CreateDebate


Debate Info

57
38
makes sense What!!!!
Debate Score:95
Arguments:69
Total Votes:112
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 makes sense (38)
 
 What!!!! (31)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(37633) pic



A woman should abort immediately when notified by father or forfeit child suppor

A woman should notify the father as soon as she becomes pregnant.  If he does not want to be a father, he can request an abortion within the legal abortion period.  The woman must comply or forfeit child support.  Plain, simple straight forward.

 

People who liked this debate also liked:

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Abortion_should_only_be_used_in_cases_where_neither_parent_wants_the_child

and

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/All_rights_are_reserved_for_minorities_women_and_the_handicap_only_non_4_white_males

makes sense

Side Score: 57
VS.

What!!!!

Side Score: 38

It makes sense this way. Both should have a say in this case, not just one...BOTH!!! If she decideds to keep the child the whole thing is on her and he should not have to have a part in paying child support or anything else if he doesn't wish to or cannot.

Side: Makes sense
3 points

Yes it is so sad all these girls or even stupid women have the babies to keep a man...Trust me i know three women who have tried that w/afriend of mine....DOES NOT WORK...Women and Men should have equal rights in an unplanned pregnancy and since a woman can't b forced to have an abortion relinquishing all rites to said child is only fair....

Side: makes sense
1 point

It is traditional in western society for children to be taken care of by one or both parents. In families where children live with one or both of their parents, the childcare role may also be taken on by the extended family. In the absence of one or both parents and the extended family willing to care for the children, orphanages are a way of providing for children's care, housing, and schooling.

Supporting Evidence: test king (www.real-testking.com)
Side: Makes sense
1 point

THE FATHER SHOULD HAVE RIGHTS TOO!!! MAKE AN AGREEMENT THAT WILL RELIVE HIM FOREVER AND EVER

Side: Makes sense
1 point

Lets go ahead and b honest people r going to have Sex have since the beginning of time. These days our teenagers r doing it more frequently than most parents like to admit and the laws seem to only protect the girls. Now we all no teenagers make mistakes and bad decisions and because the girl might decide that she does/doesn't want to keep the baby the boys r made to leave their life n her hands. ..Doesn't seem fair.Although we all no they shouldn't b even having sex half of what mist teenagers think and do they shouldn't b . I believe n pro choice for both parties at stake if the teenager girl decides to ruin any future she might have the teenage boy should b given the choice as well. If the girl wanted to abort the boy would have no say so the choice path should go both ways...What happened to equal rights for all..

Side: makes sense
2 points

That's absurd. It's HER body.

Not his body. Hers.

If a woman gets pregnant and decides to keep the child, she will be responsible not only for that child's financial development, but for its emotional and physical and spiritual wellbeing, education, social development...all the responsibilities of parenting. Yet, she is only half the "parents."

A child has a right to parental support. Not the child's mother - the CHILD. What you are suggesting penalizes children by condemning them to partial support, which often means poverty and the state dole.

A woman has a right to bodily integrity. Not a fetus - a woman. What you are suggesting robs women of a fundamental and federally-protected liberty right.

Those two things are totally different rights with totally different interests at stake. And BOTH those rights are more important by far than a man's privilege of sex without consequences.

What's next - if she doesn't agree to have sex, he gets to rape her? If she doesn't agree to hand over her income, he can steal it?

How's this instead: if a woman wants to get pregnant, she should be able to FORCE a man to give her his sperm.

What, no? Why not? Oh, bodily integrity? Hmmm.

Side: What!!!!

If the father makes it clear that he does not want a baby and that he has no desire to provide child support the mother has the option of raising the child on her own or not having the child until she can provide for the child. The alternative is to force the father to pay child support; to take away his right to chose; to give the woman total control.

The alternative takes away all responsibility for a woman's action away from her. This is done by making sure that the negative consequences for her actions are minimized.

If she has unprotected sex and gets pregnant and she doesn't want the child... no worries, have an abortion at the expense of anyone who may want the child and at the expense of the child. The negative consequences for her irresponsible action are minimized.

If she wants a child but can't afford it... no worries, trick a man into having unprotected sex with you and then force him to pay child support. Again, the negative consequences for her irresponsible action are minimized.

And this is considered fair?!?!?

