Financial Abortion - Page 9

On September 19 2011 06:24 DoomsVille wrote:
Situation 1:
Man doesn't want child. Woman does. Man pays ~ $300/mth for 20 years.

Situation 2:
Man wants child. Woman doesn't. Woman pays cost of abortion, emotional trauma, body goes through hell. Woman is scorned by friends, family, society.

I think we got a good deal guys. I don't know how you just ignore the non-monetary consequences.

On September 19 2011 07:54 PrideNeverDie wrote:


not all women experience emotional trauma and the ruination of their body. also, a lot of the time, women get an abortion without friends, family, and society finding out. there are women with multiple abortions who keep partying like nothing is out of the ordinary.

On September 19 2011 07:59 Xevious wrote:
wear a condom

On September 19 2011 07:50 TheLOLas wrote:
This article and thought process is completely bullshit. a father should NEVER have to right to walk out on their children regardless of the circumstances. Any man who abandons their children is scum and should be executed immediately. Few people actually think about the child in these cases and i can tell you that being raised without a father is extremely painful. Every child needs a mother AND a father. end of story.

On September 19 2011 08:16 itkovian wrote:
Intuitively, it seems obvious to me that a man can't force a women to get an abortion; likewise a women should not be able to force a man to pay to support for the baby if the man didn't want the child in the first place. So a "financial abortion" in the sense that a man could force a woman to abort to avoid paying child support seems absurd. But at the same time, it would be best for a system to be implemented that would absolve the man from paying support if he did not want the child.

On September 19 2011 08:03 Haemonculus wrote:


I've first hand witnessed a friend go through an abortion. It is *NOT* pretty, and it is not anything a woman would go through lightly.

The reason they would seek one without friends, family, and society finding out s because of how much such a decision is stigmatized. The social backlash you would suffer for such a decision has a major impact on your life.

I'm sure somewhere out there are a few crazies who've had lots of abortions. The number of people who do that is so minute that it's a mere outlier. Again you can't just think up the most ridiculous example, and tout that as reasoning to support any argument.

edit: durrrr i can grammar

On September 18 2011 20:15 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I think imposing to a woman to abort is just monstrous. Not an option.

If a woman lies to get pregnant or anything like that, then maybe we can discuss whether it is the right to the father not to give a pension. But the abortion really is something that should be between the mother's hands, in my opinion.

Most cases you will have an unwanted child, a father who asks for abortion and a mother who refuses. And then, I think if it is not malicious from the mother, the guy just takes his responsibility.

On September 19 2011 08:35 sevencck wrote:
There are two issues here. The first is the relationship between personal freedom and personal responsibility. I've noted numerous comments to the effect that using a condom solves this problem (actually that's totally irrelevant to what's being discussed). If you're in favor of the notion that by taking responsibility you remain in control of your life, however, then I don't see how you can disagree with what OP is saying.

A man who takes responsibility and wears a condom, takes responsibility and tells the woman he isn't ready or willing to be part of an unwanted pregnancy, and takes responsibility and pays for medical costs associated either with an abortion, or for arranging for an adoption is absolutely taking responsibility for his actions.

A man who mistakenly gets a woman pregnant and becomes indebted to her for child support because she decides she wants to keep the baby regardless of his desires is taking responsibility for her actions. There is a very large difference.

@theLOLas: your point is absolutely correct and also totally irrelevant. Children should indeed have a father and a mother, but you can't simultaneously criticize a man who doesn't wish to be a father (thus depriving the child of a father) while at the same time defending a woman who knowingly chooses to be a single mother (because she is doing the same thing -- depriving the child of a father).

The second issue is where moral imperative meets the practical limitations of our society. Casual sex in our society is just that -- casual sex. People need to take responsibility for their actions, but reasonably that can only go so far. Casual sex is not consent to be a parent, nor is it the doorway into financial obligation (particularly in light of the way our culture views sex). Morally this is the most inclusive and self-consistent view. Unfortunately, with the current limited number of practical options for a pregnant woman in our day and age, it is somewhat more difficult to reconcile practicality with moral imperative. Let me put it this way; if there was a fool proof method of contraception or an option similar to abortion but without the negative theological/ethical/physiological implications, noone would feel like they were throwing a pregnant woman under the bus for being pregnant, since it would no longer be a difficult situation.

