never speak of this again.

of course, the decision of the abortion should be made by women.

Because men are the rulers of the world, and thus must control everyone in it including women.

As for myself, though personally against abortion (except in the case of life or health of the mother, or in the case of rape,) though against abortion in theory, I'm not against it in terms of outlawing it. It's not the choice I'd make for a hypothetical child of mine, but for others it's sometimes the best choice.

If abortion were illegal (again,) then I'd worry about how that would effect our views on sexuality in general. I assert every consensual sexual act is good and positive. But if sex represented a fair to middling chance of becomming pregnant with no aboriton option, people might villify sex even more than they do when they have such options.

When men start getting pregnant I'll agree with you.

The fact is that some men realize that if their mother had the option they wouldent be here.

I see this topic has been resurrected.

Since it's ten years since I first participated in it, I may be repeating myself, but the premise of this question is very flawed.

Men can, reasonably, make a moral judgment about the decisions of a women which they will never precisely face, just as women can do the same as it respects the decisions of men.

The notion that morality is gender specific is ridiculous, but quite typical in our "identity political" society.

There are both men and women who oppose abortion because they believe it is murder.

So throw out all of the opinions of the men if you like. You still, if you are intellectually honest, need to contend with the opinions of the women.

Truth to power.

A close friend of mine, a single father with full custody, tried to start a group to help men know how to navigate custody courts and child support laws.
The depressing fact he discovered was that most of the men he met through this didn't actually attempt to gain custody, had interest mostly in how to avoid paying support, and predominantly preferred to play the angry victim after having done little to nothing to avoid the courts decisions.

Pregnancy isn't a natural state for women. It takes a big toll on their physical health. It saps them of vitamin stores, ruins their teeth.
It is more like what a person deals with when they decide to give someone a kidney. Just as no one owes you a kidney and you can't make someone give a kidney to save a life, women don't owe men a child and you shouldn't be able to force a woman to have a child OR abort one.

There is very few instances where a man can't avoid getting someone pregnant. And, at 18, they can bank a sample of their healthiest sperm and go seek a vasectomy. Can't get your doctor to agree? Get another doctor.

I'm personally against issues of custody. I think women should have a child when they are ready to be the one and only person supporting that child. You don't know thw future so you can't rely on having a willing parent partner. Let men who want to be parents adopt or hire a surrogate. Parent like you mean it. Like you wanted it so much you didn't need to tap someone else to help.

Amazing.

What a load of ****.

Where did you get this garbage from, or did you just make it up?

I know this is off the subject of abortion, but sometimes such stupendously stupid things are said, tucked into some other rant, it's worth pointing out to the poster that unless the reader is an idiot, this type of statement stands out like a supernova of exploding feces.

First of all, I believe its every right for a woman to choose whether TO or NOT to abortion, here's why;
1. Its her body that looses 10 years of the ability to live with every pregnancy and delivery, she has.
2. Its a very dreadful 10 months to go through all alone. Can be very, extremely scary.
3. Could be a special needs child, which would be more painful for the child to live.
4. Possible incest, Rape, incest from rape, a pregnancy from a woman with a tragic disease, which could be passed to the child during and after pregnancy.
5. Hate to say it, but population control, is kinda important too. If there's too many ppl on this planet, then how can anybody new come in?
6. This list is limitless. So its both good and bad, depending on your situation.

So you think the woman should be the only person supporting the child when it took two people to create the child? You're an idiot