CreateDebate


Debate Info

37
48
Yes, he should. No, he shoudn't.
Debate Score:85
Arguments:49
Total Votes:99
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, he should. (20)
 
 No, he shoudn't. (29)

Debate Creator

Argento(512) pic



If a woman conceives by deceit, should the man have a right to abortion?

There are many women out there who trick their husbands/boyfriends/buddies into getting them pregnant.

Example: Sarah gets Tony seriously drunk until he is out of it. In his last drink she puts Viagra in. So while Tony is out of it (with a hard on!) Sarah proceeds with the deceit. Before you know it, Sarah is pregnant.

Other forms of deceit: piercing the condoms with a neadle, lieing about taking the pill, etc.

Provided that the man can prove the deceit, or given that the woman admits it, should a man have the right to abortion?

Yes, he should.

Side Score: 37
VS.

No, he shoudn't.

Side Score: 48
7 points

This is a lot more common than people think. I've heard married women admit to it, and I've heard teenage girls admit to it. To me it's a horrible thing to do. Because it exploits a very pleasurable common practice to rob a man of his right to choose when or if he is going to be a father.

If there is proof for the deceit or the woman has blatantly admitted it, then I think the man should have the right to an abortion. The woman has lost her right to do whatever she wants with her body through her own actions.

EDIT: After careful consideration I have come up with the following alternative.

What if the court was to give the woman two options.

1. Volunteer to have an abortion.

OR

2. Proceed to have the baby but then have it taken away from her and put up for adoption.

Think about it. If the woman was presented with two options that both mean she will NOT end up with a baby in her hands, then she is more likely to put things right and have the abortion. If she is stubborn enough to have the baby then the courts can take it away on the grounds of her deranged behavior. Either way, no one is forcing the surgery on her and she has a choice.

Side: Yes, he should.
Pineapple(1448) Disputed
2 points

Giving someone two bad options, hoping they'll choose the "best" of the two, is not really a choice.

It seems to me that the entire reason that the men here don't want the baby born, is because they don't like the idea of a child growing up in the world with their seed, that they themselves are not raising.

So is it in some way better that a stranger raises the child than the mother?

The only way this is plausible is if you put these women in jail for rape. In which case they might give birth in jail. But that is another issue entirely.

Inmates who give birth are treated like animals, and their children are ripped from them like puppy mills.

So the options should be case by case. I think in a lot of cases the woman wouldn't be charges for rape, as it is very easy to get a guy into bed. You simply have to lie about being on birth control. Wrong? Yes. Can you be charged for that? I don't know.

I have to say, if the man doesn't have a problem with the child being adopted, he shouldn't have a problem with the mother raisig the child.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
wacko(114) Disputed
1 point

I too have heard of alot of men saying how their wife tricked them into fatherhood, but few who after the child, or children are born who still wish they had forced an abortion onto their wife.Yet if the option had have been there would have probaly taken it, wrecking the marriage that they are still in and their chance at fatherhood. And believe it or not, these same men are usually grateful that their wife took action as they probably would never had been ready for it and would have missed one of the best things in their lives. A man can get an abortion any time he chooses as soon as he grows the bodily organs on which to do them. Im sure any man who isn't willing to support a woman through the pregnancy sure as hell wont provide the needed support to help her get over an unwanted abortion.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
Argento(512) Disputed
3 points

You are missing the point here. Maybe there are men who forgive their wives for doing it and they get sweetened by the smile of the baby.

But this is not about those men. This is about women who trick a man they are having a one night stand with, or a boyfriend who doesn't want kids or marriage, or married men who REALLY don't want kids. No one has a right to force fatherhood upon a man and then expect him to forgive and forget.

A man can get an abortion any time he chooses as soon as he grows the bodily organs on which to do them.

And the woman should have a baby without consent when she grows the organs to produce sperm on her own.

I'm sure any man who isn't willing to support a woman through the pregnancy sure as hell wont provide the needed support to help her get over an unwanted abortion.

The man doesn't owe such a woman NOTHING, let alone "support" her "get over" the abortion.

