Why Does Pro-Choice Only Apply To Women??

[cocky4ever]

I would say that Im pro-choice. I believe that if a woman gets pregnant and the two parties responsible feel that they wouldnt be able to give a child a great life they have the right to abort the fetus up until a certain point. However, being somone who is pro-choice I am pro-choice for both parties involved. It doesnt seem fair to me that if a guy wants the woman to have the baby she can still have an abortion. If the pregnancy would pose a serious risk to the womans health I can understand. However, if she is just having the abortion because she doesnt want a kid but the male responsible for impregnating her wants it why doesnt he have a legal right to the child?

[supergenius]

I would say that Im pro-choice. I believe that if a woman gets pregnant and the two parties responsible feel that they wouldnt be able to give a child a great life they have the right to abort the fetus up until a certain point. However, being somone who is pro-choice I am pro-choice for both parties involved. It doesnt seem fair to me that if a guy wants the woman to have the baby she can still have an abortion. If the pregnancy would pose a serious risk to the womans health I can understand. However, if she is just having the abortion because she doesnt want a kid but the male responsible for impregnating her wants it why doesnt he have a legal right to the child?
Here Here! I have been asking this question for years. Great Post!

RTR

[uscrebel]

I would say that Im pro-choice. I believe that if a woman gets pregnant and the two parties responsible feel that they wouldnt be able to give a child a great life they have the right to abort the fetus up until a certain point. However, being somone who is pro-choice I am pro-choice for both parties involved. It doesnt seem fair to me that if a guy wants the woman to have the baby she can still have an abortion. If the pregnancy would pose a serious risk to the womans health I can understand. However, if she is just having the abortion because she doesnt want a kid but the male responsible for impregnating her wants it why doesnt he have a legal right to the child?

Aside from the obvious and visible disabilities associated with pregnancy, there is the interesting social dilemma of having a child out of wedlock. Women are percieved as whores and sluts when this happens and men are seen as randy. Read your last sentence and help me understand how your version of this has not reduced the fetus to mere property and the debate one of property rights, not human rights.

[cocky4ever]

Aside from the obvious and visible disabilities associated with pregnancy, there is the interesting social dilemma of having a child out of wedlock. Women are percieved as whores and sluts when this happens and men are seen as randy. Read your last sentence and help me understand how your version of this has not reduced the fetus to mere property and the debate one of property rights, not human rights.
Neo is working on getting custody of his child right now. Does that mean he is only going through a battle over property rights, or is he trying to get custody of his child because he has parental rights?

[crimsonnation713]

being divorced for 6 years now I feel like in the eyes of our judicial system the mother knows best...for seem reason our courts feel the mother can provide more support (even though my paycheck says otherwise) dont get me wrong my ex is a great mom but I feel like the courts look down on the fathers for some reason even if the divorce is mutual...Ive seen alot of cases with friends that the dad would make a better parent than the mother but our all knowing judges see otherwise...the only thing I'm worried about is are the kids getting what they need?...in my case they are but I feel like the courts are prejudice towards fathers in the overall picture...

[uscrebel]

Neo is working on getting custody of his child right now. Does that mean he is only going through a battle over property rights, or is he trying to get custody of his child because he has parental rights?

Apples and oranges. There is a substantial difference between making arrangements for a child who has been born and decisions about a pregnancy.

My next statement has nothing to do with NEO at all. I do not know him, nor do I know about his situation.

Having said that, as a family therapist I was often called on to testify in custody hearings. I seldom did because once attorneys spoke with me, it became apparent that I would not be a good witness. More often than not the parents in custody cases dehumanized the child and treated them as property. There is a big difference between children of divorce whose parents recognize them as developing human beings and those who became pawns and property in a power struggle between two selfish, childish adults.

[cocky4ever]

Apples and oranges. There is a substantial difference between making arrangements for a child who has been born and decisions about a pregnancy.

My next statement has nothing to do with NEO at all. I do not know him, nor do I know about his situation.

Having said that, as a family therapist I was often called on to testify in custody hearings. I seldom did because once attorneys spoke with me, it became apparent that I would not be a good witness. More often than not the parents in custody cases dehumanized the child and treated them as property. There is a big difference between children of divorce whose parents recognize them as developing human beings and those who became pawns and property in a power struggle between two selfish, childish adults.
You make some good points. Im sure there are plenty of cases in which a child is used as leverage.

I still think the male should have a say-so in what happens to an unborn fetus that he helped create. The "society might view me as a whore if I have a baby out of wedlock" reasoning for allowing females full power in the decision-making doesnt really work for me.

The easiest way to avoid these things is for people to talk about these issues before having sex to make sure they are on the same page as far as what would be done if the woman got pregnant. Of course, thats in a perfect world and not the one we live in.

[OmahaBound]

I think the standard response to your question would be: it's their body and their lives that are directly/physically affected by pregnancy. "it's my body" has become so cliche at this point that it isn't a very powerful statement anymore, but it's still true. i agree with you, cocky, it's not fair that no matter what, a woman will always get the final say in that situation....but that's life. it's not like there aren't aspects of life that swing in favor of men, and women complain about them being completely unfair (i'm certainly glad i'm not the one that has something growing in my gut for almost a year). it's their right to complain just like it is your right, but when it comes to this issue nothing will ever change the outcome in a free society. not only would we be treating the fetus as property, but the woman would basically be your property for 9 months as well if you could force her to keep the baby.

i'm pretty much at peace with the way society works in this regard (though admittedly this would probably change at least temporarily if i was ever in this situation), but one thing that really does bother me is when women claim that the man should have no say in the matter. that is absolutely absurd. genetically the kid is just as much the father's. i understand that the woman should have the final say, but the man should absolutely be able to contribute his thoughts and have them be taken seriously before a decision is made.

here's a story that will make you feel better about this and related issues *he says sarcastically*:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/11/adoption.fight.ap/index.html

[RW13]

To me this topic is just old, it's been debated for 35 years now, can't we focus on other, more pressing issues. Mother Nature may perform an abortion on humankind if we're not careful (global warming, Pandemics, but global warming doesn't exist, right fellow southerners? although I think about 3-4 days ago 75 prominent evangelicists ((sp?)) came out and said something has to be done, they should have done it 30 years ago). Not to mention we're not that far off from performing abortions on ourselves as well, I mean hell, just look at what a poorly drawn cartoon can do.....

[cocky4ever]

To me this topic is just old, it's been debated for 35 years now, can't we focus on other, more pressing issues. Mother Nature may perform an abortion on humankind if we're not careful (global warming, Pandemics, but global warming doesn't exist, right fellow southerners? although I think about 3-4 days ago 75 prominent evangelicists ((sp?)) came out and said something has to be done, they should have done it 30 years ago). Not to mention we're not that far off from performing abortions on ourselves as well, I mean hell, just look at what a poorly drawn cartoon can do.....
There are certainly more pressing issues. Perhaps we should worry about taking care of the world we have before we try to figure out the standards on which to bring more life into it. I can see this issue from both sides are there are good points made by people who see it from many different perspectives. Its not something that really bothers me or that I lose sleep over. Just something that I thought about the other day and decided to bring up.....

[RW13]

That's cool........