My feeling is if a woman can decide to terminate a pregnancy without the fathers approval, then a father should not be forced to pay for a child he did not want in the first place.

If a woman can term a pregnancy when the man wants the child, then a woman should have no claims to the mans finances should he NOT want the child.

Enough with the double standard already.

I understand its a womans body...but it takes two to tango. I am not saying abortion should be outlawed because I do not think it should be, but I am saying more thought needs to be put into ALL aspects of the situation, NOT just the side of the mother.

And I do not think it is wrong for people to be for or against it and I think it is pretty sad that peoples religous beliefs are called into question because of how they feel, whether they are for or against it.

I do believe it is a choice, but it should be a choice that BOTH in the situation help decide.

Call me stupid, but I think that is fair. This uborn...whatever you want to call it (we were all "it" to and we are humans) should be given a chance if a parent wants to raise it.

I agree that both parents should make the decision.

It makes no sense that something that is only HALF the property of a women, cause she only HALF made it, gets the FULL decision.

Now that's injustice.

If one parent, the father for instance, wants to raise the child, it just seems right that there should be a provision for that.

And to argue otherwise really just is a selfish argument because finances are out of the equation, love is out of the equation and it just boils down to someone ordering an execution because she doesn't want stretch marks. It's sickening.

I guess that's what I'll never get. If more people had respect for human life, there would be fewer of these so-called backroom and back alley abortions. Because no one really NEEDS an abortion. That can be argued, perhaps in rape or incest instances (though I'd disagree), but when it comes to abortion-on-demand, which Planned Parenthood and those extreme feminists do support, it's just uncalled for. And it makes abortion a selfish way to not face consequences. Abortion has become a birth control, and to those who deny that, how can you, when pro-choicers always wave the flag of controlling fertility and having abortion-on-demand. They would never want it limited to rape or incest, which would ethically be more justifiable; no, they would just want across-the-board "rights."

And it's not just a man deciding what women should do. Not just men are pro-life. Millions of women are too. So that argument just never flies with me. It's just buzz words the left use to try to rally women and make them think this an issue that just affects them. And to anyone who says that's true, I say I disagree, since we are ALL former fetuses, and I'm sure we all really like that we got to live. This is not a religious issue; it's a human rights issue. The right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I totally respect your well-thought-out opinion on this, JSF, but you lost me in your last paragraph. The point is, if you don't want to make a baby, take your own precautions... women and men... and allow more sex education in schools.

Edited February 20, 200718 yr by Brandeis

I guess that's what I'll never get. If more people had respect for human life, there would be fewer of these so-called backroom and back alley abortions. Because no one really NEEDS an abortion. That can be argued, perhaps in rape or incest instances (though I'd disagree), but when it comes to abortion-on-demand, which Planned Parenthood and those extreme feminists do support, it's just uncalled for. And it makes abortion a selfish way to not face consequences. Abortion has become a birth control, and to those who deny that, how can you, when pro-choicers always wave the flag of controlling fertility and having abortion-on-demand. They would never want it limited to rape or incest, which would ethically be more justifiable; no, they would just want across-the-board "rights."

And it's not just a man deciding what women should do. Not just men are pro-life. Millions of women are too. So that argument just never flies with me. It's just buzz words the left use to try to rally women and make them think this an issue that just affects them. And to anyone who says that's true, I say I disagree, since we are ALL former fetuses, and I'm sure we all really like that we got to live. This is not a religious issue; it's a human rights issue. The right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

You ever been to a Planned Parenthood? You ever taken the chance to hear them out? Abortion is NOT what the preech. It's an option they offer. They preech safe sex. Birth contorl. Relationships between partners. Teach means of communication, etc. They don't want abortion, they want to prevent it from ever having gotten there. And if someone needs an abortion, they provide the service. Abortions are not like a walk in, say I want to abort my baby, and be done with it kind of deal. There is tons of counseling, mediation, one on one time with the mother (and father or family member). There's usually an exam, sometimes an utlrasound. There's chance after chance for these girls, women to change their minds if they choose. But that's what it's about, choosing.

Abortion has exsisted since the Plato and Aristotle were alive. Was pratice, and welcomed by the Ancient Greeks and Romans (all intensely God/s fairing people). This isn't somthing new, and it's not something that's going to go away. If you take the legality away from it, then you're putting the life the unborn above the life of a mother. Because a girl/women who is desperate enough to have an abortion will, and it could kill her if not done properly. You can't be pro-life and value one life over another.

Birth control failure is mostly failure TO USE birth control. There are always excuses. Very rarely do BCPs fail if taken correctly (>99% effective). I know if I were a woman, I would not trust the guy with contraception. It's not that I think women are the ones solely responsible; I think both are equally responsible. It is just that it is the woman that has to either have an abortion or go through a pregnancy; she has more to loose if the pregnancy is unwanted and that is just a fact of biology! Of coarse, using a condom AND another form of effective contraception would be virtually 100% effective and both people would be taking responsiblity. Sooner or later, a male BCP will be available and give more options. Drug companies are working on it because it will be a bonanza for the one that comes up with it first. Don't think men want take "the pill" because they will. There are men out there who would like nothing more than to be certain they are NOT the father of an unwanted child. The problem is that currently the only effective REVERSABLE male method is the condom. It use to be about the only reasonably effective method period (male or female) but advances in female contraceptive choices has bloomed over the years without really anything being developed for men.

