He never had any such rights in the first place. A woman chooses whether or not to give a baby to a man. A man chooses whether or not to give a name to a baby.
If a man and a woman can not come to terms with this, they have no business making babies together.
He never had any such rights in the first place. A woman chooses whether or not to give a baby to a man. A man chooses whether or not to give a name to a baby.
If a man and a woman can not come to terms with this, they have no business making babies together.
So, theoretically, a happily married couple... woman gets pregnent... man is happy... woman is not... woman says 'I am getting an abortion'... man is supposed to say 'sure honey, whatever you say'???
So, theoretically, a happily married couple... woman gets pregnent... man is happy... woman is not... woman says 'I am getting an abortion'... man is supposed to say 'sure honey, whatever you say'???
the only problem is that the woman can choose to make the man pay for the baby for 18 years, whether he wants it or not. not fair, but guys should always keep that in the back of their mind before they engage their warp drives.
I should think a VERY high percentage of men in his shoes would have been relieved.
agreed. this guy is a douchebag
Whovian said:So, theoretically, a happily married couple... woman gets pregnent... man is happy... woman is not... woman says 'I am getting an abortion'... man is supposed to say 'sure honey, whatever you say'???
the hard fact is that no one but the woman has any say over her body, and i don't know a single woman who would have an abortion "just because". the situation you describe is probably quite rare.
Yup, a complete and total asshat without a single redeeming characteristic. However, we live in a country where people are allowed to be douchebags and so long as they don't break any specific laws, while we can all think they're pricks, we can't do a thing about it. That's the whole point of free speech, it's not there to protect the speech we all agree on, but the speech we all hate.
I would say that this is false because if she kept the child he would be financially responsible for that child,therefore making it his business.Once he refused to marry her, her decision became none of his business
The problem is, these are decisions that ought to be discussed and made long before the situation ever comes up. If they cannot come to a decision, then the actions that may lead to that decision should never be taken in the first place.
Of course, that requires rational, reasonable people and we all know how hard those are to come by these days.
That discussion does not belong in this thread. This thread is to ask if people felt (because some didn't) that she had a right to do what she had to do after he refused to marry her when she came up pregnant.
I would say that this is false because if she kept the child he would be financially responsible for that child,therefore making it his business.
And then, of course, you have couples who have that discussion thinking they know...but when the situation arises the script gets flipped. Life's a bitch
Nope. He chose not to marry her, thereby signing up for either a) her terminating the pregnancy, or b) at least 18 years of child support payments. As I stated previously, this is the first time I've heard of a guy having a tantrum because she DID terminate (whether by miscarriage or abortion is not actually known, nor do I want to know. He's already gone waaaay over the line sharing her personal business with anybody possible).
So, theoretically, a happily married couple... woman gets pregnent... man is happy... woman is not... woman says 'I am getting an abortion'... man is supposed to say 'sure honey, whatever you say'???
the only problem is that the woman can choose to make the man pay for the baby for 18 years, whether he wants it or not. not fair, but guys should always keep that in the back of their mind before they engage their warp drives.
her body, her decision. with one caveat
her body, her decision, her financial responsibility
You've already figured out the solution.
Yes. If she is not willing to give him as many babies as he wants, and he is not willing to settle for the babies she has already given him, they are not happily married. There is a problem in their marriage, and they need to resolve it; fighting over one baby is not going to solve their problems, and forcing her to give him more is certainly not going to help. If she wants more babies than he's willing to keep, forcing him to keep more is only going to make the problem worse. And if they cannot resolve those problems, then their marriage is over; how can it function when it is broken on such a fundamental level?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?