I'm talking about a women who just doesn't want to have a child. Forget about the pregnancy part. A woman has full rights to terminate a pregnancy just because she feels like it. There could be no danger at all. This is justified by pro-choicers because supposedly it's better for a child not to live at all then to grow up unwanted. But it's perfectly okay for a child to grow up unwanted by the father? The answer, as most of you have said, is no. Therefore, the woman's right to terminate a pregnancy because the baby is unwanted is bullshit. It should only happen in extreme circumstances, like when the woman's life is in danger.

That's not what's being said at all. Terminating a pregnancy because a child is unwanted is only a part of a myriad of reasons why a woman would elect to have an abortion, and it is because those reasons are impossible to determine that abortions must be legal.

If a father does not want a child, then sucks for the kid, but his mother did want him, thus making the child wanted by at least somebody. If you then turn the argument back around to the father wanting the child, and the mother not, then your philosophical point falls flat on its face due to the technical terms of an abortion, i.e., the woman carries the child.

If you try to argue for Men's Reproductive Rights, you won't get anywhere, because no matter how you look at it, men don't get pregnant, and the term of an abortion is that it is the termination of a pregnancy.

Call it Baby Killing if you want, but under no circumstances should a male have any legal say over whether or not a pregnancy is brought to term, nor should he have to default out of supporting said child. Life sucks, accept your responsibilities as a man and suck it up.

I do agree that men need to take responsibilty for there actions and SO DO WOMEN. If you CHOOSE to have sex then you have taken the risk of having a child. That is the purpose of sex. But a man should have every right that a woman has in the matter of abortion. It may be her body that has to carry it, but it is still half his child. If she does not want the child then he should be able to raise it. It is selfish on either parties part if they want to abort so that it will be more convient for there lives.

As far as Canadian Law is concerned, I do not live in Canada and think that it is a shame that they have no respect for the life of there unborn. The unborn should be fought with all that we have. They have no voice. They cannot speak up for themselves. Do you think that they want to die. Who knows what human you are killing. That baby could grow up to be writer, teacher, scientist, etc.

So, it's selfish for people to elect an abortion out of convenience, but a man forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term for his own sense of satisfaction isn't?

No it is not selfish. He is living up to his responsibilities and taking care of the thing that he helped to create. I see nothing selfish in his request.

As far as the nine months thing. Maybe that will give her sometime to think about the next time she is going to have sex. Maybe the thought "Hey this can happen to me again, I better wait untill I am with someone I want to have a baby with, or I am ready to have one on my own"

That's sensible, but people will blow off responsibility whenever they can and we happen to live in a society that makes it legal for them to do so.

It happens Devo. And it shouldn't. That's all I'm saying. It's not a black OR a white issue. There should be rules and restrictions. We could easily justify anything using this same kind of reasoning, but we have laws for a reason.

So, forcing a woman to go through the pains of a pregnancy to satisfy one's own ego, is not selfish? There is no action one could take that wouldn't be considered selfish. Even assuming that one does elect to have a child that they didn't want, that just means that they're accepting responsibilities in order to satisfy their sense of duty, and thus their ego.

Isn't that like the only reason people have abortions?

I mean, there are so many responsibilities included for having a child than just taking care of it once it's outside of you.

This is not to say that those who have abortions are irresponsible, of course.

I dont know how you can say that someone wanting to except responsibilities for there actions is selfish, nay i say it is admirable and should be lifted up for praise. Would you have wanted your mom to have an abortion when you were in her body? Wouldn't you want someone fighting for you on the outside? Look at it personally and see if you were in that babies place would you like to be told that your life should not exist because someone doesn't want to take responsibilities for there actions. Most were taught that you should take responsibilities for there actions, yet when it is most critical we cop out and hit that easy switch.

Okay... taking your statement here and doing a bit of a flip on it.
Suppose for instance that at the time the couple discover that the woman is pregant and the guy decides he wants to take responsibility for it at that time, but somewhere down the road a few months from now he has had time to think it over... weighed his options... and now does not want to take responsibility for it. What then? At that point in time there is a chance that the pregancy cannot be terminated and the woman who has been forced to carry this fetus to term is left holding the bag.
What is to prevent the man from flip-flopping on his initial decision to do "the right thing" and decide to not take responsibility? Can he just walk away without any sort of ties to something that he initially wanted and now wants to be no part of?

Actually, I find that everyone does know about sex and the consequences; they simply choose to ignore them for the pleasure of the moment. I myself do not agree with the "easy switch" from life's problems. Certainly, there are exceptions (rape victims, etc.), but for the majority, if you get pregnant, then you should carry it to term.

Nowadays society is all about the easy way out, shirking responisbilities, and shifting blame. Maybe people should actually take responsibilities for their choices for a change, and it might make this society better. Maybe the woman/man shouldn't have had sex to begin with, and with the easy way out of abortion, there's no consequences for having screwed up. People learn from experience.

As if you know everyone. :rolleyes:

My girlfriend's 15-year-old sister (who is sexually active) didn't know that precum contained sperm. I doubt she's the only sexually active person who's ignorant of this fact, too. You can't ignore facts you don't know.

That may not mean she's still not at fault if she gets pregnant, but there are intricacies involved that not everyone knows.

I think the world needs more abortions, personally.

Okay, maybe everyone that I know knows the consequences. I took classes in school when I was 12-13 called Sexual Awareness. It teaches you all about that sort of thing, how the body changes through puberty, what sex is, how to protect yourself, etc. Now if kids would actually listen instead of ignoring facts that are blatently given to them...

If she got pregnant because she is stupid enough to have sex when she's 15, then I would say "tough luck, time to grow up and act like an adult, since apparently she wants to have sex like one"

How many teenagers actually paid attention in those classes? They spent most of the time giggling and laughing and whatnot...
Ohhh... a vagina... ewww... a penis...

And who's fault is that?

Invasion of the Canuck Mysogynist.

I love how all the pro-lifers in this thread react to an abortion as if it were like filling out a prescription. Since when does an invasive surgery that could potentially make you a social outcast become the easy way out?

Something that has the potential to ruin someone's life is less severe than something that is guaranteed to, yes.

Having a child is never "guaranteed" to ruin somebody's life. If it was, then we've reached a pretty pessimistic view of parenthood and child rearing.