"Men Must Approve Abortion, Women Are Hosts"

[Gravlen]

My thing with this law is that the father should have a say, BUT he should not have the final say on the matter. In fact, the woman should only get an abortion if the both of them agree on it.

This is a contradictory position to hold - or perhaps straight up disingenuous. If a woman only can get an abortion if the man agrees, he does have final say in the matter. His opinion about what she can and cannot do with her body would take primacy.

[Ashmoria]

huh? the stage of human development between embryo and birth.

What is your understanding of a fetus?

i don't understand the question.

its a developing human being.

[Alvecia]

My edit clarified:


wat

Good for them

Those are all good ways to deal with unwanted pregancies before and after a pregnancy, but does nothing for the during. That's what abortion is for.

I'm all for reducing the need for abortion, but that doesn't mean we don't need the option.
Much like how I'm all for reducing the number of car crashes, but also believe we should fix people who do end up injured in one.

Make abortion safe, period.

I'm rather certain that is what they do already

Though, regulations that make abortion safe usually end up in the closing of abortion clinics. Abortion is legal in the US; that's a starting point, now can we please make abortion safe?

Again, pretty sure that's what already happens.
Should be noted that a lot of regulation intended to make abortion "safe" are targeted at closing them down

Well, for the during of pregnancy, the mother is afraid of what comes after childbirth, and that is what drives her to abortion.

I wouldn't necessarily say afraid. That could be a factor for some. For others it may be as simple as not wanting a kid right now.

I have to go finish a school lab report on how we made aspirin in a school laboratory bye see you later

Toodles

[Neutraligon]

huh? the stage of human development between embryo and birth.

What is your understanding of a fetus?

It's funny you are asking for sources but have not provided the one you were asked for first.

[Jumalariik]

Huh. So you can't have a respect for basic bodily autonomy without being a feminist?

no but feminism does respect basic bodily autonomy.

For one party at the expense of another's life.

[Dylar]

My thing with this law is that the father should have a say, BUT he should not have the final say on the matter. In fact, the woman should only get an abortion if the both of them agree on it.

This is a contradictory position to hold - or perhaps straight up disingenuous. If a woman only can get an abortion if the man agrees, he does have final say in the matter. His opinion about what she can and cannot do with her body would take primacy.

Would you agree that he should at least have a voice on the issue? Not override the woman's rights, but at least voice his opin-oh wait, nevermind, I gotta think this through some more...

[Salandriagado]

If you don't want a child, then either:
Use condoms/contraceptives
Abstain from sex
Put the baby up for adoption
Get sterilized (only if you NEVER want a child)

Because rape never happens, the adoption service isn't in trouble, and condoms are 100% effective, right?

So one of the basic human rights,the right that human has in orser to live has to be destroyed cause a woman can not take the burden of having a baby -_-
Yes cause there aren't so many couples in the world who can't make a family(cause of some problems) and are trying so hard for that for years .
Instead of killing an innocent fetus who will become a human being why not stop doing such an awful practice and give that child the chance to live with a family that will love him/her and will live his/her life as normal as everybody -_-

There is no right to the use of other people's bodies to save yourself.

What's all the fuss?

Explain to me, like I'm five years old, how abortion is a woman's right.

Do you support mandatory blood donation?

Abortion stops it getting that far.

Could you answer this question, that I have? It's been bothering me for some time.
Is there any other reason that the pro-choice community supports abortion, other than "My body my choice," or "The man gives less than half and doesn't have to deal with the biological changes of pregnancy."?

The latter is not in support of abortion (it's in opposition to this proposal). The former, while horribly oversimplified, is the core issue.

So one of the basic human rights,the right that human has in orser to live has to be destroyed cause a woman can not take the burden of having a baby -_-
Yes cause there aren't so many couples in the world who can't make a family(cause of some problems) and are trying so hard for that for years .
Instead of killing an innocent fetus who will become a human being why not stop doing such an awful practice and give that child the chance to live with a family that will love him/her and will live his/her life as normal as everybody -_-

It's because people who support abortion believe that the foetus isn't a real human being until its out of the womb. Kinda like how the Nazis said Jews, gypsies, and gays weren't people. It's disgraceful

Not at all. I absolutely agree that a foetus is human, and a person (though not in the legal sense: it should absolutely continue to not be a legal person). I just don't think that people have the right to force other people into slavery to keep themselves alive.

