Male Reproductive Rights

Maybe people shouldn't fuck each other period and avoid this problem altogether.

Also, men don't have reproductive rights once that sperm leaves their sack. Consider it a gift to the woman; one that she can throw away.

I'm playing devil's advocate. I don't think 9 out of 10 abortions should happen anyway. In fact, I don't think 9 out of 10 people should be fucking.

Originally Posted by a lurker

I'm talking and the article is talking about the right the fathers have to not support their living offspring, not the pregnancies they have caused.

Ah, ok.

Quote:

You are absolutely right. it is not the mother's decision, in fact, whether the father supports the child or not. It is the law's decision that he supports the child financially, and that she does as well.

That's pretty much it. It's essentially in the child's best interests to have both parents supporting them, even if one of them is only doing so financially.

Quote:

Okay, say a guy is sleeping with this chick and they have an agreement that they don't want kids, but the mother decides shes not going to take the pill and not tell him because she wants a baby even though he doesn't? What are this man's rights? Is forcing this guy to raise this child any different than forcing a raped woman to raise her child?

Wasn't there a case like this recently? In any case, wouldn't it be fraud? He'd still have to support the child, again, because it's in the child's best interests. The raped woman would have to carry around the product of her rape for 9 months, endure various health problems and labor and then try and raise her rapist's offspring. It's far removed from a man tricked by his partner into having a kid, and at the bare minimum supporting them financially.

The right to give someone exclusive rights to a decision as big as life should not be left up to one person. You can give me all the crap about it being her body but if half of that baby's genes are mine then i have every right to say how the care of my child is handled. Parental rights begin at conception.

This would be a lot less complicated if we just stopped killing babies indiscriminantly.

Originally Posted by Gohan1983

The right to give someone exclusive rights to a decision as big as life should not be left up to one person. You can give me all the crap about it being her body but if half of that baby's genes are mine then i have every right to say how the care of my child is handled. Parental rights begin at conception.

Then don't fuck a chick who doesn't want kids, genius.

By that standard all the men who didn't want kids should not have had to have responsibility to them if they didn't want to.

No, see, the way I see it, if you look at an (unwanted) child as a mistake, don't be a bitch and cop out of it; hone up to your responsibility and support the kid.

Meanwhile, again I restate, don't fuck someone who want kids and you don't. Don't let someone fuck you who wants kids and you don't. Don't fuck (irresponsibly!) if one of you don't want kids. Rape is an entirely different matter altogether, but for the former, all of this bullshit could pretty much be easily taken care of if people stopped to consider what they're getting themselves into.

Originally Posted by Seris

No, see, the way I see it, if you look at an (unwanted) child as a mistake, don't be a bitch and cop out of it; hone up to your responsibility and support the kid.

Meanwhile, again I restate, don't fuck someone who want kids and you don't. Don't let someone fuck you who wants kids and you don't. Don't fuck (irresponsibly!) if one of you don't want kids. Rape is an entirely different matter altogether, but for the former, all of this bullshit could pretty much be easily taken care of if people stopped to consider what they're getting themselves into.

Wait.
So you are suggesting, in a manner of speaking... a-b-s-t-i-n-e-n-c-e?

I wonder how many people actually want to consider that an option.

My guess is not that many though.

Not necessarilly abstinence, though that is a sure-fire way to prevent this whole mess of moral bullshit.

I just mean that if you two can't come to an agreement, if, should, when one of you become pregnant, then you should probably refrain from fucking, or maybe even being together, altogether.

Originally Posted by Minion

Okay, say a guy is sleeping with this chick and they have an agreement that they don't want kids, but the mother decides shes not going to take the pill and not tell him because she wants a baby even though he doesn't? What are this man's rights? Is forcing this guy to raise this child any different than forcing a raped woman to raise her child?

Yes, it's different.

No, it's still not fair for the guy.

But neither men nor women should ever have the right to up and walk away from their living, breathing child without supporting it in some way.

Originally Posted by Gohan1983

The right to give someone exclusive rights to a decision as big as life should not be left up to one person. You can give me all the crap about it being her body but if half of that baby's genes are mine then i have every right to say how the care of my child is handled. Parental rights begin at conception.

Do you support forcing the mother of your unborn child through an abortion because you do not want to support her (your) child?

This is definitely one of those issues where, yes it's unfair, but life is unfair in more ways than just this. We as men need to stop dwelling on the negative and just accept our responsibility like ... well ... men.

With the number of people and groups who are clamboring for some pretty obtuse rights, it'll be refreshing to see someone accept a social responsibility instead.

Hmm, this thread seems like it will end up in a bad way.

That said.

Is it not fair to give men actual rights when it comes to how child bearing is handled? Why does a women get all control and the ability to manipulate the mans life as she sees fit? Remember here, both sexes have to fuck in order to get pregnant. The womens egg is just as essential as the mans sperm.

