[Aramike]

Lotsa good posts.

VipertheSniper:

So, if it's financially inconvenient for the man, what is he gonna do? Force her to abort if she wants to keep the baby? And if she doesn't want to carry the child to term, force her to keep it? HUH??? I'd say the decision is entirely up to her.

The legal side of this whole thing might well be relevant to men, but not the physical act, whether it is carried out or not.

I cannot in my right mind differentiate the legal side from the physical side.

Case in point, imagine your father has cancer. Does that cancer only affect him even though the treatments only physiologically affect him?

Max:

I can't really ask myself that question because I don't believe abortion is morally wrong. I just don't like it. I also don't like cosmetic surgery, but I don't think it is morally wrong, and I certainly don't think it should be illegal.

Okay, fair enough - but please validate your reasons for not liking something that you do not believe is morally wrong? I mean, I understand that some people just don't like, say, cake, but a matter of life and death is not a dessert.

But I agree with you on the larger point. I think setting a certain stage of fetal development as the cutoff is a good idea. The heartbeat is a good possibility, the first brain activity is another. I have to confess that I don't know which comes first.

I do give you a lot of credit, Max, as you haven't tried to make the issue one of absolutes. And it is reasurring that you and I, who may be opposed to the morality of the entire issue of abortion, can find a middle ground. In fact, I suspect that we both share the same morality on the issue once a certain stage of development is attained.

But, regardless, I applaud you for not simply seeing the issue as black and white and attempting to find a way to compromise.

August:

Seems to me that there is a lot more to fatherhood than just a "legal side" but be that as it may i'd think that even the legal responsibilities alone are enough to justify a man having some say in this issue.

How about the woman makes the decision but if the man disagrees with it before the fact it absolves him of the legal or financial responsibility? That's fair ain't it?

You understood my point precisely, as usual. Also, you articulated it more clearly than I, as usual. Kudos!

Viper:

Maybe I should've written a longer reply explaining my view better.

You say there's a lot more to fatherhood than just a legal side and I agree with that, but when is an abortion considered mostly? I'd hazard a guess that it's not in situations where a couple is considering to get married because of the pregnancy, is about to get married anyway, or is married (apart from diagnosed birth defects or a child concieved in a rape). And in all those other situation which I didn't mention I think it should be entirely up to the woman to decide if she keeps the baby or not.

That's a pretty biased (and sexist) assumption to base a law upon...

In any case, under your idea of making woman the sole decision-maker when it comes to bringing children into the world, please justify the concept of child support.

For example, let's say a child is the result of an one-night stand. If the woman has the complete decision upon whether or not to bring that pregnancy to term, how can you justify the man being accountable for ANY of the responsibility of that decision?