Your last paragraph convinces me that Roe vs. Wade probably won't be overturned for a while, because of the threat of resorting to back alley abortions.

I think the ultra-conservatives and the religious fanatics should be worried more about the unwanted kids languishing in foster care, waiting to be adopted, or worse, in abusive foster parent situations. We need to be concerned about the children already here than the ones who aren't yet. Too many kids in this country are not having the life they deserve, but do you see anti-abortionists speaking up for them, worried about their rights?

Well, I agree that we should worry about the children in those situations. But I also think that when I see pictures and video of something as gruesome as abortion, and I can SEE how awful that procedure is, how undignified, how inhumane it is, I have no choice but to fight for life. It just boggles my mind how anyone could want THAT for their child, their own flesh and blood. To have some scrape their uterus, slice and dice limb from limb...to have their precious child's heat floating in their body, literally, detached from its body. To have an abortion "doctor" crush their child's skull to make it easier to remove. In some cases, as the girl confessed on the "O'Reilly Factor" about an underage abortion, DELIVERING YOUR CHILD in a TOILET. A toilet.

That is a social evil.

And I use that last word cautiously since I know pro-choice extremists would try to say it's a religious term and this is a religious issue and we have separation of church and state. Again, this is not a religious issue. Some faiths choose to subscribe to a certain belief because of their faith, but ultimatley, it's whether or not you believe life begins at the moment of conception. And even if you don't, it's about whether you think HUMANS, members of our own race, should be treated in the manner that I described above.

I don't. And I will fight, without violence, what I believe to be the "good fight." I can't imagine what it means to fight the 'other side's' battle. In my mind, it's littered with a tall heap of over 40 million bloody, mutilated, mangled up, burned fetuses. That's what you're fighting for, folks. Maybe you can do that, but I won't have that on my conscience. Because in the end, that's what "women's rights" amounts to. That's the legacy. Having maybe 40 or 50 years of your life without a child you didn't want, DYING yourself, and having nothing to show for it but "autonomy" and bloody, mangled up life or "potential life." Regardless of the term of "choice" for those precious babies, it's disgusting.

I bet he'll be showing up spouting that message on ABC soon. AMC will probably have him on to "preach" to us soon too. I'm not going to say a word. But you can all thank AMC for making this subject my passion. As long as their is breath in my body, Roe will not go down with a fight. It's already become my passion, and my cause. My body is my body, and no man in Washington who doesn't give a damn about me or why I choose to do what I want with my body, is going to tell what decision I must make about my body.

See, I'll never get that.

Fighting lifelong for a mile-high, and really never-ending mountain of burned, bloody, mutilated fetuses.

I just don't get that.

"Autonomy" for 40, 50 years tops.

And countless generations far superceding those limited lives of women -- gone.

Well said, Kylie.

Some will vote for McCain based on this issue alone, never paying a thought to a plan he has for the entire country – things that truly matter. That’s the type of "logic" that elected Bush twice. UGH

I don't think that a woman should be forced to go through a 9 month pregnancy and childbirth (and all of the physical/emotional risk/pain) just because the father wants her to. I also don't believe the father should have no obligation (financial or otherwise) because he "didn't want it". I really don't see it as a double standard unless the father is going to gestate the baby for half of the pregnancy. I do, however, feel that the father should have some rights to the child once it is born. If the mother does not want to keep the baby, the father should automatically be entitled to assume custody. Even if the mother does want the child, she should not be able to exclude the father even if it is more convenient for her to. By the way, I am male, so this is a male perspective.

These arguments are NEVER fair.

A man can't gestate a pregnancy.

Sorry, the argument doesn't fly.

That's a woman's gift. Yes, GIFT. This is not someone trying to force duties and hardships on women, as Steinem and the far left have tried to paint it; this is about getting people to realize that pregnancy is natural, it's beautiful; yes, it's "woman's work" but not in the negative way they paint it; it's just that only women CAN do it.

So to argue that a woman shouldn't carry a baby to term if a father wants it, just because he lacks that natural ability and never will be able to have that capacity...it just doesn't make sense. It seems like a cop-out to support abortion rights, with no real argument.

I persoanlly could never have an abortion. But I have no right to tell another woman that she can't. That's what this comes down to for me. Every woman having a right, and a choice to do what is best for her. It's not about being pro-abortion or anti-abortion even, it's about having options and being able to have a say in her life.

People need to stop trying to govern the country with their individual religious belief's. I'm thisclose to moving to Canada and if someone like McCain gets into power, I'm as good as gone.

Let's try this again:

it's-not-religious-beliefs.

It's about life.

That's why there are groups such as Aetheists for Life, Agnostics for Life... because this issue affects everyone. It's not a woman's issue. It's a human rights issue.

These arguments are NEVER fair.

A man can't gestate a pregnancy.

Sorry, the argument doesn't fly.

