• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

Should a Man have an Absolute Right to abort his baby?

  • Yes, but only during the first 20 weeks, same as a woman.

    Votes: 3 3.4%
  • Yes, but only during the initial period when a non-invasive technique works.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, but he should have the right to be legally relieved of all responsibility.

    Votes: 44 49.4%
  • NO! Only the woman has this right and he remains responsible.

    Votes: 18 20.2%
  • I oppose all abortion, so neither have the right.

    Votes: 19 21.3%
  • I Don't Know.

    Votes: 5 5.6%

  • Total voters
    89

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
18,893
Reaction score
25,005
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Should a man have an absolute right to have his baby aborted?

In the alternative, should he be granted relief from all legal responsibility if it is his clearly stated wish to abort but the woman decides not to?

Let me preface my remarks with this disclaimer; I am Pro-Choice and I support a woman’s absolute right to choose to have an abortion for several reasons, including the fact it is the woman who must endure the pregnancy to carry the child to term, and then follows the lifelong responsibility to raise and care for any child born.

The dilemma occurs when the woman unilaterally decides to have the baby, even when the male does not wish to accept that long-term responsibility.

In a recent news report, a young man was so desperate not to have a child that he tricked his girlfriend into taking a morning after pill. Now I do not support or condone this action, but it does bring up the thesis issue for me…why does the male partner have no say in a decision to keep the baby?

When a woman makes the unilateral decision to keep the baby this then compels lifelong legal and emotional obligations on the part of the unwilling father. This creates resentment and recriminations in both parties. By attempting to force the man to marry and/or support both her and the child this only serves to create a negative environment for all concerned, especially for any child to grow up in.

Since we now have a simple method of aborting in the early stages of the first trimester, without needing an invasive surgery, why should the absolute choice to keep the baby reside with the mother? If it does, why can’t the man be legally relieved of further responsibility to both parties?

I have offered several voting options, please pick and then explain what do you think? I am especially interested in arguments for why the woman has the sole right to keep the child while making the man permanently responsible.
 
Last edited:

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I don't think a man should get to make the choice, but I do think that if he wants the baby aborted, and does not plan to be involved in its life, that he should have no legal obligation to the mother if she decides to have it. Afaic, she has the choice, she should be legally responsible.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Should a man have an absolute right to have his baby aborted?

In the alternative, should he be granted relief from all legal responsibility if it is his clearly stated wish to abort but the woman decides not to?

No. I'm also pro-choice but that baby doesn't grow inside my body. If I didn't want a baby, I could have put my horse in a trojan. Or I could have been "fixed" (I am). Once I fire my missle then I'm responsible for the result even though it's not growing up in MY refugee camp:)
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
No. I'm also pro-choice but that baby doesn't grow inside my body. If I didn't want a baby, I could have put my horse in a trojan. Or I could have been "fixed" (I am). Once I fire my missle then I'm responsible for the result even though it's not growing up in MY refugee camp:)

I personally think it's the woman's responsibility to make sure that she doesn't get pregnant since it is her body, and solely her choice when it comes to the future of the baby.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,615
Reaction score
9,085
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Should a man have an absolute right to have his baby aborted?
No!
He should should have an effective Right to an abortion. Which would be a right to terminate his parenthood and all that it entails, with that choice being able to be made for a certain period of time after finding out he is, or is going to be, a father.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
18,893
Reaction score
25,005
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I wanted to give a couple of people a chance to respond before I put my two cents in.

For my own part, I don't believe a man should dictate to a woman how to deal with her own body. I agree with Lizzie, the responsibility for her own body is uniquely the woman's.

However, I believe that a unilateral choice should have unilateral consequences. Therefore, if the male does not wish to have a child and he makes his decision plain, he should be allowed to legally opt-out of all further responsibility (and thus all future parental rights) at some point in the process.
 
Last edited:

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
No, but he ought to be able to be absolved of all legal and financial responsibility for any baby that he doesn't want to have, but he also gives up all parental visitation, etc. If she can vote to have the baby without his consent, he can vote for her to be 100% responsible for it.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I personally think it's the woman's responsibility to make sure that she doesn't get pregnant since it is her body, and solely her choice when it comes to the future of the baby.

I view it as a shared responsibility and frankly it's the women that have to do the heavy lifting. Also, the guy definitely "got off" while the woman may well not have.

I have a child and because of that, I've supported my ex-wife for 32 years since my divorce (voluntarily, not by court order). I don't have a single stretch mark.
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
How could one possibly be granted the right to force an elective medical procedure upon anyone?
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Also, a man should only be allowed to "opt out" of financial and parental responsibilities if his partner mutually accepts. The idea that he is somehow less obligated to provide for the child's well being is absurd.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I view it as a shared responsibility and frankly it's the women that have to do the heavy lifting. Also, the guy definitely "got off" while the woman may well not have.

I have a child and because of that, I've supported my ex-wife for 32 years since my divorce (voluntarily, not by court order). I don't have a single stretch mark.

That's not the point. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she is very capable of preventing it, and it is her body which is in question- not his. Since it is her body, I view it as her responsibility to protect it, and to make the choices with it.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Also, a man should only be allowed to "opt out" of financial and parental responsibilities if his partner mutually accepts. The idea that he is somehow less obligated to provide for the child's well being is absurd.

