- NEW!
by Shatzee coming back? on May 12th, 2009
I believe that the father of the unborn child has just as much right to the child as the woman does. I believe that if the father wants the child but the mother wishes to end the child's life thru abortion, then he should be able to go to court and sue her for custody and be able to take the baby home with him once its born. The baby is just as much HIS and it is hers. But, if the man is a loser who wont stand up for his responsiblity, well, yeah, let him terminate his rights. Give him the same rights to walk away as is given to the mother to "walk away". I am a woman and I fully support a father's right. I get very disgusted with the women out there who feel that their inconvinent pregnancy is all the man's fault when they just as willingly jumped into the sack. I believe that the father SHOULD be responsible for the child. That's a real man. But, as long as women wanna play the "Oh poor me!" game and have others fully support their avoidance of self-responsiblity for their own actions, then you might as well give that to the father too.
Pro-choicers.Is there ANYTHING that could happen that would make you consiider wanting to overturn Roe vs Wade? You have even a 1% open mind
by Freedom00 on August 5th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Question about abortion of a handicapped child
by lauriegirl on November 19th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
No abortions for anyone?
by Have A Nice Day on July 2nd, 2011
| 1 person likes this
If a girl gets pregnant and wants to keep it, but the boy wants to abort it, should the guy be absolved of all responsibility?
by A shout without knowledge is a protest on August 20th, 2011
| 3 people like this
Mississippi is voting today on a constitutional amendment that will outlaw all abortions even when rape and incest is involved. (cont)
by Rufus on November 8th, 2011
| 2 people like this
You're reading Should men have the choice to terminate their parental rights and responsibilities prior to week 24?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
If the father can carry the baby to term himself or has someone who is willing to do it for him, I fully agree. Otherwise, I do not believe there is ever a reason for a woman to be forcibly reduced to the value of an incubator.
.
Out of curiousity: If the court did order that she not have an abortion and he would take the child after birth, will they then dictate her food intake? What she can consume and when? Will she be required not to drink alcohol? What would you propose the penalty to a woman in that situation who drank a 24 pack of beer in one night be?
by raindancer on May 15th, 2009
two people make a baby..then one gets locked out of all the decision making..it is wrong..and I am a woman
by Happy-Dance on July 12th, 2009
So, if a man knocks up a woman, he should then have control over her body for the next nine months (regardless of his position, or lack of position, in her life)?
Try telling a man that he MUST risk sacrificing his health and possibly his life to bring a child he doesn't want into the world. I'm guessing he laugh his *ss off.
by raindancer on July 12th, 2009
the baby has two parents...woman will scream for equal rights until their lips fall off....but they will always find excuses not to GIVE EQUAL RIGHTS..when it comes to making babies ONLY the woman have rights..the babies have none and the fathers have none....and what about the father WHO DOES NOT WANT TO BE A FATHER...he will be FORCED to pay child support even though he would have chosen to have an abortion..but the only one with rights decided not to have an abortion and now he is FORCED to be a father...
by Happy-Dance on July 13th, 2009
Happy dance, I couldnt agree more with you on everything you have said. Thank you.
by Shatzee coming back? on July 13th, 2009
sadly those who cry for equality most, often want it least.
they just want the benefits without the price!
by supercricketman on July 15th, 2009
Great points all!
by Larry on July 15th, 2009
Wow. Talk about your red herrings. I’m all for equal rights. When a man is pregnant, he should have the same right to abort that a woman has.
