Pro choicers, have a question for ya.

[burniegoeasily]

I know debating abortion issues is obserd. Everyone already has there mind made up. What I want to know is why do women have all the choices, while the man has to suffer, reap, etc. the consequences.

Lets analyze the situation;
A sperm (haploid cell created by the man) must fertilize the egg (haploid cell created by the women). One half the genetics that make up that child
belong to both partners.

A conceptus is not a part of the women, yet nourishes itself from the women. Nothing more than what a parasite does ( bad analogy but suffices for this purpose and holds the same truths).

The mother and the conceptus have different blood supplies, the mother and child"™s blood never mixes. There for, the baby is simply another being using the host (mother for nutrients). Half of that being belongs to the father. The conceptus, blastula, embryo all have different genetic make up then the mother, so to say it is part of her is obserd.



Now my reasons the man should have equal right;
If the man wants to raise said child and the mother doesn"™t, its too bad.
The mother can kill it at will. If the father doesn"™t want to be responsible
for paying child support and wants the baby to be aborted, too bad. Why
should a women have the choice to keep a child and force the paternal
member to suffer a life of financial burden. Or if a father wants the child,
why can the mother choose to kill it? I guess Im saying, if we insist on allowing self centered choices, lets allow all parties to be equally selfish.


Now before you start throwing out, its part of the mother, there for her
choice. Read the above again. If you dont believe me, research.

Now before you start saying the mother is the one who has to suffer the
nine months carrying the child, all I can say is waaaaaaa. What about the
father who has to suffer financial insecurity for 18 years.

By the logic pro choicers throw out, the father should have the right to
force the mother to abort, or keep.




Let the anger begin. and God Bless.

[kevin1]

You had balls Burnie ,
I'll give you that ...

[pointerDixie214]

you've gotta big set for bringing that up! as a student at the University of Florida, and being a science (nutrition) major, i have taken all the biology, physiology, anatomy, chem, organic, biochem etc... and i would have to agree with you based on everything i have learned. i think there should be a provision drafted that if a father wants to abort and the mother doesn't, then the mother should have full financial resposibility for that child. the converse is true as well, however, in that if the mother wants to abort and the father does not, the mother should carry the term and the father would be fully responsible. also, the mother would then be compensated financially by the father for carrying the baby. i know this idea has many flaws, but i think people could work from this and save lots of trouble, decrease abortion, and decrease the number of children who grow up with people fighting over who doesn't want them! just a thought. an arguement against this is that the father should have used protection, and that guys always "get girls pregnant." but, the last time i checked, it takes two to do the wild monkey dance! good topic, but again, you have some cojones!

[burniegoeasily]

but i think people could work from this and save lots of trouble,
decrease abortion, and decrease the number of children who grow up with
people fighting over who doesn't want them!

PointerDixie214
Glad to see another science nerd. I teach Physics, bio I and II, Anatomy and Physiology, Chemistry, and IPC. I agree with the above statement. I posted this because I am getting real tired of hearing people justify abortion on the grounds of it being a choice. If we are honest to ourselves we will admit abortion is simply selfishness hid under the shroud of "Choice". People choose to be reckless but do not want to take responsibility for their actions. Can anyone else give a better definition.

Abortion is not birth control.

[Aught Six]

I'm certainly pro-choice and have been since my political awakening. At first glance, it does seem logical to require both the mother's and father's permission to abort or not.

However, what if the baby were conceived by a man other than the supposed father? There is no way of really knowing until a post-natal DNA test can be performed. That could open up all kinds of legal battles to clog our courts up even further.

Besides that hypothetical, though, I have no problem leaving to decision to the woman. Perhaps men need to know a little bit more about the women they sleep with, before the fact. If a man and woman are in a serious, comitted relationship, I'd expect them to know each other's political/religious views before sex comes into the picture. The ones who are not will just have to deal with the consequences of their sexual nonchalance. Bottom line: plan ahead!

[stork]

I've said the same thing many times in the past and I get quite a rise out of people. What it really does is make people think and requestion themselves on there viewpoints. Sometimes it even makes people think for the FIRST TIME about issues like this. It is a good thing to say every once in a while to stir the pot.

[Strut&Rut]

Burnie,

Although you present some "good" scientific facts, you did fail to mention some of the more common complications/conditions the "host" must deal with during gestation.

To just name a few, I can think of gestational diabetes, hypertension, severe water retention, osmotic inbalance and antigenic incomplemency. These can be serious problems which require the mother to undergo either treatment or sometimes a drastic change in lifestyle (ie strict bedrest, increased exercise, etc.).

Add to that list the other more notable features, such as overall physical discomfort, bloating, swelling and strained backs. Also note that the internal organs take anywhere from 18-36 months to return to their original positions, in primiparous women, after birth.

Then add the possible complications associated with actual parturition, with the most fatal obviously extensive hemorrhaging and death.

I guess the bottom line is, when the father can die because the mother is pregnant, the current abortion laws will change. And having a heart-attack when the woman announces the pregnancy and that twins run in the family does not count

[Deleted User]

[Deleted by Admins]

[burniegoeasily]

There is no way of really knowing until a post-natal DNA test can be performed. That could open up all kinds of legal battles to clog our courts up even further.

Actually it is rather easy. Amniocentesis will review the culprit.

[stork]

The only problem I see is how do we get some people to think logically?!?!

Simple, Outlaw Democrats!