If someone stabbed your mum in the eye, do you think she owes them her support in "getting over" their jail time? Hell no.

Side: Yes, he should.
Banshee(288) Disputed
1 point

You have no evidence whatsoever, beyond the "evidence" of a single incident of deceit, that this hypothetical woman would be a "bad mother."

And it is absolutely unconscionable to suggest that one adult should be allowed by law to make blanket decisions about another adult's body or capacity to parent a child.

On what possible legal grounds would you even justify such a right? No Court in the U.S. would ever agree to the "options" you are suggesting. They would clearly violate the privacy right as delineated by SCOTUS, not to mention violating basic rights of bodily integrity that are at the foundation of much of our legal tradition.

This hypothetical woman may end up with an uninterested or uninvolved "father" for her baby. The man may have a (weak) argument concerning the requirement that he pay child support - although I would venture a guess that most courts would be unsympathetic to his claims.

But that's the extent of what he gets to do.

Another poster raised a very good point: imagine this "right" as a tool of violence and coercion. An abusive partner could force a woman to abort a baby she very much wants by lying and claiming that she "duped" him.

Or, it could simply be used to force her to submit to a paternity test as a prerequisite to establishing that the man demanding the abortion is the father. Imagine a woman who is abused, has an illicit affair, and becomes pregnant. Her abusive partner claims that she has "duped" him into fatherhood. A paternity test establishes that he is not the father. How safe do you imagine that woman is now?

And what other "rights" over women's bodies might this lead to? If she can be forced to acquiece to a man's demand for an abortion, should she then also be forced to acquiece to his sexual demands? What about demands for legal control of her money and property? You are proposing that we embark upon a very, very slippery slope.

The man can make whatever decisions he wants for his own body. But he has no right at all to make decisions for other people's bodies.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
Argento(512) Disputed
2 points

You have no evidence whatsoever, beyond the "evidence" of a single incident of deceit, that this hypothetical woman would be a "bad mother."

Please do point out where I said that the woman would be a "bad mother". Oh wait, I didn't.

Your argument is completely beside the point. The abortion wouldn't allow for there to be a baby in the first place.

And it is absolutely unconscionable to suggest that one adult should be allowed by law to make blanket decisions about another adult's body or capacity to parent a child.

The one adult wouldn't be "allowed" to do nothing on his own. It would be up to the court. If you read my post again, what I proposed was NOT an enforced abortion. What I proposed was the courts can give the person a chance to rectify the situation by volunteering to have an abortion.

Again, the capacity to parent a child is beside the point.

If a woman is raped and gets pregnant, can the rapist demand that she have the child on the grounds that he is perfectly capable of raising the child if she doesn't want to?

On what possible legal grounds would you even justify such a right? No Court in the U.S. would ever agree to the "options" you are suggesting. They would clearly violate the privacy right as delineated by SCOTUS, not to mention violating basic rights of bodily integrity that are at the foundation of much of our legal tradition.

The members of this site come from all over the world. Please refrain from limiting the world's geography and legal system to that of the US alone.

The legal ground is the same that a woman can use if she is raped and becomes pregnant. In this case, a man has been raped. So the least he deserves, is for the woman to be punished and imprisoned for the rape. The abortion cannot be enforceable. But plea bargaining happens all the time. The court could demand that the only exchange for severe imprisonment, is an abortion. Otherwise, the least the man deserves is for her to go to jail.

This hypothetical woman may end up with an uninterested or uninvolved "father" for her baby. The man may have a (weak) argument concerning the requirement that he pay child support - although I would venture a guess that most courts would be unsympathetic to his claims.

Wait. What?

All of a sudden the man is supposed to accept having a baby when he clearly was raped, and if he doesn't then he is a poor father?? Are you serious? This is not about her! HE is the victim, not HER.

"WEAK" argument? What is weak about it? A man get's raped into fathering a child and you think it is "weak" of him to not want to pay for it for the rest of his life?

An abusive partner could force a woman to abort a baby she very much wants by lying and claiming that she "duped" him.

The debate is not about "your word versus mine" cases. The debate is about cases where the woman has either come forward and admitted it, or there is strong evidence to prove the case, like video evidence, or drug tests that show rape drugs etc etc.