Side: Makes sense
Spoonerism(831) Disputed
3 points

It may not be fair, but it's the price you pay for not having a baby factory inside of you.

It's equally unfair for a man to be able to "opt out" of financial responsibility simply by asking for an abortion. And the single mother who has the child anyway and lacks support from the man will then turn where for financial assistance? The government. So we will all pay or the man who f*cked her without a condom can pay. I choose the stupid man who chose not to wear a condom.

Side: What!!!!
Lerouche(33) Disputed
1 point

I agree, it is her body. BUT, why does the woman have the right to kill the man's child but not the other way around?

Why does the fetus have no rights? At what point does it deserve rights? If it doesn't deserve the right to live then why should I pay for medicaid for ultrasounds or prenatal checkups. If it lives great, if not... it was never a human anyway?

Bodily Integrity should apply to ALL parties involved. Not just the woman. A father has rights too, only we choose to ignore them until we want something from him.

Why can't the man choose to abort? It is her body, but it is his baby. If she chooses an abortion, he has no say in the matter of her killing his CHILD. Why can't he then ask for the same thing?

Hmmmm.

Side: What!!!!
Banshee(288) Disputed
1 point

Because:

1) under the law, it is not a "child" until and unless it is born;

2) it's not his body.

Bodily integrity DOES apply to both parties involved. Neither person gets to do anything to the other person's body without consent. Both may do as they please with their own bodies, subject to any relevant restrictions of the law.

When does the fetus get "rights"? Under our jurisprudence, not until it is viable, at the earliest. States can regulate or ban the abortion of a viable fetus. Until that point, it has no possible right of bodily integrity because it cannot survive independently of another person's body.

Why can't the man choose to abort? Because at no point is the fetus dependent on his body for its survival.

Why does your tax money pay for pregnancy-related medical needs but not abortion-related medical needs? Because your State chose to set it up that way. They aren't required to pay for either one.

Side: What!!!!
1 point

At the same time, a nanny or a au-pairs, are not always the best method of childcare. It confines the child into a world of their own. It keeps them from interacting with other child alot of the times. As mention the caregivers do not need licenses or background checks so there is no way of telling if a person is really qualified or has a criminal background. These things should be taken in consideration when making a choice.

Supporting Evidence: 70-649 exam (www.real-testking.com)
Side: Makes sense
2 points

Absolutely.....I dont claim child support. I firmly believe no ifs or buts that if two people concieve a child, then both parents are responsible for raising that child ..but if the father requests that the mother have an abortion and the mother declines then she should bare ALL responsibilities for that child.

Side: Makes sense
1 point

I TOTALLY AGREE. THE MALE SHOULD WALK AWAY, AND NEVER LOOK BACK. THE WOMEN CANNOT FORCE LOVE BY USING A LITTLE EGG, AS A WEAPON. IT NEVER WORKS

Side: Makes sense
2 points

Very well described by Shari Schreiber, M.A.

"Tremendous advancements have been made in the field of contraception, yet countless males are still being trapped into marriage and/or fatherhood, and the repercussions are vast. Historically, females never wanted to be pregnant out of wedlock, so men have naively continued to hand the issue of birth control over to their partners. While it's the responsibility of both parties to insure against conception, males are easily seduced and infinitely more vulnerable to getting entrapped than they believe--particularly when their voiced concerns/queries are met with assurances that, “it’s safe.” Think this won't happen to you? Think again!

Women with agendas to have children give men no say in this matter, and are often looking for a ‘free ride’ in terms of financial support. They could harbor significant abandonment wounds from childhood that cause them to frantically grasp at opportunities for emotional security, so having a man’s baby insures that he cannot sever all ties with her, if he needs to leave. But ask yourself this; would an emotionally sound female want to keep a guy around, knowing he doesn't want to be there? Conception doesn’t “just happen,” and with very few exceptions (such as rape) I’ve always believed that if a woman is clear about not wanting to conceive or mother a child, she won’t. Ambivalence is too often the cause of unwanted and 'unplanned' pregnancies--but tragically, the children of these mishaps suffer most, as they're the unwitting victims of unstable relational dynamics that began long before they were born.