That's a woman's gift. Yes, GIFT. This is not someone trying to force duties and hardships on women, as Steinem and the far left have tried to paint it; this is about getting people to realize that pregnancy is natural, it's beautiful; yes, it's "woman's work" but not in the negative way they paint it; it's just that only women CAN do it.

So to argue that a woman shouldn't carry a baby to term if a father wants it, just because he lacks that natural ability and never will be able to have that capacity...it just doesn't make sense. It seems like a cop-out to support abortion rights, with no real argument.

YOU ARE A MAN! USE A CONDOM!

BE A MAN!

See, I'll never get that.

Fighting lifelong for a mile-high, and really never-ending mountain of burned, bloody, mutilated fetuses.

I just don't get that.

"Autonomy" for 40, 50 years tops.

And countless generations far superceding those limited lives of women -- gone.

That's not what the fight is about. Many pro-choice supporters, myself included, wouldn't have abortions. But we don't believe it's right to tell others' they can't. If i went out and had and abortion tomorrow, what does that do to you? Why do you care? What impact does it have on your life? The answer: None. It's giving women a choice. John McCain somehow knows better then me, what's right for my life? And that said, I want to protect women too. Because abortion isn't a new issue, and it's not going away. As least if the practice is legalized and monitored then it's safe. The goal of the pro-choice stance, is to make abortions uneccassary. Get society to a point where sex isn't a tabboo. Where you're not stigmatized as having done something bad when you have sex. To get our youth, educated in safe sex. To make them aware of their opinions, make them afforable and accessible. So that abortion does't end up being necessary. Those same people who think that they can tell me what to do with my body, are the ones promoting the taboos on sex, which lead to unwanted pregnancies, and ultimately abortion. So, while abortion may seem to be a pro-choice decision, it's being fueled just as much by the attitudes and decisions of pro-lifers.

Well, I agree that we should worry about the children in those situations. But I also think that when I see pictures and video of something as gruesome as abortion, and I can SEE how awful that procedure is, how undignified, how inhumane it is, I have no choice but to fight for life. It just boggles my mind how anyone could want THAT for their child, their own flesh and blood. To have some scrape their uterus, slice and dice limb from limb...to have their precious child's heat floating in their body, literally, detached from its body. To have an abortion "doctor" crush their child's skull to make it easier to remove. In some cases, as the girl confessed on the "O'Reilly Factor" about an underage abortion, DELIVERING YOUR CHILD in a TOILET. A toilet.

You're acting like the "toilet birth" is the norm. Funny you bring that up, because if abortions were outlawed, these type of things WOULD become the norm (with women trying to do it themselves). I'm not an expert on the size, but don't most abortions occur when the fetus is about the size of your thumb (or smaller)? "Slice and dice from limb to limb" when it's that small? Don't think so.

Edited February 20, 200718 yr by Pine Charles

The only way that we'll make any progress in limiting abortions is to teach and practice safe sex. ITA, about condom's, hell, double up, condoms and the pill, it's twice as much protection. Ultimately, preventing pregnancy is the way to go. But giving women a say in things if she ends up needing one, isn't wrong.

I disagree and think the only way we can limit abortions is ceasing them altogether.

Honestly, how can pro-choicers not realize that Planned Parenthood is PROFITING from the abortion procedures they provide? It's hard to think about, but it's true.

And when women's organizations are selling cute T-shirts proclaiming "I had an abortion!" like it empowers women and is something to stand up and shout about, I can't believe extreme pro-choice organizations and Planned Parenthood have any real hope or care to limit abortions -- especially since it can make some mean "blood" money.

Pro-choicers make documentaries about women who've had abortions, to let them know there's nothing shameful about it. By lifting the shame, they're basically saying, "Come one, come all!"

I'm not saying they're just in it for the profit. But I'm also not going to say I believe they truly want abortions limited -- significantly. All the signs to the contrary tell me otherwise.

They aren't 100%.

I'm pro choice, but if I wasn't gay, I would find it very hard to forgive someone for aborting my child. I am not religious, but you better get me involved in the decision. The baby/zygote is half the father. But the ultimate decision stays with the mother.

Even though I wouldn't be able to live in luxury and it would totally uproot my lifestyle and job, if I suddenly had the responsibility of having a baby son or daughter, I would be so gosh darn happy that it was even possible and welcome him/her into my life.

I'm not religious. I guess I'm just gay and wish I could share in the miracle.

And that makes no sense, I believe, when people say "the father should have a say ... but the ultimate decision stays with the mother."

In essence, that means fathers STILL have no rights.

A court could stomp all over that.

Unless fathers have REAL rights. ULTIMATE decision-making as well...this isn't equality of the sexes. I stand by my belief that it's selfish of a woman to abort if a father wants the child, will pay all her medical bills and the ONLY reason she wants to abort is because she'll get stretch marks.

I totally agree with you on this. I definitely think that the father should be involved, it's just, as you pointed out, that the woman has the ultimate decision.

--which means the father isn't really going to be involved with the decision, because no rights would REALLY be awarded if the woman still has that ultimate decison.

The scales are STILL unbalanced.