Or, it could simply be used to force her to submit to a paternity test as a prerequisite to establishing that the man demanding the abortion is the father.

If a man has reason to doubt he is a baby's father, he should have every right in the world to have a paternity test. Courts issue such judgments every day. What is it you find wrong about this right?

Imagine a woman who is abused, has an illicit affair, and becomes pregnant. Her abusive partner claims that she has "duped" him into fatherhood. A paternity test establishes that he is not the father. How safe do you imagine that woman is now?

Talk about playing the sentimental card right? Those poor abused women!

And yet your argument contradicts itself.

The "abusive partner" has every right to know if he is indeed the father of a child. And in your example it turns out he is not. Everything else is hypothetical.

And what other "rights" over women's bodies might this lead to?

None other. Why does everything need to lead to a slippery slope? That's a very weak argument. To not take action against a crime on the fear that the new law might lead to a slippery slope is equal to the court system betraying the people it was designed to protect. The victims. In this case, the man.

The man can make whatever decisions he wants for his own body. But he has no right at all to make decisions for other people's bodies.

And yet that is exactly what the woman has committed. She has raped the man out of his sperm and thus she has made a decision upon his body. Why would you want to be sympathetic to a person capable of committing such a horrible action.

Side: Yes, he should.
maxy21(6) Banned
1 point

Technology deals with human as well as other animal species' usage and knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects a species' ability to control and adapt to its natural environment

Supporting Evidence: Promotional Merchandise (www.phoenixcorporategifts.com)
Side: Yes, he should.
3 points

Strangely, we were talking about this very situation at work today.

This situation does occur in the real world, and I've known or heard about plenty of people who have actually done this. It normally happens in the form of lying about taking a contraceptive pill. There are certainly a few options that a person can put on the table along with the possibility of an abortion.

Firstly, I'll talk about the abortion option. Whilst it may seem like a viable option (it certainly does to me, at least) I feel that it would cause far too much opposition to be a workable solution. This opposition would immediately come from religious groups, as well as women's rights groups who would most likely fail to take into consideration the fact that the man has effectively been raped of his sperm and would stand up for the rights of the woman not to have an abortion forced upon her. In terms of legality, at what point can the state force someone to undergo a non-necessary surgical procedure? Would forced abortion be classed as state-sponsored abuse? I would actually support the idea of forced abortions, though I do understand the opposition that would be mounted and therefore I present an alternative too.

To me, the fact that my sperm would have been used to concieve a child is irrelevant. I don't find any kind of argument revolving around the idea of "well, it's my sperm so it's a part of me" fruiticious enough for me to feel as though I owed some sort of moral obligation to the child. When I decide I'm ready for that, my bond with the child will be an emotional one. I'd be perfectly content knowing that someone was walking around with DNA that half matched mine as long as I had no emotional attachment with that child. Without the emotion, they're effectively not mine in my eyes. At least, that's a position that I feel I could hold morally, and therefore the basis for my alternative. The alternative is a written agreement held between the mother and father and put in place by a court that states that if the mother goes through with pregnancy, the father has absolutely no legal obligation to that child. Under law, they are not the fathers and therefore the father doesn't have to pay any money towards the child, doesn't have to give up thier identity or in any way be involved in the child's life. The mother would be obligated to hold an "under oath" equivilent that makes it a legal requirement for her to explain to the child when they turn 18 (or before if the child asks) why the father is not around and what action the mother took that caused this situation to arise. Effectively, the father would be treated like a sperm donor rather than a real father to a child.

I feel that's a viable alternative for a society that, I believe, probably isn't ready to accept forced abortion (even though it's the right thing to do).

Side: Yes, he should.
2 points

It is a good alternative and I know many men who would be happy to know they have an offspring somewhere out there, and yet are OK about not having a bond.

I can't say I am one of those men. I would have a problem with the fact that, as you perfectly put it, my sperm was effectively raped out of me, and then I am expected to either accept it and pay for it, or let it walk away and live with the guilt of having let my child go. It's a pretty messed up situation to be in.

