• 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
sangha said:
I cannot state that all men do what I have done, but I can state with certainty that their actions were ones that they chose to engage in. Men have choices.
Click to expand...

Not quite correct. The male may have chosen to engage in sex, but as has been pointed out time and again this does not mean he has chosen to engage in the creation of a baby. Neither has the woman. Even you have argued in this very thread that conception does not produce a child until it is born.

Life offers choices, true. I can opt for chocolate or vanilla ice cream; I can live in New York or Los Angeles. Such choices often result in unexpected consequences like food poisoning, getting mugged in Central Park, or car-jacked in Hollywood. I did not CHOOSE to be poisoned, mugged, or car-jacked simply because I chose to eat ice cream or live in one of those cities.

Somehow, under your logic, a man has no obligations and responsibilities until the child is actually born. Then suddenly he is fully obligated simply because he had sex with a woman, even if he used contraceptives which clearly indicated he had NO intention of having a child. Even if he was no longer involved with the woman and thus unaware, suddenly she can present him with a child and demand he take full responsibility.

When you've talked about the "law requires" you are making a fallacious appeal to the consequence, because LAW can be changed. When you state "there is a child' you are making an appeal to emotion; ignoring many instances where children are raised and fully supported by a single parent alone. When you state he must accept responsibility simply by having sex, you are merely affirming the consequent; i.e. If he has sex he might have a baby, he has sex; therefore he agrees to having a baby.

All fallacies and none address the issue.

sangha said:
And I focus on child support because that was the issue your OP focused on
Click to expand...

I repeat, incorrect. That is what YOU think the focus is on, primarily because it is the most obvious concern men have when dealing with a unwanted child. It is not the ONLY concern as my OP pointed out:


It is not only the child support issue, it is all the emotional and legal baggage that comes with it; as well as all the other emotional and personal responsibility that comes with dealing with the existence of ones child.
 
Last edited:

Correct! A person can make choices without the consequences being intended.

However, the responsibility to support ones' child is not contingent upon intent. Both mother and father have such a responsibility regardless of intent.


Somehow, under your logic, a man has no obligations and responsibilities until the child is actually born. Then suddenly he is fully obligated simply because he had sex with a woman,
Click to expand...

Untrue. Having sex with the mother is not why he has the obligation. For all the law cares, the mother could have had sex with more than one man, but only one (ie the actual father) would be responsible for supporting the child produced.

even if he used contraceptives which clearly indicated he had NO intention of having a child. Even if he was no longer involved with the woman and thus unaware, suddenly she can present him with a child and demand he take full responsibility.
Click to expand...

Again, intent has nothing to do with his responsibility. His further involvement (between the sex act and birth) has nothing to do with it. The responsibility is the result of the birth of *his* child.

That's all there is to it.



My position is not only supported by the law. Morality supports my position too.

And it dishonest of you to misrepresent my position as "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby". If you rposition weren't so weak, you would not have to resort to such fictions.


All fallacies and none address the issue.
Click to expand...

I prefer to call what you posted "fictions", not "fallacies"


I repeat, incorrect. That is what YOU think the focus is on, primarily because it is the most obvious concern men have when dealing with a unwanted child. It is not the ONLY concern as my OP pointed out:
Click to expand...

This is just another fiction of yours.

Your OP mentions two issues:

1) Whether men should be able to force a woman to have an abortion, and

2) Whether men should be able to dodge their responsibility to support their children

When Jerry said the issue was about the first, you clearly and explicitly denied that, and went on to state that your real focus was on #2


It is not only the child support issue, it is all the emotional and legal baggage that comes with it; as well as all the other emotional and personal responsibility that comes with the existence of ones child.
Click to expand...

You're still focusing on the fathers' responsibility to support his child.

And you wonder why my posts have addressed the issue you focus on :screwy
 
sangha said:
Correct! A person can make choices without the consequences being intended.

However, the responsibility to support ones' child is not contingent upon intent. Both mother and father have such a responsibility regardless of intent.
Click to expand...

And the mother can absolve BOTH of the obligation by unilaterally opting to abort, or have the baby without the male's knowledge and then simply put it up for adoption. This is the first point we keep going round and round on because you refuse to see the inequity and instead keep throwing up the same false objections (he will KNOW if she's pregnant, he can prevent adoption...).

sangha said:
Untrue. Having sex with the mother is not why he has the obligation. For all the law cares, the mother could have had sex with more than one man, but only one (ie the actual father) would be responsible for supporting the child produced.
Click to expand...

