Question for males: Abortion in a specific situation

[Savorgnan]

Originally Posted by Susi

Some of us aren't traditional Christians

t'es tellement mechant! *pout*

Yeah but things change, silly phallocrat

I'm not a "traditional Christian", my entire family is desperately agnostic/atheist. I'm just an autodidact Christian. Anyway, you don't even have to be a Christian to support the traditional family. The pre-Christian Roman family was about the same, except for the minor status of the woman.

Mais non, je ne suis pas méchant, j'ai juste mon petit caractère.

I concur, things will change, after 40 years of feminism, phallocracy is back.

[Susi]

Originally Posted by Gnist

-The woman can dump the father and still get financial support.
-The woman can abort the child without the father's consent.
-Laws about who is allowed to see the child are in women's favour.

It's an objective fact that men and women are not equal under the law.

This wasn't the case until very recently. And the laws are in favour of whoever is the most competent parent, and yes, I agree, it's unfairly skewed towards the woman, but I do know of cases where the man was given custody and the woman had to pay child support.

Originally Posted by Tryggr

True. But you'll find that Germanic/Nordic heathendom actually supports the same kind of traditional family model as the christian world. Some small differences perhaps, though I can't think of anything important right now.

I'm aware, I'm just trying to say that it is similar between the two.

The men should give up any right to decide on abortion? Fair enough. But that does exactly the opposite from removing child support things. Because it gives the woman a choice to escape responsibility (just terminate it), but not the man (no matter what he decides, he'll always be forced to pay up)

They should give up any right to decide if they run away.

The woman might not be escaping responsibility. She may not be able to look after the child or afford to and she might not want to subject the child to never ending foster care.

You were saying women and men are equal under the law?

Ideally. But women don't get any respect anyways because you guys just seem to think we're irresponsible people who abort children and force men to pay child support (DEAR GOD NOT RESPONSIBILITY!)...

In some aspects, yes, in some aspects no. In some aspects women are "more equal", but in many men are "more equal".

Originally Posted by Savorgnan

Mais non, je ne suis pas méchant, j'ai juste mon petit caractère.

*le pout* je veux voir le chapeau

I concur, things will change, after 40 years of feminism, phallocracy is back.

Feminism's a bit older, silly phallocrat. ^^ Suffragettes? ^^

Hum, what I really want to say is that it's both male and female responsibility, but in certain situations, the decision making leans more towards one or the other.

[Savorgnan]

Originally Posted by Susi

*le pout* je veux voir le chapeau

Feminism's a bit older, silly phallocrat. ^^ Suffragettes? ^^

Hum, what I really want to say is that it's both male and female responsibility, but in certain situations, the decision making leans more towards one or the other.

Le chapeau? Quel chapeau?

I know, feminism is older than that, I was minimalist on this one, even "silly" macho phallocrats like me can play soft.

I agree, sometimes the decision leans more towards one, and in a traditional family, that will be towards the man.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Tryggr

The men should give up any right to decide on abortion? Fair enough. But that does exactly the opposite from removing child support things.

That's a perverted trade-off.

A man's right to defend the life of his child, born or unborn, is above any considerations. It is a divine right and duty.

If a woman wants to abort, she doesn't want the child. But since it is also the man's child she has no right to exterminate him. She must have the child and surrender all the rights on the new born child to the man.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by Delbáeth

I wouldn't support abortion, at all, under any circumstances. I wouldn't be with a women if she was pregnant with another mans baby anyway.

Agreed 200%.

[Susi]

Originally Posted by NatVox

If a woman wants to abort, she doesn't want the child. But since it is also the man's child she has no right to exterminate him. She must have the child and surrender all the rights on the new born child to the man.

Another perverted trade off is to force the woman to carry the child for 9 months when it may be bad for her health, mental or otherwise. There is also the social stigma of being pregnant to consider in each case.
Like I've always maintained, I think that it is correct in some cases but not in the majority.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Susi

Another perverted trade off is to force the woman to carry the child for 9 months when it may be bad for her health, mental or otherwise. There is also the social stigma of being pregnant to consider in each case.
Like I've always maintained, I think that it is correct in some cases but not in the majority.

That's an argument which is rarely true, but which is most abused as an excuse to abort. It doesn't make the crime any lesser.

[Monolith]

Originally Posted by NatVox

That's an argument which is rarely true, but which is most abused as an excuse to abort. It doesn't make the crime any lesser.

Indeed. It's an argument which presumes that a woman has a right to kill the unborn child because she carries it. I believe that's the most frequent pro-abortion slogan, "It's my body". Perhaps both genders are a bit biased when it comes to this matter because neither of them can experience how another feels in that situation. Nevertheless, the fact is that a woman, if she decides to abort, is killing the part of herself and the part of her partner as well.

[Susi]

It's rarely true, but sometimes it is true. A pregnant 16 year old of today does not normally have the mental or psychological capacity to carry the baby to term without causing damage to herself-- her peers will also be cruel, further damaging her mental state.

I think I made a list before of cases I think are acceptable to abort:
1. Very young mother with mental instability
2. Rape
3. If the child is shown to have some sort of genetic mental disorder such as Down's Syndrome or Fragile X

I know 3 is controversial but I would rather my child not be brought into the world with a mental disorder that will cause them to suffer their entire life.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by Susi

It's rarely true, but sometimes it is true. A pregnant 16 year old of today does not normally have the mental or psychological capacity to carry the baby to term without causing damage to herself-- her peers will also be cruel, further damaging her mental state.

This is a reason to criticise society, not to abort, I think. A girl who is mature enough to be pregnant does normally have what it takes to deliver the baby. It is society that has gone wrong.

[svin]

If there is a great probability that woman would die because of the pregnancy, then abortion is necessary, in my opinion (well, not necessary, actually, since some women would prefer to sacrifice themselves).

I'm sorry, but no religious feelings can go against this fact, in my opinion.

[Phlegethon]

Originally Posted by Susi

Another perverted trade off is to force the woman to carry the child for 9 months when it may be bad for her health, mental or otherwise.

There isn't much mental health there to start with. Don't blame it on the child.

[Dani]

I am not a "oltrationis anti-abortist", abortion is necessary when the children is disable, because he or she will be a damage for the family.

Even if the children will be the result of a rape I am pro-abortion

[Pro Hibernia]

Originally Posted by Dani

I am not a "oltrationis anti-abortist", abortion is necessary when the children is disable, because he or she will be a damage for the family.

How, will (s)he be detrimental to the health of the family?