I'm not saying that we should allow the men any say in abortion rights for woman, because that is absolutely ludicrous. No one should have a say over whether or not a women should have to go through the immense pain and suffering that comes with bearing a child. That is a decision that her and her alone should be allowed to make.

But, if a man wants a child and the women doesn't she can abort it to keep it, however she sees fit. What about the inverse situation? What if the woman decides that she wants to keep the accidental pregnancy but the male doesn't? Why should the woman force the man into something that he never wanted in the first place? Abortions are always available, but she is deciding not to go that route. Why should a woman be able to force a man into a situation that he does not want to partake in, but a man cannot do the same in the opposite situation? Sure, the man doesn't have to suffer the pain of carrying a baby, but he does have to carry the financial burden for the rest of his life.

Why should the woman be able to control everything and force something from a mistake that she herself helped create? Not that I would just leave a woman in this situation, but why shouldn't the law fair to all parties involved when the mistake was not the fault of a single party?

The mother carries a child for nine months. Not the father.

The mother's diet, health, and so on are what impacts the fetus. Not the father's.

The fetus gets its immunities, mitochondrial DNA, and so on overwhelmingly from the mother. Not the father.

The mother is the ones who face the dangers, complications, pain, and (depending on the person and circumstances) inconvenience of pregnancy and giving birth. Not the father.

Sorry, but once you deposit the sperm, the ball's in her court. Arguing for something as silly as "it's partly my genetic material, so I own the fetus too!" is understandable in some ways, but ultimately selfish. This isn't fucking copyright law. What you did by accident in two minutes doesn't trump what she'll have to go through for nine months.

The problem with that kind of argument is that it's essentially arguing that a man should be able to decide whether a woman is allowed to get an abortion. It's arguing that if she doesn't want to carry the baby, he should be able to force her to spent nine months miserable and force her to take the risks of pregnancy and childbirth. I don't know about the States, but here in Canada it's been settled.

Quote:

Tremblay v. Daigle [1989] 2 S.C.R. 530, was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in which it was found that a fetus has no legal status in Canada as a person, either in Canadian common law or in Quebec civil law. This, in turn, meant that men, while claiming to be protecting fetal rights, cannot acquire injunctions to stop their partners from obtaining abortions in Canada.

[...]the Court ruled that there was no precedent for men's rights to protect their "potential progeny."

To me this whole issue boils down to the simple rule, that you shouldn't be sleeping with anyone you cannot trust enough to take the necessary precautions and/or responsibilites - period. Sex does not have to involve love to be fun but if it's not founded on mutual trust and respect ... what the hell is going on in your life?

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

Sex does not have to involve love to be fun but if it's not founded on mutual trust and respect ... what the hell is going on in your life?

A whole lot of hedonism, at the least.
At the worst... only God knows.

Sure, the woman has to put up with the pregnancy, but that means that SHE wants to pay for the financial burden of upbringing the child, but men do not have a choice in the matter.

Quite frankly, that's bullshit. There is no 100% anti-birth control, so the fact is that if something goes wrong, the guy gets fucked if the girl gets pregnant and decides to carry it to term.

The way this system is worked out, we would likely need a signed contract of some sort to prevent any sort of unwanted pregnancy becoming a financial burden for us men, and even then I'm not sure if that would hold up in any court of law.

The fact of the matter is: If the man has to retain any sort of responsibility to the child, financial or otherwise, then he should have a choice in the matter as to abortions or financial obligations. This is some seriously one-sided crap. I respect the 9 months women go through for childbirth, but cutting men out of a process that has LIFETIME financial rammifications for them is just plain stupid.

Male Reproductive Rights? You gotta be kidding me.

I think we should roll back laws to the Roman-era so that patriarch can make life and death decisions about any family/relationship matters!

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Though, apparently wearing proper attire isn't a woman's responsibility during pregnancy. 8 months pregnant bitch thinks she can wear a button-up shirt to church? Who the fuck does she think she is? Put on a moo moo for God's sake, you know he's watching.

Now THAT was hilarious.

Originally Posted by JasonTerminator

Quite frankly, that's bullshit. There is no 100% anti-birth control, so the fact is that if something goes wrong, the guy gets fucked if the girl gets pregnant and decides to carry it to term.

Sure there is. Oral sex, dry humping, or even pulling out before ejaculation even WITH a condom. No way to get anybody pregnant there.

Quote:

I would disagree with this. Given a situation in which my partner became pregnant but felt she didn't want to go through with pregnancy I would argue that I have a right to fight for that child's life. I understand I don't have the responsibility of carrying and delivering the child but I think I would be pretty upset if I knew I was a father but my partner made a decision to terminate the pregnancy and I ultimately could do nothing about it.

I agree. I think as long as at least one parent WANTS the child, there is no reason to abort it.

In fact I have to question why anyone would want an abortion. A parents primary duty is to protect their child, correct? I have no respect for a parent who would kill their own child just to make their (the parents) life a little easier. Thats what abrotion is all about after all...