He never consented to the pregnancy, his consent to sex is no more an obligation to spend 18 years paying for an unwanted child than a woman's consent to sex is an obligation to bear and raise it in the first place.

Try again.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
That's not the point. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she is very capable of preventing it, and it is her body which is in question- not his. Since it is her body, I view it as her responsibility to protect it, and to make the choices with it.

Not being a woman, I am forced to ask, how exactly do you prevent having a baby? Just curious.
 

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,116
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
No, but he ought to be able to be absolved of all legal and financial responsibility for any baby that he doesn't want to have, but he also gives up all parental visitation, etc. If she can vote to have the baby without his consent, he can vote for her to be 100% responsible for it.

This is my position as well.

I shouldn't be able to force my seed on a woman, but I should be able to have the option to say that if you have this baby, it is with absolutely no obligation (financial or otherwise) from me. If she chooses to keep the baby, she does so under her own volition with the understanding that she cannot come back at the man for any purpose or reason whatsoever.
 

Medusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
39,861
Reaction score
7,852
Location
Turkey
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
if he doesnt want to be a father he should take all the precautions before impregnating her :mrgreen:

woman should do it too ,but it is her body
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
This is my position as well.

I shouldn't be able to force my seed on a woman, but I should be able to have the option to say that if you have this baby, it is with absolutely no obligation (financial or otherwise) from me. If she chooses to keep the baby, she does so under her own volition with the understanding that she cannot come back at the man for any purpose or reason whatsoever.

I think the man should be given enough time to make that decision before a certain point in the pregnancy so she can decide if she's going to continue the pregnancy on her own, or abort it, or have it and put it up for adoption. He has his rights, she has her rights and they need to be equal.
 

a351

#NeverTrump
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
4,825
Location
Space Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
He never consented to the pregnancy, his consent to sex is no more an obligation to spend 18 years paying for an unwanted child than a woman's consent to sex is an obligation to bear and raise it in the first place.

The woman's choice is just that, her choice. She bears the burden of carrying the child and in the case that she doesn't feel the need to terminate the pregnancy, for whatever reason, the equal participant in creating that child should not be able to simply stroll away without a lick of responsibility. I don't think many who support your position fully realize the implications of allowing such a thing to happen.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Um, birth control or abstinence. It's really not that difficult. ;)

Birth control pills have ugly side-effects for some women. They aren't readily available - at least in the past you had to beg them from a Doctor while guys can buy a condom without a license. Abstinence makes the fond grow harder.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Birth control pills have ugly side-effects for some women. They aren't readily available - at least in the past you had to beg them from a Doctor while guys can buy a condom without a license. Abstinence makes the fond grow harder.

Yes, you are right. Birth control pills have side effects for some women. That is really beside the point. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, there are a number of ways that she can avoid it. If she is negligent with her body, then it is something that she will have to deal with later.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The woman's choice is just that, her choice. She bears the burden of carrying the child and in the case that she doesn't feel the need to terminate the pregnancy, for whatever reason, the equal participant in creating that child should not be able to simply stroll away without a lick of responsibility. I don't think many who support your position fully realize the implications of allowing such a thing to happen.

Yet you argue that a woman gets to walk away without a lick of responsibility by aborting a fetus she doesn't want.

Equality? Who needs equality? :roll:
 

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,116
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I think the man should be given enough time to make that decision before a certain point in the pregnancy so she can decide if she's going to continue the pregnancy on her own, or abort it, or have it and put it up for adoption. He has his rights, she has her rights and they need to be equal.

Right, I agree. Up to the end of the first trimester is the arbitrary line I'd set.

The woman's choice is just that, her choice. She bears the burden of carrying the child and in the case that she doesn't feel the need to terminate the pregnancy, for whatever reason, the equal participant in creating that child should not be able to simply stroll away without a lick of responsibility. I don't think many who support your position fully realize the implications of allowing such a thing to happen.

Nobody is going to say that the woman should be forced to abort. What some of us are saying is that the man should have a legal avenue to absolve himself of obligation, should a woman decide to carry to term against a man's wishes. If she wants to do that with the full knowledge that the child is hers and hers alone, so be it. Otherwise, you force not only an economic burden on a man, but a moral hazard insofar that she could keep this baby for the purposes of "trapping" a man against his will.

Choice is choice. It seems like too many people here support a woman's choice, but not a man's.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,615
Reaction score
9,085
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Right, I agree. Up to the end of the first trimester is the arbitrary line I'd set.
It has to be a set amount of time to make the decision from the time he is informed of the pregnancy.
Otherwise you would just have women who wouldn't inform the guy until after the time limit had passed.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Yes, you are right. Birth control pills have side effects for some women. That is really beside the point. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, there are a number of ways that she can avoid it. If she is negligent with her body, then it is something that she will have to deal with later.

I'm just arguing that the mean have responsibilities also.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,615
Reaction score
9,085
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
but it is her body
And she should not be able to force responsibility onto a man for her choice of keeping.


The woman's choice is just that, her choice. She bears the burden of carrying the child and in the case that she doesn't feel the need to terminate the pregnancy, for whatever reason, the equal participant in creating that child should not be able to simply stroll away without a lick of responsibility. I don't think many who support your position fully realize the implications of allowing such a thing to happen.
She has the right of choice to abort or not without a lick of responsibility.
The man should have a right that is just as effective.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom