quote:

On the other hand, the way this guy did it by tricking the mother into abortion drugs, I think that is totally wrong. The guy needs to be punished for that but not be convicted for murder.

quote:

that was a PLEA ARRANGMENT, he was CHARGED WITH MURDER!

quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81

quote:

You are skipping the fact that a male could potentially impregnate another woman in the same amount of time that a woman would go through her next ovulation cycle. In other words, his dream isn't dead.

Not at all. The fact that YOU ARE SKIPPING is that men also have feelings over a fetus that gets taken away from them. Yet the way the article sympathises the woman as for what's quoted here...

quote:

but it was Lee's dream to have a child.

quote:

"Nothing is going to bring back what was taken from her," Lee's attorney Gil Sanchez said.

A man would be considered insensitive if he had that same stance in regards of things being the other way around. If a man made that stance, people like you would be quick to say "what about the woman and how she feels...

That said, I'm not leaving out what the man exactly did to the woman by tricking her into abortion. I think that is very wrong.

But what I'm simply comparing here is the sympathy towards a man who wants a child and gets denied one compared to a woman who wants a child and gets denied one, excluding the circumstances in this story.

Them 2 quotes I did in that post would be considered a pass when it's in favour of women while if it swings in favour of men, it's considered being insensitive of the woman's rights of abortion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact


I would disagree. There is no infringement to the male's body. Therefore, they can not be constituted as the same.

In order to induce an abortion in this manner, a chemical poison had to be introduced. To date, no male who has wanted a fetus to come to term has had such a physical disturbance introduced to his person. No substance reagent to cause a physical response.

The loss of a fetus to a male exists on the mental and emotional realm. Nothing forced into his physical body against his will. The closest equivalent would be an agent introduced by an outside party that would leave him temporarily sterile.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
These kind of discussions ought to come up BEFORE the clothes come off. I feel her choice does trump his, but again that's unfair if they BOTH tried to avoid the pregnancy to begin with. Like you said with the finances, There really isn't a perfect solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
These kind of discussions ought to come up BEFORE the clothes come off. I feel her choice does trump his, but again that's unfair if they BOTH tried to avoid the pregnancy to begin with. Like you said with the finances, There really isn't a perfect solution.

Of course... but if your wife lies to you and tells you she is on birth control and the agreement is no children (at least right now)? That little gem cost me about 1.2 million dollars. So obviously I have some sensitivity to "men's rights" in this area.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oneechan
there's a clear logical failure here.
if the man is guilty of murder, then all abortion must be murder.
if abortion is not murder, then this man cannot be charged with murder. maybe harm to another person, misleading them into taking a drug, but not murder.
you can't just make murder ok because a certain person is doing it, and punish another for it.

You're dead right. There is a clear logical failure here. You wrote it.

A pregnant woman, regardless of how pregnant, is in charge of her own body. Since the fetus is growing inside her body, she has guardianship and authority over it. Now, until that fetus has personhood (at which point in time all rights afforded to a human are afforded to the fetus), the fate of that fetus is up to the woman. If the woman wants the fetus aborted, she is well within her right to have that done (so long as all laws are followed). If she wants to carry the fetus to term, she has that right, too. If someone, a man, a woman, her husband, her boyfriend, the baby-daddy, her lesbian or bisexual female partners, parents, etc., take that choice away from her without her consent, that would end up being murder. The mother, because of her choice to carry the baby to term, has, essentially, shared her human rights with it.

It is up to the woman carrying the fetus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BenevolentM

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oneechan
there's a clear logical failure here.
if the man is guilty of murder, then all abortion must be murder.
if abortion is not murder, then this man cannot be charged with murder. maybe harm to another person, misleading them into taking a drug, but not murder.
you can't just make murder ok because a certain person is doing it, and punish another for it.

You're dead right. There is a clear logical failure here. You wrote it.
A pregnant woman, regardless of how pregnant, is in charge of her own body. Since the fetus is growing inside her body, she has guardianship and authority over it. Now, until that fetus has personhood (at which point in time all rights afforded to a human are afforded to the fetus), the fate of that fetus is up to the woman. If the woman wants the fetus aborted, she is well within her right to have that done (so long as all laws are followed). If she wants to carry the fetus to term, she has that right, too. If someone, a man, a woman, her husband, her boyfriend, the baby-daddy, her lesbian or bisexual female partners, parents, etc., take that choice away from her without her consent, that would end up being murder. The mother, because of her choice to carry the baby to term, has, essentially, shared her human rights with it.
It is up to the woman carrying the fetus.

It seems that what you are saying is that a murder charge here is the same as a rape charge. If the woman liked the sex and did not complain, it isn't rape, but if the woman did not like the sex and complains, it is rape.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
These kind of discussions ought to come up BEFORE the clothes come off. I feel her choice does trump his, but again that's unfair if they BOTH tried to avoid the pregnancy to begin with. Like you said with the finances, There really isn't a perfect solution.

Of course... but if your wife lies to you and tells you she is on birth control and the agreement is no children (at least right now)? That little gem cost me about 1.2 million dollars. So obviously I have some sensitivity to "men's rights" in this area.

The same can be said (and I think this may be something that some are failing to see) that if a man says: "Before we take this step, you need to understand that I am not looking to have any more children but, should a pregnancy occur, I will NOT sanction an abortion. I would want to raise the child, even if you don't want to."

She agrees and then, when the shit hits the fan, suddenly, what the guy wants means nothing (even though it was agreed upon) and sometimes, the ignorant drip expects the guy to pay for her abortion (and there are a few that will come along to say that he should).

If it's a lady's body and a lady's choice, isn't it encumbent upon her to also take the responsibility? If I were capable of getting pregnant and didn't want to, I would make damned sure that it wouldn't happen.

Except in the case of rape, both people have made a decision to engage in "high risk behavior". Shouldn't they both bear responsibility and enjoy the rights and privileges?



Regards,



Gloria Steinem

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

DS, If I remember correctly this hits close to home for you as well.

Of course it's incumbent that both parties need to be responsible ( you didn't mean to imply I said otherwise, did you?). If a deal was made before the fact, barring her health or a gross deformity, the deal should stick. I can't imagine the gall of asking for the money for expenses.

F Lee Bailey