Another evasion. We are not discussing issues of "paternity," the argument is based on the given: the child was produced by his sperm and her egg.

sangha said:
Again, intent has nothing to do with his responsibility. His further involvement (between the sex act and birth) has nothing to do with it. The responsibility is the result of the birth of *his* child.
Click to expand...

Again with the appeal to emotion.

sangha said:
My position is not only supported by the law. Morality supports my position too.
Click to expand...

That is arguable. Being Pro-Choice, in MY moral view it is often better to cease a birth than to bring an unwanted child into the world to face all the repercussions of not being wanted by the parents.


Please do not project a characteristic of debate that you yourself exhibit. There is no dishonesty on my part at all, you have made such statements in past comments. In fact, here is a chain that clearly shows your position on that point:

sangha said:
If you don't want to pay child support, keep it in your pants
Click to expand...

sangha said:
Because the child was created as a result of a decision the father made
Click to expand...

sangha said:
If the father didn't stick it to the mother, she wouldn't be a mother
Click to expand...

As you can see from the above, not fictions.


Incorrect both in regards to what I stated to Jerry, and as to your assumptions:


Thus my actual statement to Jerry is in keeping with my recent statement to you, and so not another "fiction." If you are going to point out what I said, please be accurate because I will research it.

sangha said:
You're still focusing on the fathers' responsibility to support his child.

And you wonder why my posts have addressed the issue you focus on :screwy
Click to expand...

I respond, as the OP, to many more members than you do here; addressing all sorts of arguments and counterarguments. I try to focus on each issue raised separately by each member rather than constantly repeating ALL points over and over since all may not apply to the current argument.

Your focus is on child support. You have made the following claims:

sangha said:
There is no responsibility to support the unborn. The responsibility to support begins when the child is born
Click to expand...

sangha said:
Mothers can not opt out of supporting their child

Neither can fathers
Click to expand...

sangha said:
Women are required to support their children

They can't opt out, so men shouldn't be able to either
Click to expand...

It has been shown that there are several circumstances where the woman’s unilateral decision allows her to opt out of “required” child support; she can give up the baby for adoption at the hospital, at a baby-drop-off point; or by simply selling it to the highest adoption bidder. All this can be accomplished by keeping the male completely unaware of her pregnancy.

True, she cannot do this without some difficulty if the male is aware she has had HIS baby. But that’s not the point. It is clear that she CAN opt-out of child support, while HE cannot.

So, by your own words he should have a right to opt-out. Since Women are [NOT] required to support their children then men shouldn't be either.
 
Last edited:

Wrong again

An abortion does not absolve anyone of any responsibility because at the time of the adoption, there is no baby to be responsible for.

And the father can prevent an adoption of his child.

Another evasion. We are not discussing issues of "paternity," the argument is based on the given: the child was produced by his sperm and her egg.
Click to expand...

I don't think you know what the word "paternity" means.

You claimed that a man can be held responsible for a child simply because he had sex with a woman who later gave birth to child. You are wrong.



Again with the appeal to emotion.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It's an appeal to fact. It is a fact that the reason why father is responsible for supporting his child is because he is the father of that child, and not because he had sex with the mother.



Those comments were in response to claims that men have no choice, and do not get to make any decisions. None of those statements say or mean "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby".



In the quote of yours that you just posted, you say that your OP was about the man's right to choose to not pay child support.

I am right. You are wrong.


I did not deny that I have focused (though not exclusively) on child support. It is because that was what your OP, and your comments in this thread have focused on. Your own words (quoted above by you) prove that I am right, and you are wrong.




Again, at the time of an abortion, there is no child support "required" and men can prevent a woman from adopting out his child.


True, she cannot do this without some difficulty if the male is aware she has had HIS baby. But that’s not the point. It is clear that she CAN opt-out of child support, while HE cannot.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. Neither the mother nor the father can opt-out of child support for their children without the other parents cooperation and consent.


So, by your own words he should have a right to opt-out. Since Women are [NOT] required to support their children then men shouldn't be either.
Click to expand...

Both parents are required to support their children so men do not and should not have the ability to opt out of paying child support.
 
