Reason #613 why I hate our society

[entropic]

"[Ohio] legislators have submitted a bill that would give fathers of unborn children a final say in whether or not an abortion can take place."

I'm just going to point to karjack's essay about this, because it's far more clear and well written than anything I'd come up with.

Comments

[bonesbaby33]

Wow, I am not bored enough to read that long of a rant, lol, but I guess I just wanted to challenge the "Rights? What rights?" idea. What if a couple is married, trying for a child, the woman gets pregnant, and changes her mind and wants an abortion? I mean, if a pregnancy isn't really accidental (I know there's no way to prove it either way, but still), why shouldn't the father have a right to help decide whether to keep the baby? I'm assuming this is aimed toward preventing abortions, right? The paternity test thing sounds a little intense and expensive, but it makes sense. There are problems with the bill, but I don't think it's fair for a woman to get an abortion if the father wants the baby, especially if, in the case that the mother doesn't want to support it, the father does. It seems to me that the fathers of unborn children that don't want the mothers aborting the child are the same guys who want to support, or help support, the baby and maybe mother.

Not arguing to be malicious, as I've got mixed feelings about abortion. I'm more against it than for it, for sure, but I haven't thought about fathers' rights as much as I have about the fact that it's murder (by my definition).

[alibi_factory]

I agree. There's a lot of problems with it, though, which will alienate people they could have otherwise had on their side. A bill that gave fathers some say over abortion would be (imo) a good thing, but the 'no father, no abortion' thing is transparently just a way to make abortion illegal. Really, it should be that the absence of an opinion amounts to a consent, because if they did want the child, they'd make themselves known.

[bonesbaby33]

That's true.

definite tl;dr potential here ;)

[entropic]

The issue of abortion seems to be centered around juggling three sets of rights: the rights of the woman, the rights of the man, and the rights of the fetus. I feel that the worth of a person comes from their actions in the past and in the present, and that any potential actions in the future don't count because there is no way of telling what they are. So to me, the woman and the man are worth more as people than the potential life of the fetus, and I have no moral qualms about giving their rights precedence by having the choice of an abortion available. Deciding where the rights of the man begin to override the rights of the woman and vice versa is where things get tricky.

If there is no abortion, the woman is going to put her health at risk by carrying the child for nine months, and by either giving birth or undergoing major surgery and having a c-section. If she's single, she'll have to deal with the social stigma of being a single mother. Once the child is born, if she either doesn't want to or is unable to put it up for adoption, she needs to raise, care for, and pay for it for at least eighteen years. All mothers are treated differenly in our society (whether they're treated better or worse is debatable) and if she's a single mother, the social stigma that she's doing to deal with for eighteen years will also affect the child.

The man will need to either help raise the child, or pay the mother child support.

Taking all that into account, I whole-heartedly believe that after conception the choice of having an abortion or not needs to be given to the woman. That doesn't mean that the man has no choice in the matter: his is whether to stick it in or not. It's his responsibility to find out if what the woman will do if there is an unplanned pregnancy, and to make his choice based on that.

If he doesn't want her to murder his baby, he needs to ask her what she would do. If she would have an abortion, or he doesn't trust her answer? He needs to either wear a condom or keep it in his pants. If he doesn't want to support a child in any way, he needs to ask her what she would do. If she wouldn't have an abortion, or he doesn't trust her answer? He needs to either wear a condom or keep it in his pants. If he is so opposed to having/not having the abortion that he'd try to interfere with her choice? He needs to not take the risk of having the condom fail, and keep it in his pants.

Which isn't to say that the woman doesn't have any responsibility beforehand. If she doesn't want a child, when she can she needs to try to prevent the choice about having an abortion, either by using at least one form of birth control or just not having sex. Unfortunately, in cases like rape or incest her only choice comes after conception.

Summary: the man does have a choice. He just makes it before they have sex. :)

Re: definite tl;dr potential here ;)

[bonesbaby33]

Okay, but why does the woman get 2 chances to decide (by having safe/no sex, and then by having the only real say in abortion - she can go get an abortion right now without dad even knowing not to mention without his permission). 2 choices. But you're saying the guy only really has one, and that's to be responsible with sex in the first place. Yes, pregnancy is a risk to one's health, but more risks involve the unborn baby than the mother, most times. Women are designed to have babies. I just have little sympathy for a woman who gets pregnant, decides to abort on the grounds that she doesn't want to put her body through that, and does it with little or no regard to the father of the baby, especially when she knows damn well who it is.

And adoption is allllways available, especially for white babies. Everyone wants white babies. And after that, everyone just wants a baby in the first place. So if a woman really doesn't want the baby, why can't she give it up for adoption? Do you need both parents' consent for that? One would think it's a little more involved with the fathers' rights (I don't know for sure) but if it is, that's kind of sad. It's easier to kill a baby than to give it to someone who wants it? And a woman doesn't want to take responsibility for not keeping her pants on, so getting an abortion, even without daddy's consent, is an easy way out.

I do keep in mind though that not many women actually get abortions. More either have them or give them up. But the fact that it seems like such a nonchalant decision and that the father can be left in the dark completely isn't fair.