Re: "Reproductive Rights"?
I really think a lot of the people posting here have completely missed the point of the original argument I posed to Peach. This issue isn't about how likely a man is to be a good parent, or child support, or about the difficulties of having an abortion. It's about a basic human right that is granted to women and denied to men.
Society says that women are allowed to enjoy sex without the risk of forever changing their lives with a child. For some reason, men are thought to be below this right, and unworthy of it. Is there any other group of people in this country that this kind of discrimination would be allowed? Imagine the social upheaval that would result if a minority groups reproductive rights were taken away.
And Peach, you can roll your eyes all you want at the notion of a woman tricking a man into getting her pregnant by poking holes in his condoms, but I personally know at least one woman who has attempted this, and so do you.
I'll leave you with this video as food for thought.
YouTube - Men and Abortion
While I don't agree with everything factory2590 says, he does raise some good points. Especially when he points out that Roe vs Wade was less about it being the woman's body, and more about the woman having the choice to terminate her parental responsibilities. So why should men be denied this choice?
Re: "Reproductive Rights"?
Originally Posted by Peach_follows
Humans don't have instincts peache, that is an excuse and nothing more. A woman can feel just as little obligation as a man and vice versa. It is purely circumstantial and that is all their is.
Instinct - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't have to be an expert on humans or animals to know that a woman doesn't get a sudden parental kick of unknown proportions, simply because they get pregnant. I also know that a the guidlines for being a good parent don't kick in as well. There is nothing that says a woman has more, faster, or stronger feelings towards their offspring than a man and since you said "think", I am fairly sure you understand this fact as well.
z0rn, many people here have probably missed the point between the conversation made between two people somewhere else, but we are answering the question Peach posted.
The rights as you say, are based on religious view points, ethics, and morals and do not house the simple structure of a neutral system. I said before, if the system was as it should be, this debate would never exist and frankly, if abortion becomes safer or is safe today, and nothing changes, than denying men "those rights" is and will never be, anything different than denying a minoritie's rights. Considering that "minority" has more than one definition, and considering that man is a minority, I suggest making a followup z0rn.
Every action should be held accountable for. There is nothing that says anyone is obligated to become a parent, by law, and so there should also be a law governing the extent of what creates a parent. Peach, as I said, the only reason why the system is as it is now is based on those same beliefs you just mentioned. I won't go so far as saying you contradict yourself or say you are a hypocrite, but if you can pick and choose out of guidelines, than I don't see any reason why you can't pick the same exact thing in this situation.
Sex today, isn't primarily used for reproduction, and it is strange why you still think that.
Re: "Reproductive Rights"?
I don't think that this pertains so much to married or established couples. Not that it couldn't but generally speaking I think its less likely.
Argh, I just don't like the topic. It feels off.
It's the idea that the husband and wife disagree on something completely.
I didn't miss your point... I just don't agree with it. It's not even that I disagree so much as I am trying to explain why the choice to parent is more necessary for women (Because it IS their bodies). And also I think the choice would be masively abused by men. I think too many fathers (not most) , who didn't mind an unprotected roll in the hay... Even the ones who told their partners they would be able to handle or even want a child.... Once that child is in the world they would be opting out..... Minds shouldn't be able to change, not with out huge consequence. Not for EITHER parent! I know you are talking about honest men, who have always been upfront in not wanting to parent. But you'd be giving this right to opt out... to ALL men. The ONLY reason women should be allowed that right is because it IS their bodies! Adoption is acceptable, because that has little to do with the parent, and more to do with the child having someone to care for it now that it's here. I don't think ANY man should be able to chose anything about what a woman decides to do with her body, whether it involves their unborn child or not. there is too much Gray area, too many different circumstances can apply, and no law allowing a man to decide to terminate a pregnancy can ever NOT infringe on a woman's right to chose what she does with her body.
You showed no FACT that humans lack instinct... only that it is a theory humans don't have instinct. Largely debatable I would assume (just by reading that wikipedia ) Or that what some would describe as instinct others would refer to as "motivational forces".
I really dont care WHAT you call it... I certainly can't say statistically what I am unaware of. But I CAN say whatI know is fact for me I believe to be fact for many women.
