Hi David,

A man should have an equal say in an abortion decision IF he is prepared to take responsibility for raising a baby, say until it's eighteen, as a sort of compensation for a woman having to carry and bear a child. IF a bloke doesn't want to do that, then he should have no say at all in what a woman may have to do with her body.

Of course, if a bloke wants a woman to keep his baby and raise it while he pisses off, then of course he should pay her a living wage for the duration.

It's all simple really.

Joe

Dear Joe,

It is not his baby, but it is their baby. If pregnancy goes to the end she will have to go through labour. If a baby is born she will probably have to do the caring, training and raising. Therefore she should be the one to make the decision as to whether she wants to go to term or not. Only if it was a joint decision before she was impregnated should he have a voice.

Hi again David,

Well, yeah, that's my point :)

Cheers,

Joe

Having abortion considered as a valid solution is a sickness on society. There is too many excuses to justify abortion (it's a fetus not a person, it's a woman's choice, ect), and too many hard situtions to justify abortion (young mothers, hard family lives, poverty, or just inconvenience and "choosing" not to have the baby).

However any and all of these reasons fall flat on their face when talking about killing babies after they are born. At that point, there is an uprising for some action to resolve the issues. Whatever those issues could be. The inconvience of being a mother is not a resonable excuse to kill a child after they are born. But it is an excuse before the child is born.

With this in mind, I say it again. If other solutions such as adoption were readily available as abortion is, then I expect it would kill the rationalizations for abortion, to only 2. Was the woman raped, and is her health in danger due to the pregnancy. Outside of that, the consquence of a pregnancy is a hard consquence of not keeping your pants up. Facing that consquence by starting a family, might just be the change in culture needed to step away from loose and casual sex.

Of course the other option is to kill the unborn. A solution that is too tempting in my opinion, and shows a sickness in society. Who chooses death over responsibility? Apparently that's the world we live in. May the next generations be better then our own. The current stastatistic soft abortion is 1 in 5 women will have an abortion in their lifetime. May the next generation be better then our own.

Dear NNS,

I think you probably are a man who will never will be pregnant and can talk about a sickness of society. In my opinion we are a healthier society in giving a woman a choice as to whether to bring a pregnancy to term. You will never feel the desperation of being a pregnant woman who has no place to turn to like my cousin who was pregnant and committed suicide. Her life and the life of the foetus in her was ended. Adoption or being a single mother was not a choice for her. Her only choice in the absence of a legal means of abortion was death, but you can feel holy. You can feel self-righteous. All hail the foetus!

I agree with you that there is a sickness in society. Only I think the sickness resides with people like you who can feel self-righteous in rolling back the clock and denying a woman the right to terminate her pregnancy - people like you who would bring back the backyard butcher. I think this generation in which a woman has the freedom to terminate a pregnancy is better than the past generation in which my cousin's only choice was suicide.

Her young man went off to war and was not coming back, and moralistic monsters can talk about keeping her pants up. No feeling for the desperate woman!

All hail the foetus!

David F.

Two things to set the record streight.

1). I'm not just suggesting removing abortion. I'm suggesting to make adoption just as available. From that my figuring is that abortion rates and the reasons to abort would die off. If there are any other solutions like options for a military widow to have a one time payment after the news of their husband's death, a payment for the services that man died for to the woman he loved. That could potentially be enough to help give the woman some other options then kill herself. My question is why wasn't adoption available to her? Why was suicide her only option? Because of what happened to your cousin I can stand by my statement that there is a sickness in society. Blame it on me if you want, but there should have been other options.

2). I wish this wasn't the case, but I'm not innocent when it comes to abortion. My wife and I, before we were married, had a quick panic because of a condom. You don't need any details, but the result was we got a plan b pill just in case.

When I say we have a sickness in society I'm including myself in that assessment. We live in a world where sex is expected and encouraged as an act of love long before any act of commitment is given in a relationship. We live in a world where the shame and potential hardship of having a child out of marriage is a reason for killing the child. This would not be allowed if the child is born. It should not be be viewed as a respectable choice to tempt people with before the baby is born either.

We have a sickness in society. And personally I would like a better world for the next generation to grow up in. It has to start somewhere. Let's start by making adoption affordable.