Your argument does not hold water. Conception does require a contribution from two people, one man and one woman. However, the next 38 weeks are all her. SHE needs to watch what she eats and drinks. SHE needs to go to the doctor to be poked and prodded. It’s HER body that is taken over and it is HER health, and possibly HER life, that may be at risk. During those 38 weeks he does what exactly? It’s a simple fact that men do not experience pregnancy in anywhere near the same manner that a woman does, assuming that they stick around for it at all, which they do not have to do. THEY are not pregnant. SHE is pregnant. He can take a break whenever he wants. He can be (and many are) completely absent for the entire thing. After the birth, they are equal again. They both have rights and responsibilities in regards to the child. They are both financially responsible for the child, assuming it has not been given up for adoption (which both parents must sign off on). They both have rights to see the child and be a part of its life, assuming neither has been found unfit. Equal rights applies when the situations are equal or, at the very least, comparable.
by raindancer on July 16th, 2009
All that aside, I didn’t argue against equal rights for both parties as it pertains to becoming a parent. I argued against men having a legal right to demand that a woman act as an incubator. Again, I suggest that you tell a man that he MUST sacrifice his personal autonomy for nine months and put his health, and possibly his life, at risk in order to bring a child he doesn’t want into the world. Do you really think he’d do it?
by raindancer on July 16th, 2009
So, you're good with men having choice too, right?
by Larry on July 16th, 2009
rain dancer..fact is you can say the next 38 weeks is "all her"...but that isnt exactly true is it..there is a baby involved ..and the mother and only the mother gets to decide if it lives or dies....and well if the mother decided to let the baby live...the 38 weeks it is "all her"...do not compare to the 21 years the man will be forced to pay child support..
by Happy-Dance on July 17th, 2009
just a little secret..that isnt a real secret...the womans movement of the 60's and 70's destroyed this country..I am a woman....and the womans movement in the beginning, started out as a wonderful thing..who can argue with equal rights for women......I am a woman and sincerely believe I am equal to a man...BUT THE FEMMA-NAZIS hijacked the movement....what started out as a bunch of woman wanting to be treated with equal respect in the workforce, has morphed into todays woman who do not need or want MEN for anything..they can do it all on there own..no more marriage...babies, well they are just a hinderance..and when woman do have them they hand them off to workers getting paid six dollars an hour to raise....god help us all, when a question like parents having equal rights over there offspring is so hotly debated...THANKYOU FOR READING MY RANT..(SMILE) HAVE A NICE DAY
by Happy-Dance on July 17th, 2009
@Larry: Yes. I actually do believe both men and women should have a right to decide if they are ready to be parents or not. I'm still tweaking my ideas on how that should be accomplished, but I do feel that, if a woman has they right to say that she's just not ready, the man should have that right also.
by raindancer on July 17th, 2009
@Happy-Dance: This is why I said your arguement is a red herring. When a man's "rights" in regards to the embryo/fetus are brought into play, 99% of the time it is by someone who is pro-life who doesn't really give one spit about the man's "rights". They want to assign him veto power on the issue of abortion. But, if you ask them what they think in situations where a woman has an abortion because the man wanted her to, they say, "She must have some real serious issues."
by raindancer on July 17th, 2009
You and I could argue the rights of the fetus all day long, but I don't really see the point. Undoubtedly, you consider it a fully alive human at conception despite the fact that it doesn't fit the medical description of that for a long time. Even if it did, the question would then be whether or not it's "rights" supersede the woman's rights to her own body. I also question which of the baby's rights is more important. The "right" to become a fully live human or the right to be wanted, loved, and have a safe, stable home after it's born? The bottom line for me is that it is in HER body and she has a right to have it removed if that is her choice.
by raindancer on July 17th, 2009
i thought this question was about terminating parental rights, not the fetus it self
by supercricketman on July 21st, 2009
Yes, the idea is to even the field a bit for men by allowing them to terminate their parental rights, as a woman is able to terminate the pregnancy, for a period of time after conception. Some have raised the issue of giving veto power to men who do not want a woman to have an abortion and so the conversation goes.
by raindancer on July 21st, 2009
most men do, how many leave when the babs born anyway, leaving the mum to bring upopo the child.
by someday on November 24th, 2009
Most men? That's an extreme overstatement.
by Larry on November 25th, 2009