Keep in mind I have had two children AND an abortion. I KNOW that my instinct to mother my children. A feeling of obligation to that life, a feeling of responsiblity, a feeling that I am that little creations protector. All of those aspects came into play early on for me. And I know it has in a large handful of the others I know. Im am 100% aware of the exceptions. I know plenty of mothers who have abandon their own. Not to mention I have tread the path of deciding NOT to go through with a pregnancy myself (However I admit I STILL felt that parental sense, even with the pregnancy I aborted). If I were making this up , why would their be "abortion support groups" offered right at the clinic? Because there is a demand for it. Quite frankly, many women feel a motherly connection to their pregnancies. I just feel like if a man isn't involved with the woman, and doesn't want to parent, He will likely not carry the burden of this. *not all burdens are bad*
Anyway, Zorn is probably right that going that route strays from the point.
I still cant say that ALL men should be subject to paying child support just because the mother couldn't bare to terminate a pregnancy neither was ready for. It doesn't sound fair. but I think in many cases it's what is right. Life's not fair. But I think rights, that are law, should come as close as possible to making things as fair as possible in the most general sense. I think overall, things are in that direction of being just. However the system could use tweaking when it comes to men and fathers having more equal opportunities in parenting as mothers. Certainly going the direction proposed by factory2590 would be too extreme.
Re: "Reproductive Rights"?
I really don't agree at all that humans don't have instincts. They may be much more subtle or suppressed than most animals, but they are definitely there. I have a daughter myself, and I know how strong my parental instincts are.
I do agree with your statement that there is nothing to show that women have "more" parental instinct than men. After all, my daughters mother left it up to me to choose whether or not we got an abortion, and it was my choice to keep her. I chose that knowing that it would have a huge effect on the rest of my life. My standard of living would never be as high as it could be without a dependent, I knew it would severely limit my social life, I even knew that it would eventually lead to the Family Court Hearings that I am going through now. Knowing all of that, I still felt an undeniable attachment to my unborn child. Even then, I loved her.
As far as the follow up you wanted to the 'men are a minority' statement, I'm not sure what you're expecting me to say. The fact is, men are a minority, women comprise 51% of the earth population. That's the very definition of minority. I could go on about the injustices that men, and especially fathers, face in the western world, but that is probably a topic for another thread.
It makes no sense at all to use the idea that people will abuse the system if you change it, when people are abusing it now. There are many women that have used the fact that a man has no say in becoming a parent to screw him out of a big chunk of his paycheck. I'm not saying that this is a common thing, but I don't think anybody can deny that it happens.
I could use similar arguments to oppose rights that have been given to other groups. What if I said the government never should have given reservation land to the Native Americans because all they do is abuse it and turn it into rural ghettos, or casinos that do nothing but line the pockets of a small group of people. If I don't agree with the way someone is exercising their rights, does that give me adequate reason to deny it to them? Of course not, Native Americans deserve their right to sovereignty. And men deserve the right to chose if they want to be a parent or not.
I am by no means saying that a man should have the right to force an abortion on a woman. It is her body and nobody else has the right to tell her what to do with it. I would be satisfied if the laws were changed so that a woman could be charged with a crime if she dishonestly becomes pregnant by a man, and if she is found guilty, then the man may terminate his responsibilities to that child. I think that is still a somewhat unfair system, but, like anything human, the legal system will never be perfect and fair.
Even if the system were changed so that any man could just sign a piece of paper and alleviate himself from his parental responsibilities, what effect would that have on society in the long run? Women would become much more selective about who they choose to have sex with, or at least that's what the smart thing to do would be. And who in their right mind could say that wouldn't be a good thing.
Re: "Reproductive Rights"?
I was thinking about replying to the other stuff with quotes and the like, but it is a bit irrelevant and redundant to try and explain anything, so I will continue with my previous point.
To put it simply, the system is unfair. Forcing a man to pay child support and not allowing his opinions to be a factor in the decision, is unfair. By the way, if no one has figured out the answer yet, I will tell you the only correct one. It is unfair and that is just about it really. There is no gray here, just simple truth and fact.
Pick up a dictionary, check your library, the internet, whatever, and look up the definition for "fair" or "unfair". In those terms, the definition is an unedeniable, unfair.