House Bill 1441 - Do fathers get a say in the abortion of their unborn child?

Hey guys,

I recently read several articles on a new proposed House Bill, 1441, which would require women to get permission from the father of the child in order to be able to get an abortion. Personally I think we need laws like these. However, I wanted to know what other people's opinion on this is. It seems to me that people that are opposing this bill are using the argument that this bill is just being used to restrict abortion. But why shouldn't fathers have any say in the future of their unborn child? The bill also includes exceptions, where the woman would not have to get consent in certain circumstances, such as if the pregnancy endangers the woman's life, or if the pregnancy is the results of rape or incest. I made a video discussing the various points in detail about this bill on youtube (link here: https://youtu.be/Zz3vFzVjCss), and I want to know what people's opinion of laws such as this are.

 

So you believe in slavery? That if a woman is impregnated by a man he owns her?

What if the man's "say" is that she should have an abortion?

Men can have an opinion but the woman still owns her own body.....as it should be unless you think women are no more than broodstock put on earth to please men.

No, the bill is just another attempt to outlaw a LEGAL medical procedure and take away women's rights.





But why shouldn't fathers have any say in the future of their unborn child?

Because it isn't THEIR body that has to go through pregnancy....

 

There’s a difference between the father having a voice in the discussion and the father having a veto on the abortion. The former should most certainly be encouraged (though I’m not sure how far it can be legally enforced) but I don’t see how morally the final decision on whether to go ahead with an abortion or not can be down to anyone other than the pregnant person themselves.

This kind of legislation also brings all sorts of practical complications (What if the mother doesn’t know where the father is? What if she said she was raped but no rapist was caught by the police? What if the alleged father denies it but refuses to take a DNA test?) and possibly delays which could in turn reduce the options available to the mother (for example, delay from an early-term to a late-term abortion).

 

You summed it up well, it's all an attempt to control women....and make life harder for them.

I mean besides being slavery which is illegal.

 

Fathers have the ultimate choice when they choose which eggs to fertilize. That's 8th grade biology.

 

Will never fly. However, they should go with an abortion tax to help fund the "free" birth control women be getting.

 

Nope.

This essentially establishes women as just another tool for men; a piece of property without say in what actually happens to their own body.

The next step the far-right would be clamoring for is to force women to wear long concealing clothing so that men don't have the urges to impregnate them.

 

Why should a medical procedure be taxed?

Women "be getting" birth control? Was that an intentional pun or just bad English ?

 

They already are. Just expanding the list.

Neither.

 

I wasn't aware that medical procedures were taxed. I have had some and never saw a tax.

Yes, saying women "be getting" is bad English.

 

The medical device tax is a tax on the procedure since the device is a necessary component of these procedures.

Only if you don't know what phrasal verbs are.

 

Then, according to you, abortions are taxed...so why the whine?


The correct phrase is "women ARE getting"....and they aren't anyway.

Now, back to the topic?

 

Perhaps you missed the part about medical devices. The only way abortions are being taxed is if they put an artificial knee in the baby's place.

I suppose that is one way of stating it. That is the beauty of the English language. It provides so many ways to tell control freaks they are wrong.

Which one?

 

You do sound confused, you don't know the topic (hint: read the OP) and think artificial knees can be put in fetuses so abortions can be taxed.

 

I agree with you that the father's need a voice, and that is why I agree with the direction this bill is taking. I do think the bill itself is very flawed, and that some of the practical issues you outlined would need to be resolved. However you hit the nail spot on, how do you legally enforce giving fathers' a voice? This bill makes an attempt at that. Personally, I think that if a father would veto an abortion, then he should be forced to be financially responsible for the child, and if the mother does not want to raise the child, then I think he should be required to raise the child as well. As I said previously, this bill is flawed, and these types of things would need to be added to it. And the reason why I don't think morally the whole decision should be given to one person, is that the child has two parents.

 

No I don't believe in slavery, or that if a woman is impregnated by a man that he owns her. I do however think father's should have a say in whether or not a woman can abort their unborn child. I know I cited HB 1441 as an example, but I do think that it is a very flawed bill, and would need to be changed drastically in order to be fair. And yes, women do own their own body, but the child within their body is not just their child. That child is a different body that has two parents. However, I do think that if a man does 'veto' the abortion, then he should be forced to raise the child (assuming the woman does not want to) and of course should be financially responsible for it.

You say "What if the man's "say" is that she should have an abortion?". Well, no, I don't think he should be allowed to force her to undergo an abortion. And here are the reasons as to why I think the two are different. If a man does not want to raise the child, he does not have to. If he had that power, he would be taking away the right of the woman to be a mother. Which is what women are allowed to do now. If a man DOES want to be a father, and the woman decides to abort the child, he has no say. Like I said, if she does not want to be a mother, that is fine, and the man should be entirely responsible for the child.

As to your point about women undergoing pregnancy. Does undergoing pregnancy give you the right to make all the decisions about the child after it is born, until it is an adult? What is the difference between men having a say about their child before the child is born, and after? In both cases women go through the pregnancy, yet once the child is born, we give fathers a say, but they can't have a say before it is born?

 

Your rights should always end where another persons body begins.

 

Yup, so it's too bad some sick Congressmen think that men and fetuses should have more rights than women...

 

Its the woman's body.
All the risk of birth etc is upon the woman
The bill will fail, as it should.

 

Aha

I see now. I was wondering what moron would propose such a bill.

But of course, its a back-door means of criminalizing abortion.
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/13/oklahoma-lawmakers-want-men-to-approve-all-abortions/

This is a strange link-up between MRM and pro-Life activists.

 

I feel the same way when they pass gun laws while enjoying armed security.

 

Uh, that's exactly what you're importing into western culture.

As soon as there are enough of them, women will start losing their rights.

 

"enough of them" ? Enough of who ? Southern Conservative white guys? Those are the ones trying to control and punish women right NOW in the good ol' USA....



White Christian guys are trying everyway they can to punish women for being women by taking away their rights........ WHO else do you think will do the same??

 

Muslims of course. If you think western conservatives are bad, then go lol at yourself in the mirror.

 

WTF? There are Muslims right now down in the south trying to take away women's right to their own body !!!!!!? ???

NO, that would be white conservative western American guys............ Southern Conservative white guys. Those are the ones trying to control and punish women right NOW in the good ol' USA....



White Christian American guys are trying everyway they can to punish women for being women by taking away their rights........

Why do you think it's OK for the white guys but not "those other non-white, non-christian guys????