My point, I suppose, is this. Morally it's not right to expect an unwilling "father" to submit to 20 years of child support for casual sex gone wrong, but due to the practical limitations of our current society its difficult to find a solution that works for everyone.

Edit: I should mention that I don't agree with theLOLas about executing people.

On September 19 2011 08:49 Tor wrote:
Everytime you have sex with your partner you are accepting the risk that you might get the girl pregnant. The reality is, a man opts in to a pregnancy as soon as he has sex with the woman. If you decide you made the wrong decision once your girl gets pregnant, too bad, you wanna opt out you gotta pay the dues. Take responsibility for your actions and accept that you can't force a woman to risk serious side effects both physical and pyschological just because you didn't think ahead about the possible consequences of sex. Most importantly understand that the very act of sex carries a risk of pregnancy and even as a man you're consenting to an equal amount of responsibility should that accidental pregnancy occur.

If you didn't sleep with the girl and she stole your sperm, no problem, you aren't responsible. If the woman raped you and got pregnant that way, no problem, you aren't responsible (and the woman just committed a criminal offense HURRAY!)

For those of you not convinced by this, I assume you believe that a woman choosing not to have an abortion implies that she is choosing to have the child despite your protests. Unfortunately abortion is an intrusive procedure, one that is not actually considered a way out of pregnancy for many women. For instance, women who can not abort for religious reasons cannot even consider abortion as an option, therefor she cannot abandon the child and so the man must not be allowed to abandon the child either. Equally, if the woman is fearing physical side effects such as the proposed theory that abortions cause breast cancer (whether it does or it doesn't) than the woman cannot be treated as having the choice to abandon the child via abortion and therefor the man cannot have the choice to abandon the child. All a woman needs is a single health concern to rule out abortion as a way out of pregnancy (even if the health concern is not absolutely confirmed false). Therefore it is simply best to assume the man consented to the same amount of responsibility over the child as the woman (unless we perhaps devise some wonderful technique of aborting the child with no risk at an early enough stage where no psychological harm can be identified, perhaps something like the morning after pill or a noninvasive alternative that could be invented in the future).

tl;dr? Each person accepts the responsibility of pregnancy at the moment you decide to have sex whether or not you used birth control, because abortion is too invasive to be considered birth control.

On September 19 2011 07:50 TheLOLas wrote:
This article and thought process is completely bullshit. a father should NEVER have to right to walk out on their children regardless of the circumstances. Any man who abandons their children is scum and should be executed immediately. Few people actually think about the child in these cases and i can tell you that being raised without a father is extremely painful. Every child needs a mother AND a father. end of story.

On September 19 2011 06:24 DoomsVille wrote:
Situation 1:
Man doesn't want child. Woman does. Man pays ~ $300/mth for 20 years.

Situation 2:
Man wants child. Woman doesn't. Woman pays cost of abortion, emotional trauma, body goes through hell. Woman is scorned by friends, family, society.

I think we got a good deal guys. I don't know how you just ignore the non-monetary consequences.

On September 19 2011 07:50 TheLOLas wrote:
This article and thought process is completely bullshit. a father should NEVER have to right to walk out on their children regardless of the circumstances. Any man who abandons their children is scum and should be executed immediately. Few people actually think about the child in these cases and i can tell you that being raised without a father is extremely painful. Every child needs a mother AND a father. end of story.

On September 19 2011 08:49 Tor wrote:
Everytime you have sex with your partner you are accepting the risk that you might get the girl pregnant. The reality is, a man opts in to a pregnancy as soon as he has sex with the woman. If you decide you made the wrong decision once your girl gets pregnant, too bad, you wanna opt out you gotta pay the dues. Take responsibility for your actions and accept that you can't force a woman to risk serious side effects both physical and pyschological just because you didn't think ahead about the possible consequences of sex.