What the Babies Would Say

[Wickabee]

wickabee,

I just read through the ohio laws, and the mother does not pay anything for the process of locating a father, paternity tests, nor collections. The state pays for it all and then collects from the father.

Oh I see, so the state pays what the father owes and then goes after the father who now owes them not him?
Because she needs that money now, not when that one guy eventually becomes enough of a priority (or easy enough) for the state to actually go after him.

[Wickabee]

I can agree to have harsher and/or better enforced laws, but saying because 60% of the males are idiots (which the woman chose to have sex with) is a good reason to kill 100% of fetus' via a woman's choice, does not seem very equal for the fetus.

AGAIN, no one is saying it's a good reason, but it is the reason abortion exists and without solving the problem of inequality, banning abortion would be a step backwards.
It also shows that men cannot and should not be trusted. How many said they'd be there forever only to leave the next day? Unfortunately, you're lobbying to trust men and force a decision on women.

so who is more important here, a woman who chose to have sex and is pregnant, a man who chose to have sex and got the woman pregnant, or the fetus which had nor has any choice?

From what I've seen, most here would say the man.

[shrewsbury]

the man has the least rights, so equality would be for giving the male some rights.

man can't be trusted? so if it was the man who got pregnant no issues would exist?

so since he can't be trusted we should allow killing of unborn humans?

and abortion exists because fetus' are not seen as human and some view them as an unwanted inconvenience.

but I do agree a lot of people cannot be trusted to do the right thing, including men

[centrehice]

wickabee,

I just read through the ohio laws, and the mother does not pay anything for the process of locating a father, paternity tests, nor collections. The state pays for it all and then collects from the father.

centrehice,
I can agree to have harsher and/or better enforced laws, but saying because 60% of the males are idiots (which the woman chose to have sex with) is a good reason to kill 100% of fetus' via a woman's choice, does not seem very equal for the fetus.

so who is more important here, a woman who chose to have sex and is pregnant, a man who chose to have sex and got the woman pregnant, or the fetus which had nor has any choice?

I'm not posting male responsibility in regards abortion or it's need. I am responding to veggie in disagreeing with him that the second a woman opens her legs to man, she becomes the more guilty party. My comment was not in play regarding abortion, but in regard to sexual behaviour and responsibility.

I am not saying men are idiots, I am saying that men are not by nature monogamous, and carry on as such, that is why you get such typical lousy situations that women are often put in. Men simply have a primal urge to have sex, then leave.

[shrewsbury]

point taken

[Wickabee]

Jay, why do you think abortion is in the "women's rights" arena and not "children's rights"?

[shrewsbury]

because the fetus is not considered human, so the carrier of the fetus has the choice to kill it, harm it or let it live

[Wickabee]

because the fetus is not considered human, so the carrier of the fetus has the choice to kill it, harm it or let it live

So you think abortion exists because people simply want to kill something not considered human?

[shrewsbury]

they want to rid themselves of something they consider a burden, so they label it as not human to justify it

[Wickabee]

they want to rid themselves of something they consider a burden, so they label it as not human to justify it

So, essentially, they want what men have always had and you think that's wrong.