I can think of a few cases where the government has the right to enforce surgery (or some form of penetration), and they usually involve drugs that have been hidden in the body.

Women's rights groups, if handled by a good diplomat, could actually be at the side of the man on this. Because a woman that has the bones to do such a thing is not deserving of any such support from these groups.

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

Really good points. My friend is actually going through this now, a girl he was just sleeping with has mysteriously become pregnant, and apparently never missed on pill. It happens every day to thousands of men, and it's just not talked about as much as it should be. But I agree with your points...

Side: Yes, he should.

He should definitely have the call on this one unless the female is willing to raise the child by herself and has not entrapped him into marriage. The only thing is, is that any of these things are difficult to prove and he may just be left holding the bag of diapers!

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

I believe so. It's not right for such a deciet person to put anyone through that and get away with it.

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

i know a man that was hanging out with a woman they had sex once he then found out she was sleeping with others (he got tested he was OK) she got let go from her job for some thing els the one night my friend and her seeped together she said she was on the pill this was a lie she had been trying to get pregnant by any man thinking he will marry me if she has his kid well he lucked out she had moved to another state and found out she was pregnant but had to think about the time line of who she seeped with then she put child support on him when he got a new job the child support found him and charged him it took her 3 years to find out who was the dad she told him he had to leave his girlfriend and married her or she would make him pay

she had planed it all out we found out but after she had been let go so no one new she was pageant this has fued up my friends life and the child's life she is being mad fun of at school for not having a dad and when she gets older and finds out what kind of person her mom is that will ruin her relationship with her mom this lady only thinking about herself cased a lot of problems i know as i was there when this all happened and the law wont do a thing about this great place we live in

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

I'll paste the e-mail I received from a girl I barely knew that I had a one night stand with. This should speak for itself.

"You were right. I was lying. I did get pregnant on purpose. I wanted a child so badly. I hated being alone. I hated not having any friends. You were never going to be my friend. No one was. I wanted someone to love me. To have someone who would never leave me. I didn't take any birth control. I just planned sex according to my ovulation, so every other day. I don't care if your around or not, I guess all in all you served your purpose by giving me a child that will always love me. Becuz I know that if I didn't have a child on purpose that I would always be alone and that would lead me to a dark place that I didn't want to go, I didn't want to commit suicide. Death is lonely so I didn't want to feel that either. I wanted to experience happiness for once in my life. I don't know why I chose you. I guess oppurtunity just striked. I found out I was ovulating the 2nd of Aug thru Aug 7th. I had sex w/ you Aug 5th.

Your right I am lying and vindictive but only to get what I want and that is to never be alone, For someone to always love me. I'm only bitter and mean becuz my life is always dark and lonely. I envy you becuz you have friends. I envy you becuz you probably had more of a normal life than I would ever had. I envy you.

I guess deep down I want you to hate me, I want you to be mean to me. That's all I'm use to. I'm not use to others being nice to me. I'm not use to others giving me compliments.

But I sincerely wasn't going after you for child support on purpose. In order for me to get assitance from the state for childcare. I need to go after you for child support."

For the record I am unemployed, and within 26 days of court establishing child support I have received a bill in the mail for $241 that I am legally obligated to pay this woman. Let me serve as a huge warning to men everywhere, it doesn't matter if she says she's on birth control, if you two are in a relationship, if you even want a child, if you have a job or money, or if you were downright lied to. The court doesn't give a FUCK about you. The court's only concern is to establish a living wallet to support children so that the government doesn't have to. Among this e-mail I have almost a hundred other e-mails saved. In one e-mail she even admitted to being beaten by her alcoholic mother in her home, said she would do the same to the child and likely kill the child and then herself. I asked the court to review these and received a stern reply from the judge of, "None of this is of the court's concern."

I have text messages from her admitting that she was getting high off prescription anti-anxiety pills while watching the child, and much, much more. Guess what? Nobody cares! I've told the court, my friends, and family. The system is flawed gentlemen - horribly flawed. Don't listen to women who tell you any different. The same woman I've been writing about wrote an entire article online that's almost identical to what I've seen from other women. It goes into detail about how I'm a 'deadbeat' and a 'real loser'. What a joke.

