@sarahjustme it is US law. A dead body can't be forced to give up its bodily autonomy(give
Organs without consent) even to save the life or lives of others. No one can legally be required to put themselves at risk, even when it would save a life.Therefore if you demand that a woman take the risk of giving up her life to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, you're putting women in a legal class with less rights than any other class, even dead people.

Really, really can't wait until this mindset dies off. It's well beyond time to lay these old ass, tired ass disproven 5000 times ass theories to rest. If I had to listen to this everyday I'd cut my own throat just to escape.

@Akfishlady It'll always get one out of me.

Gee ok, since you refuse to consider a man might want the child he fathered and, although I know your answer here because you will want to remain consistent, what if it was reversed and the man bore the child and was going to abort YOUR baby? That you'd have to pay for once it's born whether you want it or not?

@lerlo What kind of fantasy is this? Let me tell you how I lived my reproductive life. When I was young and foolish, I was at least smart enough to know I was in no position to care for a child. I used birth control pills. I was a woman in the Army in the late 70s and early 80s, those were crazy times. Yes, I was sexually active. Then I was married for many years and had babies when the time was right. I now have three adult daughters. I brought them all up understanding their bodies. When we thought there was a chance they would be sexually active we made sure they were protected with a good form of birth control. There were NO pregnancies when they were not planned and welcomed. I have two married children who have given me two grandchildren. If YOU want to father a child find a woman who is willing to have your child, but have that discussion before you move forward in the relationship. If you don't want to father a child make sure you are not spilling fertile seed. Not every woman has my ethics.

In my opinion, the "conclusion" is not the important thing here. The arguments used are all important. And most of them are invalid (from a logical point of view.)

@lerlo IF men were the ones capable of gestating pregnancies and bearing offspring, the situation would still be the same. No woman would have the right to force them to gestate a pregnancy if they didn't want to.
If it's not your body, it's not your life, it's not your decision, and it's not your business.
Why should any other person have any right over someone else's bodily autonomy?
As far as paying for a child whether you want it or not, you should absolutely have the right to give up your parental rights and be done with it. That the legal system can force men to pay for offspring they don't want is completely wrong and should stop. The same goes for women who do not have custody of born children and want to give up their parental rights.
Of course I refuse to consider whether a man might want the child he fathered. It's not his body that has to gestate it. Women are not broodmares or gestational slaves. They should never be forced to gestate any pregnancy they don't want, regardless of what their reason(s) may be.

@KKGator So when you have a child is it just yours?

@HippieChick58 So when you had the children were they just yours?

@lerlo You are extrapolating the issue.
However, I will answer your question. IF the father and I have mutually decided to parent together, then that would be what we would do. If he didn't want to be part of the equation, I wouldn't force him to. That also means I wouldn't force him to pay child support. That would make the child "just mine" at that point.
Any other questions?

@lerlo When a man's only investment in producing a child is an orgasm, I fail to see how that equates to the right to force gestation on a woman. If the woman chooses to give birth, then he can assert rights, and bear responsibility, but until then, she is making all the decisions.

@lerlo The children were brought into the world with the understanding we both wanted to be parents. We decided together the time was right to have a child. For our second and third living children I knew my rhythms so well I actually asked my ex after we went to bed "do you wanna make a baby?" and we made a baby that night. Because of travel/vacation schedules that was the only time it could have happened. So we were both committed to having another child. Were the children just mine, no. My ex was and still is a committed father. However, had we not been married and not been committed to having children and being a family I would never have had children with him. I controlled my fertility, it did not control me. I never had a pregnancy that was not wanted, and I only had one that truly was not planned.

@COGITOERGOSUM Do tell. What does "logic" have to do with having dominion over one's own body?

@KKGator Well yes we can go on and on if you think that deciding whether or not to support that child means that you are not its parent and that it's not your child if you say you won't support it. So if the father chooses not to support it is he still the father? Yes it seems an absurd question but absurd arguments call for absurd questions sometimes. To put it in perspective for you, if you build a house and your name is on the deed and you walk away form the house is it still yours? (think birth certificate here)

@GinaMaria Wow, not his until its born. And then it's his even if he didn't want it. No hypocrisy there

@lerlo If the father has made it clear he's not interested in participation, his name does not have to be on the birth certificate.
Why are you dragging the issue out?

