The only reason women have abortions is because they WANT to have a baby in the future

So, if the man in the case decides to put an end to the baby harming the mother, you are okay with hm unilaterally doing that?

 

I am well aware that there were always child support and alimony laws . But men were able to just skip out of town and not have to pay. Thankfully now with the Internet they can find these fathers easily. The other problem was the male was the primary earner and he was able to get lawyers. They were also able to hide money. That is why so many women stayed in miserable marriages because they knew they would get screwed

 

We aren’t talking about children...I’m the one who fights for children, you’re the one who fights for zygotes

 

I fight for the child from the point of conception. You wait and wait until you get the feeling to start pitching in.

 

He has his chance when before he has sex...they both know the consequences.He knows he will be dependent upon her decision since she will be carrying the brunt of pregnancy or abortion. So basically you are saying that if a child is born the daddy has the right to walk away.

 

If you believe this ended, sadly you are simply in error.

 

Note how they do not encourage men to have vasectomies. They’re a lot cheaper and don’t need general Anesthesia

 

Her duty in this is not to get pregnant in the first place. If the woman can kill her child, the man can simply walk away. At least in his case he did not kill the child.

 

His duty was not to impregnate. Now please stop talking about children because it is illegal to kill children. We are talking about something that is 1/10 of 1 ounce and it is not a child. You cannot kill something that is not alive

 

Who said it ended? Luckily for women men are being held accountable when they weren’t in the past

 

I got one and agree no doctor wanted me to have one. But mine was paid for by Kaiser and naturally if men doesn't get one, Kaiser is not out for the operation. It is not difficult on the man. He will remain at home a day to get needed rest and recovery.

 

If only you cared about children as you do about a zygote,we would all be better off. Hey why don’t you Remove the zygote and raise it. Of course you would probably need a microscope to find it

 

I am so thankful for both of my daughters that I did not see them as you see them. The woman has options if she wants no children. She is as involved in sex as he is.

 

Why didn’t your doctor want you to have one?

 

A child starts at conception. Even with your renaming, you don't change that.

 

I am saying the doctor did not grind me to get one.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
OH! I see....you don't know that a fetus has no rights and BORN persons do ! That's where your confusion comes in...



BTW, yes, men can decide not to have a child. Yes, they can legally give up their child.

WTF? Where did you get that baloney from the post of mine you quoted??

I never posted anything like that...

 

Duh, everyone starts at conception...and then they go through STAGES, we aren't all at once adults or teenagers or babies or old folks....we grow in stages , NAMED stages...

 

WHAT!!??

 

Why would he? My husband had one also..snip, snip he was out went to work the next day

 

That is called diversion tactics. You are asserting that i stated you said that. It was not needed for you to say that. But you diverted away from the question. Does the man have the right to terminate her pregnancy when he refused to accept fatherhood?

 

I did not say he should grind a man. In my case i would say the doctor was neutral.

 

No one off used at the beginning of the cycle is conception. The same way no one argues that an acorn is not the beginning of an oak tree. But neither one of them is viable

 

From YOUR own POST!:

However, because the law didn’t provide recourse for parents who left the jurisdiction, these parents frequently escaped justice by relocating to a jurisdiction that hadn’t adopted the law.

 

Who is ignoring a child's right to survive? NO one....