I have enough stories to write a novel, but time is short. I'm running on three and a half hours of sleep from applying for jobs all day and studying for my college exams. I just wanted to say I absolutely agree that men should have a right in this regard and I hope my situation clearly depicts just how ridiculous our current system is.

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

I think that if a woman pushes away a man just to get child support, which is about $900 a year IF YOU ARE LUCKY, you should be allowed to put her in a prison for ten years and abort her baby, sorry, YOUR baby, because it is wrong, it is stupid, it is the WORST fucking idea ever. you wanna know WHY women get out so pampered and spoiled? Because of FEMINISM. Woman have TOO MANY rights, not saying they don't deserve rights equally, but just go on youtube and look up TheAmazingAthiest, he can explain better. women think they have it hard, because they are living alone and they wanna get CHILD support, PHEH, they deserve to pay extra tax, but the real problem is that they APPARENTLY HAVE LEGAL ISSUES, well fuck no to anybody who fits that description, not ALL women, because men have it worse. a man molests a child, for instance, BAM! about ten years if he is LUCKY, while a woman might get five years if she has a shitty lawyer, no evidence to help her, and video evidence. just think on that

Side: Yes, he should.
lolly90(2) Disputed
2 points

Ok this is moronic clutches 0324 and your English is so bad, I found that very difficult to read. I guess you are a man and a very bitter one.

Anyway I am an unwed single mother who got pregnant and am in my thirties, my ex is very bitter man and a lazy useless father but the pregnancy was not planned so I did not file for child support because he would become even nastier than he already is and his family are even worse, if he was a nice guy he would help anyway, I shouldn't need to FORCE him. A decent man would want to help the mother of his child but a nasty selfish me me me man won't want to, he'd rather spend it on himself and his latest g/friend. Now if a woman gets pregnant on purpose and that means working out her best days to get pregnant and sleeping with him, no I do not think it is his choice for an abortion..NO, it is her body not his, no no no, however, she needs to take full responsibility financially as got pregnant on purpose and knew he was not the kind of guy who could turn down sxx. If you are married, madly in love and are trying for kids and he then does a runner, hell yes make him pay child support and some of you men need to Calm down ok, just calm down and look at all the facts before ranting and raving about how nasty the mother of your child is (who by the way 9 out of 10 times does an amazing job that you wouldn't begin to know how to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

Yes the man should have a right to abortion. It is evil for a woman to deceive a man into having a child against his wishes and intention. The emotional and financial cost to men demands that something is done.

If the answer is for men to have a right for the pregnancy to be aborted, then it would be a deterrent to this evil behaviour being perpetrated. It is wrong for women to take away a man's right to plan with her for children.

It is evil and wrong for the woman to take it upon herself to make a decision for man that he could make and often would make with his wife or partner in a united approach to having children and raising a family. I do not believe in or advocate abortions, but in this instance I would advocate it as leverage to give back some control to men.

Side: Yes, he should.
0 points

I think she should be executed, IMO.

but I guess the next best thing would be him forcing her abortion.

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

a random down vote, actually a couple. Obviously the work of a moron who can't come up with a proper rebuttal.

Side: Yes, he should.
4 points

The man isn't the pregnant one so I don't see how he has a right to an abortion. But he also shouldn't have to take care of the kid if he so chooses.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
3 points

As far as I'm concerned, it's her child and her choice. If she wants child support though, that's a whole different story. I think it'd be a little fucked up to force a woman to let someone else essentially violate her.

It's dumb to do something like that deceitfully, but whatever. If the woman wants to be like that she should have to look after the child without support from the person she cheated.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
3 points

This is a hard answer, but I think no matter what , the woman has total rights over what happens to her body no matter the circumstances or how unfair it is. It isn't just the woman who can "mislead" their partner into becoming parents. There are many men out there who take advantage of a woman in many ways, not to mention, trick a woman into parenting their babies for them, fully taking advantage of the womans hormones or good nature, yet no-one forces them to have the castration procedure that most women think they should have. There are husbands, who knowing their wife isn't ready to give up their careers or income or personal pursuits yet who poke a hole in the condom, knowing their wife would never have an abortion. There are men who take advantage of a weak moment, and discourage any thoughts of abortion with promises and guarantees of how devoted they are, or even marriage, knowing full well that it was totally their intention to become a daddy and they never carry through with the promises. And quiet often these same men are the ones that run when the reality strikes and are the hardest to get any support from, financially or otherwise, but they run around bragging about how many children they have.

