http://www.slate.com/id/2199258

this kinda things get me all hot and bothered...so thought i'd put it here and see what others thing...even though i'm sure it will degrade into either a massive flame war or a thread about sex in some means...but whatever!!!it will be fun none-the-less

Being born & raised Catholic, I really don't like abortion... but because of my scientific nature I certainly respect that women should have control over their own bodies. Plain and simple, people who are old enough to have a child should be intelligent enough to know if you're capable of caring for one. Bringing a child into the world when you yourself are only 15 years old is fucking absurd and one of the most infuriating things for me. 100 years ago, being married & having kids at the age of 17 wasn't out of the ordinary... but they were capable of caring for the children & raising them properly. I could go on and on about this stuff, but I really only hate talking about 2 things... religion & politics. Both are surefire ways to get into fights with family & friends.

it's a fun topic becucase everyone has their own views that stem directly from how they were raised...so i find it fun ^^

me, personally, am pro choice...however...i can't decided where the choice actually lies...me and my gf discussed thsi over lunch today...

she said the woman has all the choice...becuase it's her body, she is effected the most...i can agreed with the fact that it does effect her more...but...it also takes 2 to tango as teh saying goes...and to me, letting someone sleep with you kinda gives them a right to have their opinion weighed in as well should the pregnancy happen...after all...it is the mans child as well...but again...the woman bears the "burden"...it was a very fun thing to debate ^^

we also found it very interesting (at the end of the article) when they quoted palin and mccan saying "I" and "we"...making it seem like they actually have a say in it...well...they do have a say in it...which i think is part of the problem...but that leads to another can of worms...

if the kid keeps it, and the parents don't want them to: it will more then likely become a burden on the parents...they will end up taking some of the financial, emotional, and physical burden...is that far on the parents???is it right that parents feel the need to support a young mother/father/family???are they obligated to do so (socially, morally)???

if the parents demand the kid keeps it: then it become a life long burden on the kid...they can potentially lose out on so much...school, a higher paying job, being a kid...yadda yadda...was the decision of the parents really in the best interested of the kid???or did they allow their "sense of right" overcome the idea of what is actually best???

imo, its very cool stuff to talk about...gets ya thinking!!!and also frustarting...cause idk where i stand on the idea...i can see it from both sides...i guess it just comes down to what the total situation is

It's funny how someone who writes an article like that doesn't even seem to realize how much responsibility they're attempting to shirk.

It's as if there should be no difficult choices in life. Your kid went and screwed somebody and she's pregnant. No, we don't think you as a parent should have a say in it, because unlike getting their ears pierced, this decision is too important for a parent's judgment. Oh, wait.

You're the parent. You're responsible for guiding this still-child person into adulthood. They went and screwed around and now they want to erase their mistake fast food style. It's a decision they'll carry with them for the rest of their lives and they have to make it at age 17. And the person writing this article is in la la land attempting to believe that they'll somehow make the right one alone. At age 17. After being proved to be at least stupid enough to get pregnant unintentionally.

This particular writer is a mountain of logic, to be certain.

While there's certainly more that could be said and more points that could be made, I'm going to have to side largely with what I hear you saying, Matt. I don't think there's ever going to be a single hard and fast rule that somehow manages to capture the best in what is by definition a bad situation. However, what should the rule be? I think it should be whatever puts control into the hands of the people with whom the decision ultimately lies. As unfortunate as these situations are, the people who are going to be unavoidably, directly given responsibility for the action are the young potential parents. The decisions should lie with them, and ultimately with no one else. They'll probably fuck it up more often than not, but that's why we have Darwin.

My short answer to this is: My body, my choice. Though, the debate is much more complicated than that.

While I can see the arguments to the parents having a say in the issue - comparing that to ear piercing is completely frivolous. For one thing, you can take the damn things out. But, no matter what the parents say/do, it's still that poor underaged girl that's going to largely have to deal with the consequences - it only makes sense that her opinion should matter more.

As for the whole idea of the legality of abortions. If anyone's taken Greek or Roman history - then you know that ppl were performing them all the way back then - obviously with very different methods. The fact is, illegal or not, women/girls are going to have them. Wouldn't we rather that it was safely with a doctor? And that help from counsellors was available?

i like the posts already!!! ^^

raz got me thinking...and the choice shoudl be rested solely on the soon-to-be mother...however...as you said yourself...it's the parents job to "guide" the child...guide doesn't mean, force/demand though...the parents, imo, should help the child come to their own decision...lay out what will happen on both sides of the coin...inform them...allow them to make this important decision on their own...but, and it's a big but, give them the knowledge that allows them to make the correct, and informed, decision that best fits them

my question to heather...why doesn't the male get any say???after all, it is HIS child...he has absolutly no say in what happens with it???and does that then flow into actual child birth and rearing???does the fact that a woman has to actually have the child trump any opinoins and "rights" the father has???

something else i just thought of...if it's "your body, your choice"...why then...if you make the choice to keep the baby...why then is that choice forced on the man???he is forced, by law, to pay child support...but what if it wasn't his choice to keep the baby???shouldn't the woman be shit out of luck by the "my body, my choice" rule???is was your choice to keep it, not mine, it's your problem

so...back to the original question...if the woman decides to ditch the baby w/o the males concent or just flat out ignoring his opinion...shouldn't she then be required, by law, to pay the male "lack of child support" (couldn't think of a more witty name)???