@KKGator only the people with the "right" answer get to drag this out huh? When you personally attack me for asking a question you get what you get. I notice you couldnt answer my question about is the kid yours after you have it--why is that? can't open your mind enough to answer it or you know the answer puts you in corner

@lerlo Okay, first of all, I have NOT "personally attacked" you. At all. Not once. Saying I have is a straight-up LIE.
Further, I DID answer your question. My mind is sufficiently open to have answered every question you posed. Under no circumstances would any answer I might give put me in a corner. For someone who claims they are an attorney, you really aren't that great at arguing. That is not a "personal attack", that is simply an observation. I have more than adequately supported my position. You seem to be the one who is having a problem with my responses. We've done this before, and you behaved in the exact same manner, and still did not win the argument.

Nice avoidance of the question

@lerlo Your question was whether or not a man has the right to prevent a woman having an abortion. The user above explains why she does not feel a man should have that right. She's answered you in some detail rather than avoided the question.

@lerlo Seems you're just here for fight instead of a thoughtful discussion.

@Jnei No, she gave all the reasons why it's so hard on a woman and completely avoided the man's side of the equation, leaving it to "he had sex." The comment I left raised both sides and I expected the bias, was just trying to see if people would answer the question considering both sides. Totally avoids that its his child too.

@GinaKay Just trying to get answers that consider that its the guys child too. I knew the biased opinions would come, I listed them in my comment. I 'm just looking for the poll numbers and hopefully some thoughtful discussion. Check how many responses here mention that its also the man's child and then ask who wants thoughtful discussion.

@lerlo It isn't a child when the abortion happens. It's a tiny clump of cells.

@lerlo If it is born then it is a child and both parents are responsible for its upbringing.

@lerlo Your question misstates the situation. There is no child to keep or not keep.

@lerlo "No, she gave all the reasons why it's so hard on a woman and completely avoided the man's side of the equation, leaving it to "he had sex" - so, to sum up, she gave reasons explaining why she believes a man does not have the right to prevent a woman having an abortion - and thus answered the question.

@lerlo I answered the question when I voted. I was elaborating.

@lerlo bacause thats literally the entirety of a mans role in procreation, whether you like it or not.

When you say taken into account do you mean taken into consideration? By whom? The pregnant female? The courts? Just curious on your train of thought there...

Yes, "taken into consideration". Both: Woman and the courts.
I know it is HER body, and, as a lawyer myself I would defend her decision to have an abortion. But the man is the father, and it is not possible to justify ignoring HIS rights.

@COGITOERGOSUM You're assuming he has rights to the woman's body, but he doesn't. That's her uterus, and if she doesn't want overnight guests, she's within her rights to evict. His rights don't begin until she gives birth. At that point, he can assert his rights and take on the consequent responsibility.

Your words: "His rights don't begin until she gives birth." My questions: Why? Who said so? Is that a "truth", a dogma, a prejudice? Can you enumerate 2 or 3 logical reasons to defend that thesis? @GinaMaria

@COGITOERGOSUM because the pregnancy, its risks and repercussions are entirely the womans until the fetus becomes viable and is born. You don't have a right to any womans body. No fetus has a right to any womans body. Full stop.

@COGITOERGOSUM, @Blindbird answered your question with regard to rights. While the fetus inhabits a woman's body, she has full right of bodily autonomy. You can't even force a person to give blood in order to save the life of another person, or their organs after death, so ordering a woman to donate her uterus, however temporary, suggests women have fewer rights than corpses (or even chickens, in the state of California.)

@GinaMaria She didn't. I asked for "logical reasons". She gave me none. But there were worse replies. At least, hers (and yours) are coherent.
It is one thing to be right (A person can be right by mere chance!), and another thing to be able to present logical arguments to defend our thesis. Verbigratia: I agree with your statement ("a woman has full right of bodily autonomy" ), and yet, your argument is a logical Fallacy (non sequitur), because your conclusion, though correct, does not follows from your premises.