As usual you simply pick apart and piece together any points in order to make any argument you wish. You cannot see the forest for each tree you focus on.

sangha said:
An abortion does not absolve anyone of any responsibility because at the time of the adoption, there is no baby to be responsible for.
And the father can prevent an adoption of his child.
Click to expand...

If there was a birth, then there was a baby that was the “child” of the two parents. One parent can make the unilateral decision to put the child up for adoption. The father can only prevent this if he knows about the baby. People have already explained that the “father” does not always know.

sangha said:
You claimed that a man can be held responsible for a child simply because he had sex with a woman who later gave birth to child. You are wrong.
Click to expand...

Actually you and other’s are using that argument to support your position that merely because a man has sex which results in the birth of a baby he is morally and legally obligated to support the child. I’ve always recognized that this is current law, it is one of the issues concerning equity.

sangha said:
It's an appeal to fact. It is a fact that the reason why father is responsible for supporting his child is because he is the father of that child, and not because he had sex with the mother.
Click to expand...

LOL! Nice attempt at evasion, but he is the father because the mother got a sperm donation, either directly from sex with him or through a sperm bank.

sangha said:
Those comments were in response to claims that men have no choice, and do not get to make any decisions. None of those statements say or mean "he is responsible because he had sex" or "he agreed to have a baby".
Click to expand...

Another attempt at evasion! Meanwhile those statements seem pretty clear to me and anyone else who read them. On the basis of your clear statements a man is the “father” because he donated his sperm through “deciding not to keep his legs closed and sticking it in the mother.” Your words, paraphrased.

sangha said:
In the quote of yours that you just posted, you say that your OP was about the man's right to choose to not pay child support. I am right. You are wrong.
Click to expand...

Once more, simply asserting your opinion does not make it a fact. The quote does not refer to child support, but rather "responsibilities." Anyone following my arguments throughout this thread will see my position touches upon many areas of “responsibility” including child support. The thread is not only about child support.

sangha said:
Both parents are required to support their children so men do not and should not have the ability to opt out of paying child support.
Click to expand...

Again with your assertions? Both parents are only required to support their child if, and only if, the woman has the child with his knowledge and at least one parent agrees to keep it. In that case under current law, the other parent is bound to provide child support if he/she earns enough to do so. However, if the woman has the child without the man’s knowledge, then she can unilaterally place the child up for adoption and neither parent is responsible for child support.

Therefore, since the woman can opt-out of child support via unilateral adoption, then the man should be allowed to unilaterally opt-out of all care and responsibility for an unwanted child also. Since the woman can unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility at all via abortion, then the man should have legal recourse to unilaterally opt-out of having any responsibility for an unawanted child.

Now, there is no point in arguing around in circles. I have made clear, rational, logically sound and valid points. If and when you bring up a new point I'll be happy to address it.
 
Last edited:
opendebate said:
Apparently logic is subjective, because in my opinion your posts are lacking it.
Click to expand...

Logic isn't subjective. It is objective. My posts are filled with it.
 

Yeah.. they are being stupid. Agreed. That doesn't negate the argument though... Women should not be allowed to hold a man captive because of her choice. A choice that he has no say in.
 

If there is an abortion, there is no baby

If the father does not know, that is the result of decisions he has made. Furthermore, if the child is put up for adoption, then the father does not have to pay child support, which is what your OP whined about.




I'm glad to see that you've added the words "which results in the birth of a baby". Now, you're longer making up crap about how a man is responsible for a child simply because he had sex with the mother.

And there's nothing unfair about it. Both parents had sex "which results in the birth of a baby" and both parents are responsible for supporting the child. How is that unfair?

LOL! Nice attempt at evasion, but he is the father because the mother got a sperm donation, either directly from sex with him or through a sperm bank.
Click to expand...

This is dishonest. He is not the father merely because he ejaculated inside of her. He is the father because his sperm fertilized her egg. I'm sure you know how reproduction works, so why do you post such ridiculous drivel?

And it is dishonest of you to suddenly bring up the matter of sperm donation. You must be desperate.



My comments were clearly in response to claims that the father has no choice in the matter. Posting lies like you just did isn't helping your argument



I am asserting fact. The "responsibilities" you're referring to is child support. It is the only responsibility the law can compel a father to have.




