Abortion

It takes two to tango MA. The man should be responsible for his actions as well.

Like I said earlier, I'm not comfortable with the idea of abortion but don't think that getting rid of abortion is the right answer either. Many of these kids would have horrible lives if they were born which would cause many more problems down the line.

I just think that the whole attitude is indicative of many of the problems facing this world. It is never MY fault and there is always an easy way out.

0 Replies

Walter,

I was referring to control prior to pregnancy, not after pregnancy. There is just no way around it, if the woman was more responsible (I realize many are, I am talking about the ones that have multiple abortions mainly) about getting pregnant in the first place, this wouldn't be the issue that it is. It all comes down to everyone being responsible for their own actions IMO.

jp, I so totally agree with your last statement!

0 Replies

jpinMilwaukee wrote:

It takes two to tango MA. The man should be responsible for his actions as well.

bingo, jp.

i suspect that if every man was held to this, be he a libertine, one who "slipped up", poor, wealthy, politician, religious leader, overly industrious husband with a need to continuously pop out yet another legacy child...

abortion would not be an issue. might even be included in the health care packages of corporate america.

i don't feel like abortion should be used in place of condems, or other physical or chemical methods of contraception, but it lacks compassion in my view to essentially say to a woman carrying an unplanned, unwanted (or however you care to put it) pregnancy; "hey, you wanted to rock, so now you gotta roll whether you want to or not... ssslutt." even more so when the male is more or less allowed to walk away or crow about how vital his mojo is. " hey guy's ! i still got a tiger in my tank. strut strut strut".

-----

momma, i'm curious why you let the men off so easy. could ya fill me in ?

0 Replies

A point was brought up earlier that seems to not get much attention, but nevertheless is important. Women are fertile for roughly 30 years. 30 years is a very long time. 3 abortions over 30 years does not seem excessive to me, but then again, I'm not feeling morally superior just now.

0 Replies

Is three abortions over a long period of time better than three abortions over a short period of time? I don't think so, but I don't really have a problem feeling morally superior.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

A point was brought up earlier that seems to not get much attention, but nevertheless is important. Women are fertile for roughly 30 years. 30 years is a very long time. 3 abortions over 30 years does not seem excessive to me, but then again, I'm not feeling morally superior just now.

it doesn't to me.

0 Replies

DTOM,

Why do I let the men off so easily? Hmmmm. I guess you could say it seems that way. I guess I let them off so easily because even though they are also responsible for the pregnancy, the ultimate responsibility is on the woman. She is the one that can get pregnant so she, IMO, (oh boy, ladies don't get mad at me for this, please) that has to have more responsibility than the man.

Is it fair? Hardly, it's just the way it is.

0 Replies

jpinMilwaukee wrote:

Is three abortions over a long period of time better than three abortions over a short period of time? I don't think so, but I don't really have a problem feeling morally superior.

Better? I have no idea, but certainly more understandable.

I can use a similar line of reasoning. If one abortion is ok, why not three? Or is it that one abortion isn't really ok, and so having more than one is like being a repeat offender?

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

DTOM,

Why do I let the men off so easily? Hmmmm. I guess you could say it seems that way. I guess I let them off so easily because even though they are also responsible for the pregnancy, the ultimate responsibility is on the woman. She is the one that can get pregnant so she, IMO, (oh boy, ladies don't get mad at me for this, please) that has to have more responsibility than the man.

Is it fair? Hardly, it's just the way it is.

but do you believe that this is the way that it should be ?

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Momma Angel wrote:
DTOM,

Why do I let the men off so easily? Hmmmm. I guess you could say it seems that way. I guess I let them off so easily because even though they are also responsible for the pregnancy, the ultimate responsibility is on the woman. She is the one that can get pregnant so she, IMO, (oh boy, ladies don't get mad at me for this, please) that has to have more responsibility than the man.

Is it fair? Hardly, it's just the way it is.

but do you believe that this is the way that it should be ?

Should it be? Hmmmmm. That's a tough one, DTOM. Of course, if the man does the "crime" he should do the time, so to speak, so I guess that's why we have child support laws. But what of the men that visit prostitutes and those women become pregnant?

I don't know, DTOM, I will really have to give this quite a bit of thought.

0 Replies

Well, to an extent, I agree with MA. The primary responsibility is the woman's because it is her body. And that's precisely why nobody else should be able to decide whether or not she can have an abortion.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Momma Angel wrote:
....
Is it fair? Hardly, it's just the way it is.

but do you believe that this is the way that it should be ?

Should it be? Hmmmmm. That's a tough one, DTOM. Of course, if the man does the "crime" he should do the time, so to speak, so I guess that's why we have child support laws. But what of the men that visit prostitutes and those women become pregnant?

I don't know, DTOM, I will really have to give this quite a bit of thought.

okay. take your time.

your comment about prostitutes brings up the question of legalization and regulation by the health department. doesn't seem like "the oldest profession" is goin' anywhere. Laughing

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Well, to an extent, I agree with MA. The primary responsibility is the woman's because it is her body. And that's precisely why nobody else should be able to decide whether or not she can have an abortion.

ahhh, i'm caught betwixt and between. Confused

0 Replies

DTOM,

Well, after giving it some thought, I'd have to say no, that the man should not be held as responsible as the woman.

Since she is the one that gets pregnant I'm afraid the ultimate brunt of the responsibility would have to rest with her.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Well, to an extent, I agree with MA. The primary responsibility is the woman's because it is her body. And that's precisely why nobody else should be able to decide whether or not she can have an abortion.

What about the father of the baby?? I'll tell you one thing, no wife or girlfriend of mine would EVER abort my baby.

0 Replies

John, please don't threaten to pee in the gene pool? Smile

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

DTOM,

Well, after giving it some thought, I'd have to say no, that the man should not be held as responsible as the woman.

Since she is the one that gets pregnant I'm afraid the ultimate brunt of the responsibility would have to rest with her.

okay. but in that case, i'd have to quack along with freeduck that the woman is the sole person that has any kind of right to the determination of whether or not she will move ahead with the pregnancy.

btw, johncreasy has just made my point for me as to why any legally required notification of the male contributor to the pregnancy is completely out of the question.

unless he meant that "he would never be with a woman who would consider an abortion".

is that what you meant johncreasy ?

0 Replies

no I meant that I would not allow a woman to abort MY baby. Remember, that is the man's baby also. It's not just the woman's.

0 Replies

John Creasy wrote:

no I meant that I would not allow a woman to abort MY baby. Remember, that is the man's baby also. It's not just the woman's.

would you then immediately marry the girlfriend, whether you were in love with her or not ?

what if she didn't want to marry you ?

what if she had no intention of being with you in any way, married or unmarried ?

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

John Creasy wrote:
no I meant that I would not allow a woman to abort MY baby. Remember, that is the man's baby also. It's not just the woman's.

would you then immediately marry the girlfriend, whether you were in love with her or not ?

what if she didn't want to marry you ?

what if she had no intention of being with you in any way, married or unmarried ?

Why does that matter?? If she didn't want to be with me, then I would take the baby if she didn't want it.

Married, unmarried, in love or not, I wouldn't allow MY baby to be aborted.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know