It's called a "poll" no "attempt" to do anything. Because if such attempts were possible I would hold a poll to abolish religion and trump. By the way, unless there is a written contract, he doesn't leave it up to her. The law says she gets to choose. That's what the poll is about.

Excellent comment!!!

The phrase "not acceptable under any circumstances" is the perfect example of an absolute "truth". Interesting! I didn't expect to find absolutism in this forum.

@lerlo Polls end with "do you believe A or B" they do not include a narrative or slanted opinions.

@COGITOERGOSUM We're talking about a woman's right to choose - not god - absolutism applies to one and not the other.

@SLBushway check the questions...believe it or not, even someone posting a poll is allowed an opinion but I just tried to pose all the arguments

Which would be reasonable if women under 35 without children weren't actively prevented from recieving this surgery except in case of emergency. I've lost count of the times I've heard " I wanted my tubed tied but the doctor refused to perform the surgery because I might change my mind" from childfree women.

@Blindbird That is really strange considering the "It's her body" argument and if she is older than 18 and considered an adult. I would think a woman would have no problem getting this procedure done after a specified waiting period to give her time to think about it. Is this type of misogyny prevalent in the medical community (as it is elsewhere but I don't want to guess)?
Can a doc refuse to do the operation barring any physical complications if it is within his scope?
This just proves you can learn something new everyday. I have never thought about medical services being refused to women, I'm sorry ladies. I'm still kinda new to the leftish side of things, but I'm learning.

@MacTavish the women arent makimg these decisions doctors are. Are you suggesting we attempt surgery on ourselves? Its not strange, it's infuriating.

@Blindbird No, no, no. I didn't think docs in this day and age would refuse the surgery on any grounds other than health reasons. That's why I thought it strange.
I was alluding to the modern era where (legally) a woman has control of her body and the decisions she makes concerning it. I never meant to degrade women and will never consciously do so, I may be misinterpreted (that will be my fault for not explaining things well enough) but will never blatantly do that.
I apologize to you and anyone else I may have offended, I am sorry.

@MacTavish but they do. That is what I just said. Google it for yourself and you will find hundreds of women telling their stories about that happening. Another lovely instance of men disbelieving women about things they know nothing about because, since men never experience it, it doesn't happen right? Sexist much?

@Blindbird

1. It wouldn't have mattered who posted that I would have replied the same.
   2.You implied that I didn't believe it because you are a woman, I never said nor implied that.
2. You have put words in my mouth I never said.
3. I thought it strange the docs are able to get away with it. I never said nor implied you were lying.
4. Just another case of reading into it what you want.
5. If "Another lovely instance of men disbelieving women..." isn't a sexist statement then what is.
6. I even apologized for any offense but apparently that doesn't mean much to you.
   Last entry on this thread, I am not explaining further, I don't have too.

@MacTavish doesnt mean much. You are correct. I sincerely doubt you wouldbhave replied the same had I been a man.

Now that's one hell of a way to end a topic ....

@Simon1 Lol. And that is just the tip of the iceburg. You will notice he hasn't replied. ?

@Elusia8 Thank you, we are all pretty good now but it was quite a journey getting here. There is still stuff we deal with and always will, but that is just the normal for us.
"What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly.”
Quote by Charles Addams

?

You go girl!!

@Palacinky while technically correct, I have a hard time believing any trans man would try to force a woman to continue a pregnancy. They are, after all, well versed in the concept of bodily autonomy.

I agree, if a woman has the right to abortion if she does not want to financially, emotionally and otherwise be a parent, a man should have the same option of opting out of parenthood. I know a lot of women that are raising kids by themselves. The biological father doesn't pay child support or see the child. Men should have the right to release themselves from all parental responsibility by giving up their parental rights .

@SallyMc perhaps, but just as a woman may not be ready or able to support and raise a child ,a man may not be able to either.

That's appalling.

And said rapist can not be sued for child support.

No implication at all. That abortionable object is the beginning of the father's child. Timing isnt the issue. The result is.

@lerlo That is a stretch. I would say it is the "father's HOPE for the beginnings of a child." Some studies say that up to 25% of known pregnancies end in miscarriage. That number is likely much higher given many women miscarry without realizing they were pregnant.