Mind you, I do not condone in any way the behaviour of any woman acting in this way, but unfortunately IF WE ALLOW A LAW that states a man who has been tricked into fatherhood to legally force an abortion onto a woman, then alot of men who have not been tricked can and will make this call, forcing alot of innocent women through a court case or surgical procedure that has medical, psychiatrical and emotional risks, that are often permanent and affect that woman for the rest of their lives. Note that putting an innocent woman through a court case while in early pregnancy just so some man doesn't have to be responsible, is just totally wrong. And where do we start with just what to call trickery. If a condom breaks, is this considered a trick if she supplied it, if the pill fails due to a small case of ghardia that she didn't get a doctors certificate for, and the list is never ending. I feel there would be more arguement for the men that DO get tricked into being free sperm donors, who are wanting to strengthen the laws on all their parental rights, but that is yet another debate. A man can seek joint custody with no contact with the mother what-so-everand has legal rights over his own privacy, cutting any monetary advantage or stalking advantage to the woman, and giving the child a father figure (and his own family like the grandparents, aunts and uncles) rights to have contact with the child.). If more men were interested in doing this, I am sure you would find the rate of the women using this as a cheap way to trap a man into either payments or staying in their life would lessen greatly as word gets around on the failure rates of this trick. Any woman using this trick in this day and age would have to be considered out of her mind.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
3 points

I really doubt that many women drug incapacitated men with Viagra in order to rape sperm out of them. These are the actions of an incredibly disturbed individual and I'm sure not a common occurrence. In that case it is very unfortunate for the man that he is involved with a mentally ill person and the appropriate actions need to be worked out amongst the individuals involved.

If a woman lies to a man about being on birth control, that is also wrong, but unfortunately human beings lie to each other and make bad decisions. If a man has an extramarital affair and lies about it and gets another woman pregnant the wife doesn't get to tell the mistress to keep or not even though it affects her future as well. The man lied and produced an unwanted child, but the other woman should still choose what happens to her and her child ultimately.

Men need to protect themselves if they truly want to make sure they don't reproduce when they don't want to. The culture of placing the blame on the woman for unwanted children is bad for women and men both. Birth control has a failure rate even when used properly, and many women don't use it properly. Men need to grow up and acknowledge that the more sex you have, the higher statistical chance you have to create a child. No matter what your partner is saying doing, you have to realize that if you want to have sex, you may end up with consequences. If you want to make absolute sure you won't be held responsible for a child, stop having sex.

I know that men will continue to have sex, so what can they do to protect themselves?

Maybe only engaging in sex with people you know well enough to be able to be certain of their integrity, respect and honesty is a first step. Take an active interest in birth control, go with your GF to the doctor and talk about the birth control options you have as a couple, talk openly about how you feel about children and your plans for the future. Maybe considering a vasectomy while freezing sperm for a future plan for children could work for men who are more well off. If being "trapped" into caring for a child you didn't plan for is such a threat to men, you'd think they'd take more actions before a pregnancy occurs to protect themselves from this situation.

It is common that women, who are sexual creatures just like men, should be responsible for saying no, for always controlling their desires, for not getting pregnant and ultimately held 100% responsible for and event that involved two adults. Men understand where babies come from, they just feel like they should be able to indiscriminately put their sperm wherever they want and them when the inevitable happens they don't want to be held accountable for their actions.

In conclusion, human relationships are complicated and there are lots of factors that lead to unplanned pregnancy. Men choose to have sex and they know that sex can lead to pregnancy. Having good communication and trust in your sexual partners can go a long ways, but even when everything is being done "right" pregnancy can still happen. Even if a woman says she'd have an abortion if she did get pregnant, that doesn't mean she will follow through. Sex is a risk, don't do it unless you are ready to take the consequences.

