Col, mostly agreed.

Society does have a role to play in the issue though. The manner in which abortion is portrayed impacts on peoples perceptions of the seriousness of the issue. Yours and my tax dollars (and the tax dollars of people strongly opposed to abortion as well) are going to fund abortions. Might be better to fund condoms and research into the male pill.

My main concern in this debate is the lack of choice given to prospective fathers. In a society which allows abortion the father should have choice (during the period that abortion is allowed) as to their willingness to take responsibility for a share of the childs upbringing (personal and financial). Failure to give them that choice absolves them of any moral responsibility for the child - it is then an issue of what the law can get away with. At the moment that can be quite a lot.

R0bert

Jose
“Know this:
-Ethics is a Science.
-Ethics is a branch of Philosophy.
-Philosophy is a Science.
-Just as you cannot separate energy from matter, you cannot separate Science from Philosophy. “

Know this

“Subjective judgement” divides “science” from “art”.

Science is defined in terms of absolutes – laws, elements etc

Ethics, philosophy (and for that matter Law and Accounting) all represent “Arts” not “Sciences”.

I am an accountant by professional training, I am continually arguing this point with my peers and colleagues – as soon as subjective judgement enters the equation (eg the value of a provision for future product obsolescence, the science disappears and we are left with “accounting” as an art form).

Ethics and philosophy are both subjective studies which arrive at outcomes which are not supported by absolute proven facts or physical laws but are influenced to some degree by “subjective opinion”.

Now
“You misinterpret my posts.”

Would you like to argue how I have “misinterpreted” the above?

”What I do have the right and responsibility to do is to create awareness of relevant issues, drawing solely from science and universally accepted laws (such as that against murder).”

Ah – I like that “drawing solely from science and universally accepted laws”

Confusion abounds, a “law” which prohibits abortion presently does not exist.

You confuse physical and scientific “laws” with the art of “Law” – the Laws of men, which wax and wane with social values and belief.
I recall, at one time, the witches and heretics were burnt at the stake. That is one “Law” which no longer applies. Similarly, nowadays we respect the individual and have repealed the “laws” (which were not “enacted” until around the 2nd quarter of the nineteenth century) to “outlaw” abortion.

Before accusing me of misinterpreting your posts, I suggest you stop doing it to yourself.

Robert as a father – I understand what you mean – however, pregnancy is an intensely personal experience and one which, as a father, I never endured. The mother of my children experienced and risked far more from the pregnancy than I ever did.

When I said you misenterpret my posts, I also added an "i.e" afterwards to explain my accusation. This was not a universal accusation of your responses, but that was explained when I put the ie afterwards(but you chose to take out of the context).
This is how you have misinterpreted my posts:
Upon reading my posts, you have reached a conclusion sparked from misinterpretation;
"Maybe you can illustrate to us all where you were given you the right to interfere in the private choices and decisions of people you do not know."
I then said that I do not presume to interfere with private choices but I have the right and responsibility to create awareness about relevant issues drawing solely from science and universally accepted laws (such as that against murder).
I know about laws concerning abortion. I know about laws concerning murder. If you were to read my posts again, you will realise that I have been trying to create awareness of the fact that abortion falls under the category of murder. Again, I know about the laws concernig abortion and murder, and how these laws differ (this is why I am creating awareness).
Ethics and Philosophy are not, by there nature, influenced by subjective thought, but rather, subjective thought can affect people's philosophical and ethical opinions.

By the way, you still haven't managed to disprove my argument (regarding the right of the embryo to live) put across in my posts. Read them, they're reasonably close together.

Col, I don't want to be a distraction from your main area of discussion but I'm going to duck back in anyway (poor self control).

I'd agree that the obvious risks are more with the mother. I'm not suggesting that the father be able to force her to carry a child to term, rather that as far as practical there be some equity in the ability to choose regarding taking on the responsibility of a child.

Likewise I get very nervous when society decides one persons (or group of peoples) needs or priorities are more important than those of another at the expense of the other. Please excuse the clumsy phrasing on that. Who is to say that the risks physical and emotional of carrying a child for 9 months are greater or lesser than those of supporting that child (and mother) for 18+ years with no viable say in the matter.

I have not been in the situation of paying for an unwanted child (just sponsoring an ex who does not like working) but I have seen enough of the impact on guys who are there to know that this is not a trivial issue.

Given the wrong set of circumstances it can rob someone of 18+ years of a significant part of their income. It involves the lack of privacy that comes with dealing with C$A where your financial details are passed on to someone you may have come to loath. It may come with the ongoing conflict between a sense of parental responsibility and other life choices.

If one has a choice following the act that lead to conception then both should have a choice about their ongoing responsibility.

R0bert

Jose “If you were to read my posts again, you will realise that I have been trying to create awareness of the fact that abortion falls under the category of murder. Again, I know about the laws concerning abortion and murder, and how these laws differ (this is why I am creating awareness).”

I deny your claim - abortion is not, never has been and (likely) never will be considered murder.

”Ethics and Philosophy are not, by there nature, influenced by subjective thought, but rather, subjective thought can affect people's philosophical and ethical opinions.”

That is plain “doublespeak” you have descended from misrepresentation into gibberish – your statement is so duplicitous and ambiguous as to be completely meaningless.

I believe my view is sustained

As for “By the way, you still haven't managed to disprove my argument (regarding the right of the embryo to live) put across in my posts. Read them, they're reasonably close together.”

I am under no obligation to disprove your subjective opinions, indeed you are under an obligation to prove or substantiate them.

Robert – I understand your view and being a divorced father, appreciate where you are coming from.
Despite issues of finance and what is a gross imbalance of treatment by the courts (which I treat as an entirely separate issue), in matters biological during gestation, the woman’s involvement, risk and position are significant whilst the fathers is incidental.

Subsequent to birth, the involvement of both parents reverts to “equals” rearing their progeny in the manner they have both (as equals) formulated and agree with.