@lerlo Its all about the timing.

hope it takes many many decades

@Faithless1 I don't know! Currently, artificial wombs are intended to help babies born prematurely. U of Philadelphia researchers showed lamb grown in an artificial womb starting from a few weeks old foetus.
In similar ground breaking research, male mouse stem cells have been differentiated into female gammets (eggs). So, in the future, same-sex couples could be true biological parents of their own child. All these developments, if they do happen, are going to drastically change the way gender and parenthood is perceived. Currently, we have, at least in some parts of the world, legal equality for parents of all compositions and soon it might be a biological reality.

Read the whole fucking thing before you blow a casket please. Try also to remember the civility part of this site and remember also freedom of speech gee thanks for your input

@lerlo Civility, Mr. "fucking"?? Again, por favor!

Well said!

???

My mom is fond of telling how some family friends had 3 children. Each child defeated some form of birth control the parents were using!

Celibacy has a pretty high failure rate, in actual fact. Not many folks actually stick to it.

Last I checked questions were still ok in the universe

@lerlo I never said questions weren't ok. I just think your reasoning is seriously flawed here. " She knew what she was getting into when she had the sex", like are you serious here? Also I don't think you grasp what freedom of speech means. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. Freedom of speech means that the government isn't going to lock you up for your opinions. It's not carte blanche to say whatever you want, free from criticism. Also is fine to have an opinion and ask questions, but your OP is about the most condescending thing I've read on here in a minute.

and that answers the question how?

That just makes me think of Brave New World, and it's a little saddening. There is no real existence for the inhabitants of the World State, or for the outer groups.

@DZhukovin My comment on a post concerning artificial wombs, including links to a prototype experiment done with an animal. Very cool pics.
I think technology may eventually provide an answer to the abortion debate.

@sarahjustme

Okay

Thanks for the lecture. I missed the fine print that says I have to ask your opinion before I post something. I happen to think that it takes intelligence and reason to determine that religion/god is bullshit. I therefore assumed that my audience would be that intelligent, reasonable crowd that might consider both sides of the abortion issue. There is NO "tone" to my post/poll. It merely poses a question. Apparently some women believe that only they get to decide what lives and what dies. I found it interesting that none of them answered my question about who does the kid belong to once it's born, if they and they alone get to decide to have it or not. Whether you or they like it or not, the father is a a "co-owner" for lack of a better term--not just if the kid is born. What if the scenario is this: A loving couple who always planned on having 4 kids--while the wife is pregnant with the 4th she decides, "enough of this, I'm not doing it" and decides to abort the 4th kid? Poor father? Fuck him? He's just some schmo I had sex with, it's my body? See the scenario doesn't change that it took two to create the embryo and potential kid. Regardless of the scenario or the answer, to make any question, post or poll here personal is uncalled for and any question that can piss someone off puts the blame on the person getting pissed off in what is supposed to be an open forum for people to have a dialogue with others about any and all subjects. Can you imagine if I posed the question "Should men get vasectomies to prevent childbirth?" Are you pissed by that question? No one can tell me what to do with my body? Can you hear the same women say, "yeah , dammit, hysterectomies are a whole lot worse that a vasectomy, fuck him!" You think you're allowed to attack me personally for asking the question? Because I should know that men might read it? If the answer is yes, as I suspect it is, then apparently some people who I thought were intelligent and reasonable, looking at subjects from all sides, are only that way if they like the subject matter. As I said, they know what they can do.

@lerlo why did you add this sly remarks in your post if not to antagonize: Without it and your precious law that says you have a right to abortion, you wouldn't have it.
For those of you who decided to make personal attacks because I dared to ask the question (to point out a few).
You see that is one problem. You knew you would get some push back and you were already on the offensive (and defensive).

Where in your question do you mention this: I found it interesting that none of them answered my question about who does the kid belong to once it's born?. To answer that point, if the child is the 4th born of the same couple, the precedent is established who the parents are. If the couple can't resolve their issue then yes there is the court system to decide.

I answered you and conveyed to you my opinion with civility, honesty and without malice. Judging from your reply, I wonder who is pissed and angry.

Apparently from the answers here EVERYONE knows the possible medical implications of a pregnancy...calming down now

I take it you've had dealings with him before?

spot on!