^^

While I agree that the men get the shorter end of the stick on this one. When you have sex with someone - you must know that, no matter what precautions are taken - there is a risk of pregnancy. Unless the guy wants to get his tubes tied, it's not like you don't know there's a chance that something could happen.

And, unfortunately, as biology works out, it's still the woman who actually has to carry the fetus to term and, let's face it, push a watermelon through her nostrils. The physical effects on her body are long term and permanent.

However, part of the difference is the rights of the child versus the rights of the mother. The child doesn't have rights until it is born (well, really starting in the third trimester, but you get what I mean). The support the father pays is not for the mother, but for that child.

I'm going to split it down the middle on this one. I think the idea that the parents should have any final say is ridiculous. It simply is not their decision to make. However, I wouldn't have a problem with making the decision a bit more difficult to make in the absence of parental consent. It could be something as simple as a form to fill out voiding the rights of the parents to have a say. I would tend to think that the parents should at least get a head nod. Still, it's not a sticking point.

I'm going to call the whole "only the woman's choice" thing damn close to a sticking point, though. That's the reverse of giving the parents a say, and it's just as stupid. If you're going to impose "Long term, permanent" consequences on the male in the form of child support, it's rather ludicrous not to give him a say possessed by his partner. The arguments upthread cut rather elegantly both ways when speaking of why it should be the woman's sole choice. The guy's on the hook too, and his decision was no more or less wrong or bad than his partner's was. Give him a say.

i don't see how this is relavent at all...maybe i'm just missing your point...cuase the girl knows this full well ahead of time just as well...so...idk how this works lol



what about the long term mental and emotional stress the male could have knowing that his child was "killed"???you don't think that could be an monumental emotional burden to bear???knowing your child was taken from you w/o having any choice in the matter???always thinking about what could have been???

Since I found this article, I figured this would be a good thread to post it in. I really understand where he's coming from... so give it a read and let me know what you think.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=5886592&page=1

I think he's kinda pushing Darwin in everyone's faces... but then again, the country isn't getting any smarter now...

I started typing something up but it'll take too long, I'll try later

I agree with Hier's article.

You want your food stamps, tie your ovaries and snip your balls. You can still fuck you just won't wreck the world doing it.

Blah blah blah, they have a right to bear children! They have a right to get off their asses and get a job so my taxes don't end up paying for their children! And don't give me this "It's hard to find a job" crap! There's always some shit job out there that needs doing, they'd just rather not. Maybe if the welfare system was worse than the job they'd have a reason to go to work.

It's not like the world is about 2x it's max capacity for humans or anything like that... We could stand to lose a few billion people!

Oh and for the original article, yea the parents should be involved. Maybe have a mentoring program or something in place for anyone having an abortion whos under 21 years old. For people having sex changes they have to go through like 5 steps that last a few years before being able to have the surgery because its so life altering, I'd say abortion would rank up there in life changing events. A similar process could be put in place for young people looking for abortions, only with a faster process obviously.

"Ok your 5 year counseling is done, you can have your abortion!"

If you have children, you incurred those costs of your own volition, through choices you, personally, made. What I have a problem with now is that though you made those decisions for yourself, greater society then has an obligation to help you defray those costs if you can't meet them.

Why should your self-incurred costs be society's burden?

another very interesting article...i have to agree with what jon said

i hate the welfare system becuase, imo, it seems to promote and reward poverty striken families...oh, your poor, and have kids...here's some money to help you out...oh, you had more kids???have some more money to support the extra burden...um...you're rewarding the wrong behavior!!!

about a month aga my gf was telling me she saw this young couple (early 20's)...they had 3 kids...with one in the oven...and they were paying with food stamps...now, what is wrong with this picture???don't you think that someone should step in and say..."you know...you can't even support the family you have...you shouldn't be adding more to it"...then of course...they add that shit that "but it's my right to have children, you can tell me not too"...then the goverment shoudl just say, "you're right, it is your right to have children...but it's always our right to not give you any assitance" and then, cut all finacial assitance...from health care, to food stamps, welfare...etc...

now...there are definitly people who use the system for what it is meant for...and it should stay for those poeple...but imo, the majority of the people who use it, aren't