If men start caring more about their role in family planning and being more involved and open in the process they can protect themselves from dishonest strangers they probably shouldn't be having sex with anyways.

But if you really got raped by some chick with Viagra, then I feel for you. Some people are just crazy, but we shouldn't build laws around extreme examples of irresponsibility,

Side: No, he shoudn't.
3 points

I believe a large concern in this is that not only does he become an unwilling father but he is also legally liable for this child and especially if married to the woman then legally has to provide for this child through the course of its life. This means food, clothes, school, college, medical bills. Anyone who has children of their own knows how expensive it is to raise a child and it is a commitment you must want to make. It is understandable that the man would not want the child to go to term.

Stipulating a compulsory abortion though opens a whole new can of worms. We aren't just talking about female vs male rights we are talking about an ethical right to life. It is already under huge debate whether or not abortion is ethical and many religious affiliations are trying to put an end to it. In the end we are talking about killing a possible human life form afterall it's not something that can be taken likely.

I believe a better alternative would be to legally annul his responsibilities as father of that child. For example a deceitful woman hoping to make a small fortune from a rich business man by tricking him into fathering her child and then claiming hundreds of thousands in compensation would have wasted her time. I'm not entirely sure of the current lawful responsibilities of a parent, afterall fathers walk out on their families every day, as do mothers but I have heard of women blackmailing the man through a bastard child.

Either way I definitely don't think Abortion helps anything, if not it makes it even more complicated and regretful.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
2 points

The means by which any child is conceived is unimportant.

At the end of the day, that is still a child growing in a womans body.

Yes, it is wrong. Yes, the woman must be psychologically ill.

If the man is concious and has consensual sex with a woman, than he is responsible for the consoquences.

If he can prove that, perhaps he was unconcious and an anal shock was used, than the result should be a choice to not be held responsible for child support.

The choice to abort should, however still remain with the woman. The courts can decide the line at which the male is held responsible.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
Argento(512) Disputed
2 points

The means by which the child is conceived is important because if the conditions are not right, the child is not going to receive normal levels of nurture and love. In this case the man would always look at it as something forced upon him.

In the first few weeks it's not really a child, so there is still time to end a whole snowball effect.

And why is it that everytime we talk about a man's right on a child it always comes down to money (child support). Men are equally tied to their offspring as women. If a woman got pregnant accidentally we give her more rights because its her body. But this is not the same. This is malicious, and yet we allow the woman to troll on everybody else's emotions and rights. It's wrong.

I'm all for forced abortions in this case.

Side: Yes, he should.
Pineapple(1448) Disputed
1 point

Well the reason it comes down to child support is that is the minimum involvement a father has to have with a child. If they want to be in the childs life, great! But that's the line.

If a man wanted to abort a baby, (I'm a woman so this is only my opinion), I would assume he wouldn't want anything to do with the kid. So either you care about it, or you don't.

The means aren't important, in my opinion, because the result is so significant.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
2 points

You take ONE scenario like that and try to justify a man having any right at all in a WOMAN'S decision...Hell no! I'm sorry, but if drunk ass Tony wasn't passed out, he still would have had sex with her so hell no Tony or any of you have any right to even have a SAY in the matter because you know why...you had your chance, your God givin' right, to abort BEFORE you decided to sleep with her with no jimmy...No one's fault but the dumb-ass dog the slept with the triflin' bitch.

Also, since when men truly understand the shit women go through to carry a baby for nine months?...you only get to hear about it, so please don't start to believe you are the pregnant one with all the natural God givin' right. (yes women have rights also)

Besides, men have been deceiving us women for years to get into our pants without a condom on. You all are just mad that woman finally caught on to the foolishness and decided to give you all a taste of your on medicine, you greedy little boys. Stop whining about having to put on your big boy shorts and take on some responsibility.

Side: No, he shoudn't.

