[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Tom.

But its not. Its all psychological. Parental instincts often override the initial resentment.

Yeah, maybe but this would hardly be a normal case really would it?

Do you know many people who have been forced to have a baby that they dont want?

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Zippy

think you're being a bit unrealistic with all this thinking.

a woman aborting her own child will probably be a damn sight more painful for the baby than a hospital method. Assuming you actually care about how the unborn baby dies?

Limiting abortions will not stop abortions. It will just stop legal abortions.

In the real world, limiting then would make people more cautious, even if it results in higher uptake of morning after pill. If you need to repeatedly have abortions then obviously the message isn't getting through and other help is needed.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Tom.

She probably wouldnt abort it in the first place

Lets say for arguments sake though, that she listened to him, and did it. Would it then be fair, in your eyes...to chop his bits off or severely mutilate them at least?

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah, maybe but this would hardly be a normal case really would it?

Do you know many people who have been forced to have a baby that they dont want?

No because they have the option not to, but as I said if you look around the subject you'll find plenty of case studies where what I'm saying is true. I know it sounds illogical but its not.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Tom.

No because they have the option not to, but as I said if you look around the subject you'll find plenty of case studies where what I'm saying is true.

Well no they wouldnt, in your ideal world by the sound of it :/

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Tom.

You can flip that around and ask how many women have kids against the fathers wishes, only to force the father to pay up or have some involvement when they don't want to. Its not fair and easier for women to get out of.

.

the 'flip that around' scenario doesn't quite work though. The mother is the one who cares for the child 90% of the time - if the father isn't interested.

I put it to you earlier in reply to your post about the woman not wanting the child, but the father wanting it- that very very few men would take the baby from birth and have the baby 24/7. I still stand by that.

the flip side above that you mentioned? If the man doesn't want to be a father - he takes responsibility for the contraception. That's not rocket science - takes two you know....if the man doesn't take protection and the woman falls pregnant - he has a responsibility to provide for the child his sperm created if the woman choses not to abort.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I'm not especially clued up on this but surely barely anyone actually uses it as a form of contraception; who really thinks "ah dont bother with a condom, I'll just get an abortion", it's not like you can get an abortion just by clicking your fingers

I dont think its common, but there are some sick ****s around that do do that.

Also its a lot easier than you would think to get an abortion...

I dont know about multiples though, never known anyone who has had many...I would HOPE that its harder to get the more you have

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

the 'flip that around' scenario doesn't quite work though. The mother is the one who cares for the child 90% of the time - if the father isn't interested.

I put it to you earlier in reply to your post about the woman not wanting the child, but the father wanting it- that very very few men would take the baby from birth and have the baby 24/7. I still stand by that.

the flip side above that you mentioned? If the man doesn't want to be a father - he takes responsibility for the contraception. That's not rocket science - takes two you know....if the man doesn't take protection and the woman falls pregnant - he has a responsibility to provide for the child his sperm created if the woman choses not to abort.

Sometimes the mum wouldn't take 100% responsibility for a child either, and in a lot of cases can force the dads to be involved whether financially or physically. A man has no control over an abortion, so is it really fair that he is dragged into it? Whereas if the woman doesn't want it, she can just get rid and thats it.

I'm not saying that women should be forced by the men to keep the baby, I just don't like how women have full control over it. Other situations i've outlined are just hypothetical.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Tom.

Sometimes the mum wouldn't take 100% responsibility for a child either, and in a lot of cases can force the dads to be involved whether financially or physically. A man has no control over an abortion, so is it really fair that he is dragged into it? Whereas if the woman doesn't want it, she can just get rid and thats it.

I'm not saying that women should be forced by the men to keep the baby, I just don't like how women have full control over it. Other situations i've outlined are just hypothetical.

