the live stream starts in ten minutes!
I need to ask my wife.
Zactlt.
If I have no say in giving the child birth then, it seems like you have a personal problem for the next 18 years
It used to be that in many states, men were not liable for child support if they were not married to the mother. It encouraged women to demand marriage.
It would also discourage divorce, mostly initiated by women, if men were given the choice of paying child support, or taking custody.
Who is obligated to pay for child support, 99.999% of the time?
Yes.
I do believe that a man should have an equal say as to the future of his child.
More importantly, I believe that GOD should have the final say.
This would be a very interesting debate. I would often ask my daughter’s male friends what they would do if they got someone pregnant and they chose to have the baby and then gave it to them. 3 of the guys said they’d give the baby to their grandmothers.
Men should. Fewer women will have sex when the realization hits the sperm donor is in charge of their decision to have or have not.
Neither; life comes from God, therefore His right and only His right.
If you want to be an atheists about it, then entropy’s right (And the fact you don’t want to be a hypocritical ass since those who promote abortion went through the birthing process already).
Men can have babies too in today’s world
As long as women have a “right” to abort, men should demand a right to “opt out.”
I’d be opposed to abortion even if our Constitution was silent on the matter. But the Constitution is not silent: no person shall be deprived of their life without due process. There were only two ideas in the Roe opinion that I agreed with. One was the sentence which states that if the fetus is a person, then “of course” the Constitutional protections apply. I’ve been disappointed, albeit not surprised, that no judicial nominees have been questioned about whether and when human beings change from being nonpersons to persons. The science of DNA has been clear: every one of us is unambiguously identifiable as a human being from the earliest stage of our biological development. Every one of the 60-million plus surgical abortions since Roe has deprived (or at least attempted to deprive) an individual human being of their life. Due process? I haven’t heard of single abortion that involved due process. Check your favorite dictionary for the definition of person.
“Speak for those who cannot speak; seek justice for all those on the verge of destruction.”
Proverbs 31:8
“Speak for those who cannot speak; seek justice for all those on the verge of destruction.”
Proverbs 31:8
That scripture is for all people.
Men have the same choice as women, keep it in their drawers, otherwise there are no gaurantees.
Nobody should have “abortion rights.” End of discussion. Everyone should have the right to refuse to participate in conception.
I think that is an inappropriate “choice”.
The other human that deserves full consideration besides the monther, when it comes to abortion, is the human in the womb whose life would be taken by abortion. That is the principle moral matter regarding abortion.
The issue of a “father’s rights” might have some merit, but it will also NOT address the principle issue - the life of the unborn child - and it will become a sidetracking of that as debates get bogged down in the secondary matter of the father. I say secondary given that the principle rights of the unborn ALWAYS apply whether or not the father is around and whether or not the father cares to have an opinion.
Allow me to hedge so that there is no misunderstanding. I do not support abortion as a form of contraception. It will always be the taking of life, murder, in my opinion. I believe a man should Take responsibility for his children from the time they are conceived and continue to be a father until he is called home and leaves this mortal life.
Having said that,
As long as a women has the right to terminate an otherwise healthy pregnancy, a women should be responsibility for the choices she has made.
If a women has the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy without the consent of the father, the man should have the right to terminate his legal rights and obligations to a child conceived without his consent or a mutual expectation of becoming a parent.
Casual sex, hook ups, booty calls, etc are risky enough without contraception. Holding the man responsible for a women’s choice while prohibiting his choice is not an equal standard. If conception were a result of mutual consent, both should have an equal choice for how it will effect their bodies.
Either both have a choice or neither. That is the only way to influence them to make better (responsible) choices.
Again, I’m in the life begins at conception crowd. Your offspring, your responsibility. Both of you.
They already do. It's called "keeping it in your pants."
people do have reprodcutive rights already - the right to have sex (chance of pregnancy) or not take the chance.
those tryingt to say killing an unborn child is about reproductive rights is self deluded and just wants the ability to commit murder on the most vulnerable.
If only women are allowed to choose whether they have an abortion then they should have to have a license in order to have sex if they want to get pregnant out of wedlock then kill an innocent child who had no chance to live then the abortion should be paid for by the woman not the institute killing the child or the taxpayer
If the taxpayer is paying for the Abortion then its not truly a choice its like obamacare its a tax that a citizen should not have to pay
Make a woman have to pay for a license to have sex either a marriage license to be married or a procreation license yearly in the sum of how many children the woman thinks she may abort and the license should be paid by the woman period
Hell they want to murder children make them pay for it quit sucking money from the government
From what i see men don't have any rights one way or another in the situation anyway murder is murder and if a man gives the nod to kill his child hes just as guilty it's amazing we can keep people on death row for murdering someone or many someones for that matter but they are more than willing to kill an innocent child and for what reason ?
Because they can or its convienent !