[Salandriagado]

This is a contradictory position to hold - or perhaps straight up disingenuous. If a woman only can get an abortion if the man agrees, he does have final say in the matter. His opinion about what she can and cannot do with her body would take primacy.

Would you agree that he should at least have a voice on the issue? Not override the woman's rights, but at least voice his opin-oh wait, nevermind, I gotta think this through some more...

Sure. The moment it becomes possible for him to support the foetus without the use of the mother's body.

[Dylar]

no but feminism does respect basic bodily autonomy.

For one party at the expense of another's life.

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

[Dylar]

If you don't want a child, then either:
Use condoms/contraceptives
Abstain from sex
Put the baby up for adoption
Get sterilized (only if you NEVER want a child)

Because rape never happens, the adoption service isn't in trouble, and condoms are 100% effective, right?

So one of the basic human rights,the right that human has in orser to live has to be destroyed cause a woman can not take the burden of having a baby -_-
Yes cause there aren't so many couples in the world who can't make a family(cause of some problems) and are trying so hard for that for years .
Instead of killing an innocent fetus who will become a human being why not stop doing such an awful practice and give that child the chance to live with a family that will love him/her and will live his/her life as normal as everybody -_-

There is no right to the use of other people's bodies to save yourself.

What's all the fuss?

Explain to me, like I'm five years old, how abortion is a woman's right.

Do you support mandatory blood donation?

Could you answer this question, that I have? It's been bothering me for some time.
Is there any other reason that the pro-choice community supports abortion, other than "My body my choice," or "The man gives less than half and doesn't have to deal with the biological changes of pregnancy."?

The latter is not in support of abortion (it's in opposition to this proposal). The former, while horribly oversimplified, is the core issue.

It's because people who support abortion believe that the foetus isn't a real human being until its out of the womb. Kinda like how the Nazis said Jews, gypsies, and gays weren't people. It's disgraceful

Not at all. I absolutely agree that a foetus is human, and a person (though not in the legal sense: it should absolutely continue to not be a legal person). I just don't think that people have the right to force other people into slavery to keep themselves alive.

The Nazis believed that Jews, Gypsies, Gays, etc. were not legal people as well...
The foetus doesn't force anything on the mother. They don't handcuff the mother and say "GIVE ME MORE FOOD WOMAN!!" That's not how pregnancy works...

[Alvecia]

For one party at the expense of another's life.

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

It's allowed to try to survive on it's own so long as it doesn't invade the womans right.

[Reikgaard]

It's a step in the right direction. The fetus took two to create, and contains the DNA of both mother and father, and the woman is indeed a temporary host for an individual being. Aborting the fetus should be a joint decision. It's about time unborn children were treated as separate, individual beings (which they are) rather than an extension of the woman's body.

[Ifreann]

For one party at the expense of another's life.

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

There is no right to use another person's body without their permission.

[Laxaria and Sakria]

What's all the fuss?

Explain to me, like I'm five years old, how abortion is a woman's right.

Do you support mandatory blood donation?

What does the question have in relation to the abortion debate? *shoots strawman nonetheless, because of boredom*

[Alvecia]

Do you support mandatory blood donation?

What does the question have in relation to the abortion debate? *shoots strawman nonetheless, because of boredom*

Both involve violation of bodily soveriegnty

[Ashmoria]

For one party at the expense of another's life.

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

it doesn't have any rights.

[Ashmoria]

It's a step in the right direction. The fetus took two to create, and contains the DNA of both mother and father, and the woman is indeed a temporary host for an individual being. Aborting the fetus should be a joint decision. It's about time unborn children were treated as separate, individual beings (which they are) rather than an extension of the woman's body.

she is MAKING a human being from scratch. she isn't just some kind of vase where a fetus sits at the bottom growing on its own.