He was happy to have sex - and take his chances. So yes, it is really fair that he is dragged into it. Babies don't happen just with wishful thinking. If he didn't want dragged into anything, he should have made sure he took every precaution to ensure the woman didn't fall pregnant.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

the flip side above that you mentioned? If the man doesn't want to be a father - he takes responsibility for the contraception. That's not rocket science - takes two you know....if the man doesn't take protection and the woman falls pregnant - he has a responsibility to provide for the child his sperm created if the woman choses not to abort.

many women lie to men about taking contraception. Then they have all the say in whether to keep a child or abort it.

this idea that men and women have equal responsibility is BS. After the point of conception a man virtually has no rights or say whatsoever. It's all about what the woman wants.

ultimately women have to take control of their own body and not rely on any man to prevent a pregnancy.

and men are not always thinking straight when horny and/or don't have contraception handy so it wouldnt be too difficult for a woman to catch him in a weakened moment then force him to be a Daddy even though he may not be ready to be one.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Tom.

Sometimes the mum wouldn't take 100% responsibility for a child either, and in a lot of cases can force the dads to be involved whether financially or physically. A man has no control over an abortion, so is it really fair that he is dragged into it? Whereas if the woman doesn't want it, she can just get rid and thats it.

I'm not saying that women should be forced by the men to keep the baby, I just don't like how women have full control over it. Other situations i've outlined are just hypothetical.

Thing is though in most cases, it IS the woman left 'holding the baby'

I do agree that potential fathers should get a say too, but ultimately I do think it should be up to the woman, unless the father can PROVE in some way that he will be there for that child...and if the woman wants nothing to do with it, be prepared to take on the baby on his own fulltime. But still, even then, it is the woman who has to actually carry/give birth...so its a bit murky for me :/

My partners ex aborted his child...he didnt even know she was pregnant. She rang him afterwards, telling him, and laughing about it...saying he should never have left her...the definition of evil that one.

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

He was happy to have sex - and take his chances. So yes, it is really fair that he is dragged into it. Babies don't happen just with wishful thinking. If he didn't want dragged into anything, he should have made sure he took every precaution to ensure the woman didn't fall pregnant.

Right, but now flip the situation over and if he wants it and she doesn't, she can just go and get it aborted, ie woman wins either way (as usual ). So going back to the initial argument, why is it different with the shoe on the other foot, and why should what the man wants be overruled by what the woman wants? If she didn't want to get pregnant then she should have took precautions.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Tom.

If she didn't want to get pregnant then she should have took precautions.

Yes. Unless raped, a woman is always responsible for being pregnant because its her body and she should take full responsibility for what happens to it.

she can't blame a man for getting her pregnant because if he wasn't wearing a condom she could have still just refused to have sex.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Zippy

Yes. Unless raped, a woman is always responsible for being pregnant because its her body and she should take full responsibility for what happens to it.

she can't blame a man for getting her pregnant because if he wasn't wearing a condom she could have still just refused to have sex.

That same argument can go for an earlier thing too. About men having to pay for their children. If they dont want to be stung for child support, they should refuse to have sex(without contraception) also

Meh, this is kinda going in circles now anyways. I think imma leave it for now

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Zippy

many women lie to men about taking contraception. Then they have all the say in whether to keep a child or abort it.

this idea that men and women have equal responsibility is BS. After the point of conception a man virtually has no rights or say whatsoever. It's all about what the woman wants.

ultimately women have to take control of their own body and not rely on any man to prevent a pregnancy.

and men are not always thinking straight when horny and/or don't have contraception handy so it wouldnt be too difficult for a woman to catch him in a weakened moment then force him to be a Daddy even though he may not be ready to be one.

It takes a female egg and male sperm to make one baby - iit takes two people - basic biology. Both are equally responsible.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Tom.

Right, but now flip the situation over and if he wants it and she doesn't, she can just go and get it aborted, ie woman wins either way (as usual ). So going back to the initial argument, why is it different with the shoe on the other foot, and why should what the man wants be overruled by what the woman wants? If she didn't want to get pregnant then she should have took precautions.

