Hypothetical. If men could have babies would abortion be legal?

[MissCatholic]

Absolutely. Not only would it be legal, it would also be free.

[nclib]

I once saw a sign at a march that said, "if men could get pregnant, you could have an abortion at Wal-Mart."

[Platypus]

Abortion IS legal.

[Nation]

what is wrong with you?

[jokerman]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

I hate this argument that abortion is just a way of men controlling women (wtf?).

[J. J.]

Abortion IS legal.

That's basically my answer.  I doubt it the law would change.

It wouldn't free, any more than Viagra is free.

[Virginian87]

what is wrong with you?

silly feminist.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As far as I know, abortion is legal in Britain as well

It is; but only until 24 weeks. And there are additional restrictions as well.

[afleitch]

As far as I know, abortion is legal in Britain as well

It is; but only until 24 weeks. And there are additional restrictions as well.

I think you still need a doctors (or possibly two) certification

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As far as I know, abortion is legal in Britain as well

It is; but only until 24 weeks. And there are additional restrictions as well.

I think you still need a doctors (or possibly two) certification

Yep; it's still two doctors. And a valid medical/psychological/etc reason is needed as well.

[YRABNNRM]

Absolutely. Not only would it be legal, it would also be free.

Do you think before you post?

[afleitch]

As far as I know, abortion is legal in Britain as well

It is; but only until 24 weeks. And there are additional restrictions as well.

I think you still need a doctors (or possibly two) certification

Yep; it's still two doctors. And a valid medical/psychological/etc reason is needed as well.

I think thats a good system. I'm not a fan of 'on demand' abortions.

[dazzleman]

what is wrong with you?

^^^^^^^^^

My sentiments exactly.

Men of course control everything, so men fixed things so they can't get pregnant.  Because we control everything, we face no problems or challenges in life.  Everything is perfect for us.

[opebo]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

I hate this argument that abortion is just a way of men controlling women (wtf?).

What do you think it is for, Prude Kramer?  Obviously the control of women and access to their sexuality is one of the primary sources of male power in our society.

what is wrong with you?

^^^^^^^^^

My sentiments exactly.

Men of course control everything, so men fixed things so they can't get pregnant.  Because we control everything, we face no problems or challenges in life.  Everything is perfect for us.

No, fool.  The point is that cures which solve the ailments of the powerful will not be outlawed by those self-same powerful.  Women however are not powerful, and so their freedoms are contingent.

[A18]

Women comprise a majority of the electorate.

[dazzleman]

Women comprise a majority of the electorate.

Oh, but Philip, they're horribly oppressed and can't make their preferences known.  Haven't you figured that out yet?

You touch on a great point by implication.  Women voters are deeply split about abortion, and in terms of supporting versus opposing abortion, there is no real gender gap.  So it appears that a significant percentage of women are opposed to this procedure that is painted by the feminists as one of their most basic 'rights.'

Of course, I could also illustrate the absurdity of the whole question by simply turning the biological aspect around and asking -- if women could get a hard-on in public, would that be something that is celebrated (rather than considered an embarrassment)?

These types of feminazi-inspired questions are absurd.  The ability to get pregnant, versus the inability to get pregnant, is the central difference among men and women.  To ask a hypothetical question about men getting pregnant misses the whole point -- if they could get pregnant, they wouldn't be men.  Just as a person who gets a hard-on can't be a woman.

[Virginian87]

what is wrong with you?

^^^^^^^^^

My sentiments exactly.

Men of course control everything, so men fixed things so they can't get pregnant.  Because we control everything, we face no problems or challenges in life.  Everything is perfect for us.

Damn straight.

[Emsworth]

Obviously, as everyone knows, if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

[dazzleman]

Obviously, as everyone knows, if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

  Yes, Gloria.  Funny thing is, to the radical feminists, it is a sacrament.

[nclib]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

Of course, abortion is legal (and would still be legal if men could get pregnant). In regards to your second point, men would certainly have easier access to abortion. Part (not all) of opposition to abortion is based on lack of respect for women's choices. Most pro-lifers do believe in traditional roles for women.

[dazzleman]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

Of course, abortion is legal (and would still be legal if men could get pregnant). In regards to your second point, men would certainly have easier access to abortion. Part (not all) of opposition to abortion is based on lack of respect for women's choices. Most pro-lifers do believe in traditional roles for women.

What choices, if any, do you think men should have?

[nclib]

The ability to get pregnant, versus the inability to get pregnant, is the central difference among men and women.

The problem with this statement is that many women (in fact all women above a certain age) are unable to get pregnant and are still classified as women.

[nclib]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

Of course, abortion is legal (and would still be legal if men could get pregnant). In regards to your second point, men would certainly have easier access to abortion. Part (not all) of opposition to abortion is based on lack of respect for women's choices. Most pro-lifers do believe in traditional roles for women.

What choices, if any, do you think men should have?

In regards to abortion, or in general?

[dazzleman]

#1 Abortion is legal
#2 Actually, I think it would be more heavily restricted than it is today

Of course, abortion is legal (and would still be legal if men could get pregnant). In regards to your second point, men would certainly have easier access to abortion. Part (not all) of opposition to abortion is based on lack of respect for women's choices. Most pro-lifers do believe in traditional roles for women.

What choices, if any, do you think men should have?

In regards to abortion, or in general?

Both.  Because it seems to me that in all this talk about women's choices, it has largely been ignored that men often have few choices.

While Betty Friedan and her sisters were whining about being imprisoned in their sterile, upper middle class homes, how many men went to work every day at jobs they hated in order to support their families?

What choices did these men have?  I get sick and tired of hearing all this one-sided whining, with no credit given to men for the sacrifices that they/we have made for our families.  In certain marriages, women had by far the better deal.  In other cases, not.

I recognize the weaknesses of women being in traditional roles -- primarily economic dependency, which can be dangerous in an age of throwaway marriages.

What were men's choices in the past, and what are they today?  Basically, they are the same -- get out and work.  Only now, men are expected to contribute more to the home, too.  In some ways, this too is good.  More father involvement is great, assuming there's one in the home, but we shouldn't expect fathers to be second mothers, another feminist mantra, or do half the housework if he's working more than half the combined hours, which is usually the case.

And if a wife wants out of a marriage for whatever reasons today, men's choices and rights with respect to their children are severely circumscribed.  Wives often use their children as instruments of control against their estranged/former husband, denying him the right to visit his kids and be involved in their lives with little intervention from the judicial system.

And on abortion -- of course, the man has no say, but he must abide by the woman's decision regardless.  I have less sympathy for a man in this situation, since I think it is irresponsible to impregnate a woman outside a committed relationship.  Still, the legal inconsistency is glaring.  When it comes to paying for the baby, the man is considered an equal, if not dominant, parent.   But when it comes to determining the fate of his baby, he is nothing.  Even if he's willing to raise his baby himself, the baby's mother is allowed to abort it.  On the other hand, he must pay child support for 20 years is SHE decides to have the baby.

I know you'll come up with some twisted justification for all this from the NOW playbook, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

[dazzleman]

No, fool.  The point is that cures which solve the ailments of the powerful will not be outlawed by those self-same powerful.  Women however are not powerful, and so their freedoms are contingent.

I guess the discrimination against powerless women that exists in the medical field explains why they live 8 years longer, on average, than men.  I'd hate to say how they'd have to be treated to have an equal, or shorter, lifespan.