I agree with the fact that it's a womans right to chose what goes on in her own body...to an extent. I also dont think it should be totally up to the woman. Just because some men are not responsable you can't assume every man is. It's my belief that woman dont want to or are not ready to be a parent just as much as a man. Especially at 1st sign of pregnancy. Some men like myself are excited about being a father. The father should have a choice. Before you say "but it's growing inside her" . It has to be mutual to have intercourse so i believe the choice on having the child should be mutual to the father as well. I would love to know your opinion.

I also would like to know how to get people (family mostly) to say i don't care about politics it won't matter what i say anyway.

I'm a recent listener to your radio show and i downloaded your app after only 2 days of listening.

Thank you, Corey

Comments

Bayhuntr's picture
Bayhuntr 3 years 23 weeks ago
#1

I hear this argument again and again from the right, I don't know if they are just dense or dishonest, "We spent the Social Security Surplus" The Republican, x-governor of New Mexico, on the show today said the same thing. BS! The money in the SS trust fund was not spent, it was invested, it's not worthless IOU's; in reality a ten dollar bill is an IOU, a share of Microsoft is an IOU, a mortgage is an IOU. Billions in Treasury bonds are held by the rich are IOU's, do you think they would have them if they were worthless, they are backed by the same thing the SS "IOU's" are backed by, America.

Think about ING, where my company has it's 401K, what if ING's management raided the money to to give themselves billions in raises and benefits, to the point, that there was not enough to pay me and my coworkers INVESTMENT back. They would say Microsoft stock held at ING has no value, just worthless IOU's, but at the same time Microsoft stock held outside of ING, by the wealthiest, is just fine. Would you be OK with it? Apparently, if you're on the right you would be. I personally think they should be tossed in jail for the rest of their lives and everything they own turned over to the people they wronged. Those tax breaks for the rich, that the rich paid all those lobbyist and politicians and buying of supreme court judges to get? They are robbing us, our children and grandchildren blind.

Joe Phillips LCSW's picture
Joe Phillips LCSW 3 years 23 weeks ago
#2

A thought just hit me. Does the army pay for abortions for women on active duty. I looked it up. No. Only in life threatening situations. Well...there is public funding for abortion in some circumstances. But, that means if a woman is captured in combat, tortured, raped, and impregnated, she would have to pay for the abortion out of her own pocket. Why can't we say that when the right is throwing this wedge issue around?

Zenzoe 3 years 23 weeks ago
#3

I fail to see what Bayhuntr's comment has to do with this blog post.

I also fail to understand why could-be-fathers should be entitled to an equal opinion, where they have merely contributed sperm for the fertilization of an ovum. Their bodies are not involved in a biological transformation of profound complexity and significance; their lives are not necessarily to be potentially damaged, nor affected positively, in any way, certainly not to the degree of that to be experienced by a pregnant woman.

Certainly, given that a woman’s decision to take a pregnancy to full term might result in a father’s being forced by the courts to provide child support, the father should be heard and considered by the mother. But his objections to her choice, one way or the other, should never outweigh her interests, given that to do so places her in the position of slave, either to biology, or to the forces that would remove a woman’s right to choose for herself what is to be done with her own body (“forces”—the father or law).

What many anti-abortion folks don’t understand, or are unwilling to hear, is that abortion is regulated by law already. It is only freely optional during the first trimester. After that, there are restrictions. Once a fetus is viable, the ethics of abortion become more complex—there, the fetus does deserve extra consideration.

The Young Man says, "It has to be mutual to have intercourse so i believe the choice on having the child should be mutual to the father as well." I would suggest, yes, it is mutual to have intercourse, but for many folks engaging in sex, the mutual agreement is NOT to make a baby; rather, such is the last thing on their minds. Thus, you cannot argue that the potential father equally owns the result—he was disinterested in pregnancy to begin with, and so he should be consistently disinterested in the choice to abort or not to abort. The consequence did not happen to him. All the more reason to use contraceptives and be damn sure you wish to be associated with the results of sex with your "partner."

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Currently Chatting

Community Archive

The Real Carbon “Monster” Revealed

Another day, another stupid assault on the truth by the fossil fuel industry and its paid lackeys. In a recent op-ed for the New York Post, Tom Harris, the executive director of the so-called International Climate Science Coalition -- an organization that’s funded, in part, by the fossil fuel industry -- blasted Leonardo DiCaprio for his work on “Carbon,” a new documentary on climate change that I helped write and present.