If he wanted a child so badly - he should be with a woman that is prepared to give him one.

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

If he wanted a child so badly - he should be with a woman that is prepared to give him one.

From a personal view, its not something you realise you want until it happens.

[Angus]

Nobody has the right to tell a woman she MUST carry a child she does not want - the father has made his brief contribution and can carry on his merry way. The woman has 9months ahead, then the actual labour (which is something most men would NOT go through twice), then are expected to be automatically nurturing and prepared to put their lives on hold for several years whilst bringing up the child. Most men think they're amazing because they change the occasional nappy, or once in a while do the night-time feed. Women have to do all that with sore nipples, often painful stitches in places you don't want to know about, and constant exhaustion from lack of sleep. On top of that, they are also expected to maintain the usual housekeeping duties because "that's their job".

Also, just because childbirth is viewed as an everyday occurrence, does not negate the fact that it is an extremely dangerous event for both mother and baby. A woman has the right to decide whether she wants to put her body through the trauma of pregnancy and childbirth if she really doesn't want the baby. What right does anyone have to make that decision for her, and as for a father having the right to "jointly"make the decision, why should he when he doesn't have to face any potential hazards to HIS body?

You can't have it both ways - on the one hand saying that a fetus is NOT a baby until a certain gestation period has passed, and on the other hand saying that it's a baby from day one and therefore a man has an equal right to make the decision to abort.

As I said earlier, the only issue I have is with the age at which an abortion is allowed. I think up to 20 weeks is more than enough time for a woman to make up her mind, for whatever reason, that she wants an abortion, and it should be nobody else's business but her own.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

That same argument can go for an earlier thing too. About men having to pay for their children. If they dont want to be stung for child support, they should refuse to have sex(without contraception) also

yes, but when it comes to sex we all know men are not rational thinkers in the heat of the momoent. Women know this so should write this into the equation and take the ultimate responsibility.

Again, it is YOUR bodies that have to suffer the consequences ultimately not the mans so he isnt gonna give it the same amount of thought. We all know men are gonna have stupid unprotected sex at times without thinking of any consequences. Its not right but it's the reality.

when women have stupid unprotected sex at least they still have options open afterwards. Men do not.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Zippy

yes, but when it comes to sex we all know men are not rational thinkers in the heat of the momoent. Women know this so should write this into the equation and take the ultimate responsibility.

Heh, nice generalization there

Not all men think with their penises (or I would like to think that )

And not all women are these responsible sensible thinking things you seem to have us down for you know. Even we get caught up in the heat of the moment sometimes you know

[Tom.]

I reckon women are secretly worse than men but can surpress it

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

It takes a female egg and male sperm to make one baby - iit takes two people - basic biology. Both are equally responsible.

and the award for the most simplistic post of the week goes to....

Pyramid!!

actually it takes 9 months of incubation and nurturing to create a baby and Im pretty sure the man isnt part of that process.

he provides an essential ingredient, thats all.

[Tom.]

Originally Posted by Zippy

and the award for the most simplistic post of the week goes to....

Pyramid!!

actually it takes 9 months of incubation and nurturing to create a baby and Im pretty sure the man isnt part of that process.

he provides an essential ingredient, thats all.

Theres a lot more than just being an essential ingredient, men determine the sex of the baby amongst other traits

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Tom.

Theres a lot more than just being an essential ingredient, men determine the sex of the baby amongst other traits

thats still down to the ingredient. He doesnt actively decide any of the babies traits...or sex.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

And not all women are these responsible sensible thinking things you seem to have us down for you know. Even we get caught up in the heat of the moment sometimes you know

No, I know. But read my last line in that post; you have options available afterwards whereas men don't have any say at that point about becoming a father.

and, again, its your bodies that are at stake here so you should put the most thought into it and be the sensible ones. Thats really my point.