Any woman (straight or gay) who yearns to have a baby and is equipped to provide a loving/stable home for this child, may adopt or use the services of a fertility doctor or clinic. My point is, this is a conscious adult choice, which entails accepting full financial and emotional responsibility for this decision. But when a couple's faced with an unintended pregnancy and they disagree about keeping it, neither should be forced to pay the terrible, life-altering price for this occurrence! Inequities may always exist between females and males in every society--but in my view, this one's the most hideous. Until our legal system mandates that women are equally financially responsible for these "accidents," men will continue to be brutalized by governing bodies that persistently ignore this travesty. Furthermore, if we sanction a woman's "right to choose," how is it even remotely fair that a man's denied this same liberty?"

Side: makes sense
2 points

I can't help but wonder, if we gave those fathers the first right of refusal to choose primary custodial care, (in other words if she chooses to have an unplanned baby) then the father is given the first right to become the primary caregiver over the mother and she were required to pay child support to him, how many of those women would actually choose to risk a pregnancy?

Side: makes sense

It's only fair. A man can't tell a woman that she must give birth to a baby if she doesn't want it and that he'll take care of it so he should be allowed to request an abortion instead of being held financially responsible for 18 years for a child he doesn't want.

Side: Makes sense
1 point

The three main types of child care options for most American working families include in-home care, family care, and child care centers. Many American working families are two-job households, and this means that childcare is often delegated to childminders or crèches on a full-time or part-time basis.

Supporting Evidence: 70-536 testking (www.real-testking.com)
Side: Makes sense

What's really required are jobs with flexible work hours. One parent can drop the kids off and the other one can pick them up. Or, if they can work from home like.... ;)

Side: Makes sense
0 points

I never thought about it this way but it does seem fair.

I am against abortion but if the mother (not technically because liberals think it isn't a baby so....)/ chick decides to remove (kill) the clump of cells (baby) the father can't sue her for damages.

I think fathers who are want out should either be able to force abortion or be released of all paternal (not a father because it isn't baby) duties.

Side: Makes sense
1 point

Makes sense, if we are to live in a world of equality then a man should be able to choose not to be a father seeing how a woman can choose not to be a mother.

Side: Makes sense
1 point

I don't think the woman should have to abort but I do think the man should have a choice in being a parent just as much as a woman does.

Side: makes sense
1 point

Well would help the men to have alittle choice but its like with anything women are #1 in america next to blacks we gotta spare there feelings and men are all dogs....

Side: makes sense

Another possibility would be to abort only those fetuses that have been determined to be liberal because conservative fetuses would be against abortion. ;)

Side: Makes sense
2 points

OMG!!!!!!!!!!! If you are indecent enough to have intercourse with someone and not accept responsibility for your actions then you should be neutered, or have to pay a fine. When someone is pregnant at least from what I've heard they develop an emotional attachment, and I for one do not think what the guy says should necessarily be the OK. It takes the whole thinking of a man's world to another place. Besides since when does the man get to make the decision of if they would like "their lady" to have the baby...It's in her...This is wigity wigity wack!!! Child support is necessary and in order.

Side: What!!!!

So what you're saying is that if a woman leads her lover to believe that she's using a contraceptive and tricks him into having unprotected sex in order to conceive a child and extort child support from him, then that's OK.

Side: Makes sense
Lilmommy(1) Disputed
1 point

Could you sound any more stupid? Seriously? So you are telling me that some girl can tell you she's on birth control and you are just ok with taking her word on it! Wow...even if she is telling the truth, since when has any birth control been 100%? Even condoms aren't 100% ....nor are vasectomies and even sometimes women who have their tubes tied can still get pregnant. I some how doubt any female is going to be dumb enough to believe that if she "tricks" some "poor pitiful unsuspecting" man into getting her pregnant that he will surely do the right thing automatically stay with her and magically love her...or are you suggesting that she is some how going to become rich or even remotely finsncially more stable from his paying child support!!! Well obviously based on your argument, there are idiots out there...so I guess some of those idiots might be dumb enough to believe your theory. Damn this was the dumbest thing u have ever seen

Side: makes sense
lorraine1461(7) Disputed
1 point

THE WOMEN SHOULD HAVE AN OPERATION TO TAKE HER EGGS AWAY. WHY SHOULD HE BE RESPONSIBLE. IF HAVE A GIRL TOTALLY INTO DRUGS THE COURTS SHOULD FORCE ABORTION. I AM A CATHOLIC, FOR ABORTION. ROE VS WADE. SCREW RELIGION., THIS KID CAN BE BORN ADDICTED. ONE ARM, NO FINGERS. WHO ARE YOU TO SAY ITS THE MANS FAULT. I AM A WOMEN, THAT IS WATCHING A POOR YOUNG MALE, THINKING ITS HIS CHILD. THIS GIRL HAS SEX WITH DAD. WHOS THE DADDY???

