Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Men Should Be Able To Veto Women's Abortions,' Says Fox News Psychiatrist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Men Should Be Able To Veto Women's Abortions,' Says Fox News Psychiatrist

    This appeared in the Huufington Post today. Not a huge item, but it is definitely something

    'Men Should Be Able To Veto Women's Abortions,' Says Fox News Psychiatrist

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7216150.html
    FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
    It's time to call it out for what it is.
    == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


    The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
    http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

  • #2
    I think the word 'fetus' is obsolete; once an egg is fertilized it's human life whether it's inside or outside. Eventually abortion will be seen for what it is: murder. And I'm not Catholic (or anything actually); it's just common sense.
    Stay single and prosper!

    Comment


    • #3
      Once the artificial womb is up and running, then absolutely the man should be able to decant the fetus out of the female, stick it in a jar, and raise it himself. Till then though it wouldn't be fair to hijack the woman's uterus for 9months against her will. That being said, considering how unfair things are for men now, I wouldn't be at all against sticking it to women a bit until men can get financial abortions on demand and avoid wage slavery for 18+ years at the woman's whim. If "you should have kept it in your pants" is all society tells men when there is an unplanned pregnancy and they don't want to be a father, then it should also be what society tells women when they don't want to be a mom.
      Yes, yes, yes: NAWALT, NAWALT, NAWALT.
      NAZHS (Not all zebras have stripes)
      NACHS (Not all cheetahs have spots)
      NAWIW (Not all water is wet)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Observasaurus Rex View Post
        Once the artificial womb is up and running, then absolutely the man should be able to decant the fetus out of the female, stick it in a jar, and raise it himself. Till then though it wouldn't be fair to hijack the woman's uterus for 9months against her will. That being said, considering how unfair things are for men now, I wouldn't be at all against sticking it to women a bit until men can get financial abortions on demand and avoid wage slavery for 18+ years at the woman's whim. If "you should have kept it in your pants" is all society tells men when there is an unplanned pregnancy and they don't want to be a father, then it should also be what society tells women when they don't want to be a mom.
        From one of my posts here:

        A Modest Proposal - Abortion Rights for Women and Men

        I believe that both men and women have the same right to be or not be parents-- at every step of the process. There is no reason why women have a "right" to abortions, it is simply an affordance made possible through technology and sympathy and concern towards the woman if she chooses not to be a mother. However, our society affords much less concern towards his plight, should he choose not to be a father. And yet, there is no real reason why he cannot be the beneficiary of an abortion as well, if he chooses. It is simply a technological construct which can be successfully applied at the behest of either parent-- if our society were really interested in fairness.

        Considering that the number one reason given by women for having an abortion is "I'm just not ready to be a Mommy right now", why is it that we have sympathy for her and none for him? Isn't he just entitled to an opinion and a choice? Isn't he just as apt to be "finishing up his degree" or "not able to financially support a child right now?" Or "not mature enough to be a parent just yet?" Or any of the other reasons why our society lauds women for their decision to abort their child. When a man walks away from a pregnant woman, he is making the choice to not be a parent in the only form he has available-- it really is analogous to a woman deciding to have an abortion.

        Women say men don't know what it's like to be pregnant-- and that is true-- and yet, when a woman has an abortion, she is no longer pregnant. And further, if the woman is complaining about being pregnant-- which is what the lament suggests-- having the abortion will resolve the issue. Women say that pregnancy is stressful and carries risks for the mother but also they say abortions are safe, effective and when done correctly hardly ever have complications. So having an abortion, if the risks involved in pregnancy are indeed any sort of real concern, will go a long way toward mitigating those risks, regardless of who is the originator of the request.

        There are yet further benefits to this arrangement, no woman will ever need to feel "trapped" or "enslaved" through pregnancy, and no man will ever feel "entrapped" by a woman. Moreover, every child will be born knowing absolutely that they were desired and wanted by both their mother and father-- since both parents had an opportunity to "opt-out". Additionally, there can be no further legitimate reason for fathers (or mothers) to abandon their offspring. If they together chose to bring the child into the world, then they jointly undertook the solemn obligation to love and care for that child, and thus giving even more weight to the State's argument that the parent-- either parent-- can and should be compelled, by force if necessary, to provide for the child. Neither parent could have any credible argument otherwise.

        This outlook is neither a "Feminist" nor a "Masculinist" perspective, but rather a joint "Egalitarian" perspective based on true equality and mutual respect between the parents. Fairness and equity is possible between the sexes, it simply requires that people start listening to one another and looking for cooperative solutions and stop blaming each other for perceived transgressions. Regardless of what was true in the past, the only way to the future is through mutual respect and concern for one another. The only question left really, is when will we all climb onto that bus?
        FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
        It's time to call it out for what it is.
        == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


        The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
        http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

        Comment


        • #5
          look I thing men should definitely be able to opt out financially. Either that or should be entitled to 50/50 access
          But this is a step too far and I would fight against it actively
          Interested in men rights activism in the Sydney area ?
          Go to mensrightssydney.com

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by oldblueeyes View Post
            I think the word 'fetus' is obsolete; once an egg is fertilized it's human life whether it's inside or outside. Eventually abortion will be seen for what it is: murder. And I'm not Catholic (or anything actually); it's just common sense.
            Originally posted by Imdefender View Post
            look I thing men should definitely be able to opt out financially. Either that or should be entitled to 50/50 access
            But this is a step too far and I would fight against it actively



            100%
            The deepest circle of hell is reserved for betrayers and mutineers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Trustory View Post


              100%

              Apart from the idea that "abortion is murder", why should the woman be the only who is permitted to make life or death decisions about an unborn child? Abortion is an artificial construct in any case. If you DON'T permit women to have abortions then the sexes are equal because each has to live with the consequences of their actions. If you DO permit abortions, why should it only be employed at the behest of the mother?

              (I'm ignoring all of the issues regarding rape / incest / health of the mother / blah blah)
              FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
              It's time to call it out for what it is.
              == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


              The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
              http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                Apart from the idea that "abortion is murder", why should the woman be the only who is permitted to make life or death decisions about an unborn child? Abortion is an artificial construct in any case. If you DON'T permit women to have abortions then the sexes are equal because each has to live with the consequences of their actions. If you DO permit abortions, why should it only be employed at the behest of the mother?

                (I'm ignoring all of the issues regarding rape / incest / health of the mother / blah blah)

                Heck, even the Feminists support it...

                End Hyde And Make Abortion Accessible To All

                http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-...b_7232738.html
                FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
                It's time to call it out for what it is.
                == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


                The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
                http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

                Comment

                Working...
                X