Writing about rights....

It's Thursday and time for us (the Men's Club and the Demystifying Divas) to cover another topic. Today's topic is a tad bit on the serious side. The topic, whether the biological father of an unborn child should have the right to block a woman's abortion; and should she be subject to damages for her failure to disclose prior to termination of the pregnancy?

The topic of abortion is a tough, and often troll baiting, topic alone. Add in the options of either a)women having a right to control their bodies or b)the penis wielding womb butchers1 have absolute moral and physical authority of what women should or shouldn't do, and the topic gets even rougher. Me I like trolls, almost as much as I'd like a stalker, thus mean, hateful and nasty comments are welcome, just make sure they're on topic and don't forget to kiss me on the cheek when your done with the spanking.

On to the first part of the topic: Should the biological father have the right to prevent an abortion? No more so than he should have the right to force an abortion. It all boils down to circumstances. Should a one-night-stand gone awry have a resounding effect for the next eighteen plus years of the three people's lives? How about a couple that has only been together for a short time period, weeks or months? How about years? Or if they're married? What happens if the mother's life is in danger? Should rapist be allowed to force their victims to carry their children to term? If you follow the strictest of pro-life arguments, in each of the cases mentioned above the answer is the unborn child should be carried to term.

I for one however can't go along with that train of thought. In my humble little opinion, it all boils down to a woman's right to decide what is best for her and what to do with her child birthing equipment. If a male is ready to utilize the reproductive tools bestowed upon him, then it's in his best interest to find a woman ready to bare the fruits of his loins. Until then we men are, and should be, at the mercy of the fairer sex.

Given my views on the first part I don't see how a woman could be held liable for controling her body.

If in the future technology allows for incubation from conception to "birth", then the laws may need to be revisited. Until then, if a man wants absolution control over his swimmers and their biological functions then it's best to fly solo or not fly at all until he finds someone willing to birth his babies.

For other views: Jamesy, Our Maximum Leader, Stiggy and That 1 Guy.

And the ladies: Phoenix, Kathy, Silk and Ruth.

Note: 1) Phrase Stolen shamelssly from Jeff Goldstein of Protien Wisdom.

Posted by phineas g. at 08:35 PM on October 27, 2005 | TrackBack

Nicely done, Phin...

Posted by: That 1 Guy at October 27, 2005 08:50 PM

Well said. I agree.

Posted by: Theresa at October 27, 2005 10:03 PM

I agree too - unsurprisingly. I love your last paragraph. I really IS that simple, IMO.

Posted by: Ruth at October 27, 2005 11:31 PM

And what if by controlling her body she decided to point a gun to the palm of her hand and fire, and by doing so the bullet then goes through her hand and hits an innocent man?

Do her actions not count just because the action she took was only intended to effect her body?

I believe as a woman we have the right to control our body, yes. Right up until the point that it also disturbs someone else's body. There are too many options to prevent conception to make termination an exceptable answer. - under normal conditions.

Posted by: L. at October 28, 2005 09:32 AM

Personally, I think abortion is wrong. HOWEVER, What right do I have to tell you what you can or cannot do with your body? Which is what makes me pro-choice.

As for the Father's rights. If they are married/engaged, then yes I think he should have a say. However, if they aren't... sorry, no input. Oh, and just because a woman gets pregnant does not necessitate they need to get married.

Posted by: Contagion at October 28, 2005 12:33 PM