[Dylar]

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

It's allowed to try to survive on it's own so long as it doesn't invade the womans right.

You think the foetus had a choice to be in the mother's womb? You think it jumps from womb to womb going "Knock Knock" until someone lets it in?

[Alvecia]

It's allowed to try to survive on it's own so long as it doesn't invade the womans right.

You think the foetus had a choice to be in the mother's womb? You think it jumps from womb to womb going "Knock Knock" until someone lets it in?

I don't consider that relevant.

[Tyrassueb]

This is ridiculous. Banning abortion or making it so difficult to get one leads to wasted time and energy on the part of the woman involved, sometimes leading to inordinate amounts of stress that are being piled on top of the stress of having to make such a difficult position already. Saying the men must approve only makes it harder because it really can't be enforced in many instances (rape, incest, death of the father, abandonment of the father, abuse from the father, etc).

Abortion is a right and a fairly easy and safe process. All of these laws trying to implement ever more stringent procedures and operational dictates are there only to close down clinics.

Another issue I hear a lot is that the mother should take the baby to term and then simply put it up for adoption. This is cruel not only for the mother being forced to carry said child but for the child involved in many cases since the system is already inundated with as many as 400,000 children are already in the system with around 22,000 ageing out of the system yearly. So ban abortions (of which approximately 600,000 occur a year) and flood the adoption agencies with them, bumping the number up to around 1,000,000 children a year for adoptions? Not going to go over all too well, right?

And contraceptives don't always work, sometimes they fail miserably, are misused or even tampered with. And abstention from sex doesn't always work due to rape.

Maybe we should instead be looking at the child marriage problem in the USA? An issue one would not normally expect in this country but which affected over 3000 children from 1995 to 2012, ages as young as 12 and up? Or what about the 1 in 6 children in the USA (approximately 13 million) who live in food-insecure homes? Or the any number of issues that affect children RIGHT NOW?

[Ashmoria]

It's allowed to try to survive on it's own so long as it doesn't invade the womans right.

You think the foetus had a choice to be in the mother's womb? You think it jumps from womb to womb going "Knock Knock" until someone lets it in?

doesn't matter, if you fell down my cellar stairs you would still have to get out.

[Salandriagado]

Because rape never happens, the adoption service isn't in trouble, and condoms are 100% effective, right?



There is no right to the use of other people's bodies to save yourself.



Do you support mandatory blood donation?



The latter is not in support of abortion (it's in opposition to this proposal). The former, while horribly oversimplified, is the core issue.



Not at all. I absolutely agree that a foetus is human, and a person (though not in the legal sense: it should absolutely continue to not be a legal person). I just don't think that people have the right to force other people into slavery to keep themselves alive.

The Nazis believed that Jews, Gypsies, Gays, etc. were not legal people as well...

No they didn't. I'd suggest you go and look up what "legal person" means before continuing: it's very different from what you think it means.

The foetus doesn't force anything on the mother. They don't handcuff the mother and say "GIVE ME MORE FOOD WOMAN!!" That's not how pregnancy works...

They take resources without asking for permission. That's force.

[Alvecia]

You think the foetus had a choice to be in the mother's womb? You think it jumps from womb to womb going "Knock Knock" until someone lets it in?

doesn't matter, if you fell down my cellar stairs you would still have to get out.

Might even give you a hand getting out.

[Salandriagado]

It's a step in the right direction. The fetus took two to create, and contains the DNA of both mother and father, and the woman is indeed a temporary host for an individual being. Aborting the fetus should be a joint decision. It's about time unborn children were treated as separate, individual beings (which they are) rather than an extension of the woman's body.

Separate individual beings do not have the right to the use of another's body to support them.

[Neutraligon]

For one party at the expense of another's life.

Also, wouldn't abortion be an invasion of the foetus' bodily rights? It didn't want to be killed and have its body destroyed...

A fetus has no desires, much of the time a fetus has no functioning brain at all. And no, since as the one residing within another person it does not have bodily autonomy.