Alright, yeah, this is fucked up. But consider the lengths this woman has gone to in order to conceive a child. Taking the child from an already deranged woman is cruel and unnecessary. The woman needs rehabilitation for her actions and some sort of therapy to help her figure out why she feels the need to take such horrific actions.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

A lot of people go to far greater lengths to do less horrible things, and we still stop them and punish them. And you wouldn't be taking "a child" away from her, this is about preventing the child from being formed in the first place.

Having pity for the perpetrator shouldn't be an excuse for completely ignoring the rights and emotions of the victim (in this case, the man).

Side: Yes, he should.

I am absolutely pro-choice and I agree that a foetus is not a child (which is, I think, what you were saying), but as far as I can tell, when a woman who wants to be a mother discovers that she has conceived, the cluster of cells in her womb is immediately her child and she becomes attached to it.

It's a difficult situation. Prevention is best; male birth control may be the best solution.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
wacko(114) Disputed
1 point

Im not sure wether you are for or against the woman being made to have an abortion. It sounds like you are all for it. After all should someone who's considered deranged be allowed to go ahead with it.

Side: Yes, he should.
wacko(114) Disputed
1 point

But you say to throw the woman in jail and ADOPT out the baby OR give her the CHOICE of aborting. Wouldn't this be considered as TAKING AWAY THE CHILD if she doesn't choose the abortion

Side: Yes, he should.
1 point

No, he shouldn't. While I believe that the woman was wrong for tricking the man, I don't believe that abortion is the only option. If the man can provide proof that he has been tricked, he shouldn't be legally responsible to support the child...unless he wants to. Why should the child lose out because his/her mom is a poor decision maker?

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

Abortion is bad and immoral in all cases, ever. If you believe it isn't, then you are an unpatriotic liberal.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

No because a) it's the woman's body and b) abortion is very, very wrong.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

No. Abortion is murder of human life.

Its not the conceived humans fault he was conceived.

Abortion is a convenience for women and men too.

Pretending it is not murder is also a convenience.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

i agree with you its true and we have to face it because Abortion is a convenience for women and men too.

Pretending it is not murder is also a convenience.

Side: Yes, he should.

As long as one parent wants the child, the pregnancy should go to term.

Abortion should only be used in cases where neither parent wants the child.

Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

No he should not.Every matter could be sort out by humbleness and care.

Supporting Evidence: vmware practice exam (www.actual-exams.com)
Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

No not at all, Be patient and be humble to solve out the problems.

Supporting Evidence: hp practice exam (www.actual-exams.com)
Side: No, he shoudn't.
sonamo186(1) Banned
1 point

The personal matters should be sort out by care and respect.You have to understand the feelings of your spouse.

Supporting Evidence: pmp practice exam (www.actual-exams.com)
Side: No, he shoudn't.
1 point

If a man can prove that the woman conceived by deceit he shouldn't have the right to abortion but he should have to pay child support. Unfortunatley, so many men get women pregnant on accident and then try to get out of thier responsibilties as a father and those men have given men in general a bad reputation. However, this is just another example of why men should keep it in their pants and why women should keep their legs closed until they are in a committed relationship, as in "till death do us part."

Side: No, he shoudn't.
lolly90(2) Disputed
1 point

This confuses me. I agree with you about the abortion, it is her body, her right, he consented to sxx with her but should not have to pay child support if she got pregnant on purpose, that is the ONLY reason he should not have to pay and she must take full responsibility but if he is a great guy and wants to help fine but maybe he can help in other ways, like buying the kid/kids stuff when they want it.

Side: Yes, he should.
0 points

As scandelous as the situation is, it's her body, no one ever has any right to decide an abortion one way or another accept the pregnant person I believe. Though he certainly has the right to try and convince her one way or another.

Now child support is a completely different situation. I believe the man should have equal rights in raising the child if he so chooses, and if he wants nothing to do with the situation, should not have to pay any type of child support.

Unfortunately I believe currently the laws would state the objecting father would have to pay for the kid, and if the mother chose, would not have many rights as far as how the child is raised.

These kinds of laws, divorce, custody, child support, while all stemming from altruistic beginnings, have become unjustly slanted toward the woman I think.

Side: No, he shoudn't.