Again, if the child is put out for adoption, then the man does not have to pay child support which is what you whined about.



A woman can't hide a pregnancy unless the man just doesn't care and makes choices that demonstrate that he doesn't care.

And whether a child is wanted or not, both parents are obligated to support their children.

Most importantly, even if what you said was true, the fact that diffferent people get to make different decisions does not mean the law has to step in and ensure that everyone gets to make the same decisions.

I noticed that you never answer my question the first time I asked it, so I'll ask you again:

Do you think the law does or should ensure that everyone gets to make the same decisions?


I'm pretty sure you won't answer that question (you'll just ignore it, or maybe edit it out of your response) because you know the answer to that question proves why you're wrong
 
Bodhisattva said:
Yeah.. they are being stupid. Agreed. That doesn't negate the argument though... Women should not be allowed to hold a man captive because of her choice. A choice that he has no say in.
Click to expand...

Should the law ensure that everyone gets to make the same choices?
 
sangha said:
Because men can't choose to have a vasectomy or no sex.

Those are beyond his control
Click to expand...

a vasectomy... which I have, is not 100% Care to step up to the plate again?
 
sangha said:
If the father didn't stick it to the mother, she wouldn't be a mother
Click to expand...

Nope. WRONG. She is a mother because she chose to not use her Constitutional right to have use birth control (abortion).
 

Having daughters, I didn't realize that they were being told every day of their lives that they were being groomed to be mothers. As a single father I have more responsibilty than their mother... I didn't choose that. It is a flawed argument.
 
Bodhisattva said:
a vasectomy... which I have, is not 100% Care to step up to the plate again?
Click to expand...

And you have the choice to get a vasectomy, but a woman does not

Does that mean some woman should get to decide whether or not you get a vasectomy?
 
Bodhisattva said:
a vasectomy... which I have, is not 100% Care to step up to the plate again?
Click to expand...

Mine is 100% and has been since day one. You went to the wrong doc...

Not only is mine 100%...but it's reversible.

The procedure was new when I had mine, but the logic of the procedure...flawless.
 
Removable Mind said:
Mine is 100% and has been since day one. You went to the wrong doc...

Not only is mine 100%...but it's reversible.

The procedure was new when I had mine, but the logic of the procedure...flawless.
Click to expand...



vasectomy statistics

IOW, vasectomies don't work when men choose to not follow the doctors instructions or choose not to have the success of their vasectomy documented
 
Thanks for the 23 chromosomes hun! Now let's see what I do with "my" baby that is growing on your belly!
 
The Myths and Realities of a Vasectomy - NYTimes.com

 
sangha said:
And you have the choice to get a vasectomy, but a woman does not

Does that mean some woman should get to decide whether or not you get a vasectomy?
Click to expand...

She can get her tubes tied or have an abortion... not sure why this is a difficult concept.

And he is a father because he chose not to use his constitutional right to not have sex.
Click to expand...

Nope. He is a father because she has all the power.
 
sangha said:
vasectomy statistics

IOW, vasectomies don't work when men choose to not follow the doctors instructions or choose not to have the success of their vasectomy documented
Click to expand...

That's how it worked for me. I hated the follow-ups...embarrassing, but necessary. As the saying goes. All else fails...follow the directions.
 
Removable Mind said:
Mine is 100% and has been since day one. You went to the wrong doc...

Not only is mine 100%...but it's reversible.

The procedure was new when I had mine, but the logic of the procedure...flawless.
Click to expand...

OK... Good to know. I should have said that I am getting one... which sounds even better n ow.
 
Bodhisattva said:
She can get her tubes tied or have an abortion... not sure why this is a difficult concept.



Nope. He is a father because she has all the power.
Click to expand...

You don't believe that, Bod...come on. Unilateral control...is here to stay until reproductive science develops a bit more, and it will.

This isn't a simple solution. But really what you want to do is to create the unilateral switcharoo.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Not sure... what do you mean? About what?
Click to expand...

About anything.

Is it the laws job to make sure that people have the opportunity to make the same decisions that other people get to make?

Men get to make a decision about vasectomies. Should a women be able to decide if a man will have a vasectomy? Should a mother be able to renounce her responsibility to support her child because the father chose to not have a vasectomy, thereby making him fully responsible for supporting the child?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…