Side: Makes sense
2 points

1. That takes away a women's choice

2. That takes away all the consequences for the father not keeping it in his pants

I find it hard to believe that so many people are in favor of this...

Side: What!!!!

1. No, she has a choice, abort or keep and support the child.

2. No, it makes a woman take responsibility for her body, like keeping her legs together.

I'm surprised more people aren't in favor of this.

Side: Makes sense
jamaicalyons(5) Disputed
1 point

So men have no rights? Men have no choice? And why can a woman abort and take away all her consequences but a man can't do the same. A woman can abort simply because she's not ready to parent a child but the man has no choice as to parent or not. It takes 2 so maybe that woman shouldn't have opened her legs!!

Side: makes sense
1 point

No. A baby is alive from the moment of conception. Abortion is wrong.

Side: What!!!!
lorraine1461(7) Disputed
2 points

ABORTION?? I AM CATHOIC, AND I BELIEVE IN A WOMENS RIGHTTO CHOOSE. I ALSO THINK THE MALE SHOULD HAVE THE SAME RIGHS. A BABY IS NOT ALIVE FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION. THAT IS YOUR RELIGIOUS OPINION. NOT REALITY

Side: Makes sense
lorraine1461(7) Disputed
1 point

ROE VS . WADE. PUT RELIGION ASIDE. THAT IS YOUR OPINION. THIS DAY AND AGE, THERE ARE SO MANY DRUG ADDICTS. THESE WOMEN NEED MONNEY FOR THEIRR HABIT. SAD, BUT TRUE. THEY DO NOT DESERVE A CHILLD. THERE ARE SO MANY WOMEN WHO CANT HAVE CHILDREN. THIS IS SAD. THEY DESERVE TO HAVE THE EGGS OF THE ADDICT. NOW PUT THE DRUG CHILD ON INNOCENT PEOPLE. ABORTIONN IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THIS POOR EGG INTO BECOMINNG A PERSON. THIS EGG WILL ALSO WANT DRUGS DOWN THE ROAD

Side: Makes sense
1 point

It takes two to make a child. Abortion is two much of a tetchy issue to pressurize a woman like that. Whilst on paper the argument makes sense abortion is emotionally traumatic and can be medically dangerous. I am pro choice. But it should remain just that, a choice. A woman who is passionately against abortion should not be financially pressurized into having one by the man who got her pregnant.

Also for the sake of argument, who is paying for this abortion, what about rapists or men who clearly have more than enough money to pay for the child i.e bill gates, Mitt Romney.

Side: What!!!!
jamaicalyons(5) Disputed
1 point

"A woman who is passionately against abortion should not be financially pressurized into having one by the man who got her pregnant."

According to this only man makes a baby women just birth it...Get real they both did the dirty and they both conceived a child...they both should have the choice of parenting and supporting.

Side: makes sense
1 point

Some people say that whenever a woman sleeps with a man, she should accept pregnancy as a consequence- so according to them the male should accept supporting a child as a consequence too.

Side: What!!!!

If women are going to force men to support an unwanted child, then men should be able to force women to deliver a child that is wanted by the father ;)

Side: What!!!!
Elvira(3447) Disputed
1 point

Dispute! Sure- would you rather be tortured or pay money? Men have no right to that as childbirth can be fatal. handing over cash isn't, especially if the guy in question has alot of money.

Side: makes sense
1 point

Some are saying the woman should keep her legs closed and some are saying the men should keep their pants zipped if they dont want to suffer the consequences. Well, both statements are true. But unfortunately that isnt likely to happen. If you drink, it is YOUR responsibility to not drink and drive, and if you choose to do so anyway, KNOWING what the possible consequences could be, then you must pay the consequences if and/or when something happens. Same with pregnancy. Both parties KNOW the possible consequences, so if they choose to play anyway, YOU pay the consequences. Period!

Side: What!!!!