If a woman can abort a pregnancy without the father's consent, can a man have the right to abort a pregnancy without the mother's consent? Because that would also be equal rights.
@jdoodle, it's a toughy. It's the women's body but also literally half the man's baby
@jdoodle, I guess it depends on the circumstance. If it's between two people that want to stay together, I say it should be both the mans, and the women's consent, since they both have an equal interest in the outcome. While a girl who gets pregnant, and the male figure leaves, and wants no responsibility for the child; then I would say it's the women's choice. It's a touchy subject.
@jdoodle, yeah it depends. I honestly say the woman has more say since she has to grow and birth the damn kid, but if the man wants the child and has the means to raise them, i'd say he should have a voice on the subject
@jdoodle, im a woman and I do think a man should have a say, especially if he doesn't want the child. If you don't agree to the abortion then bye bye child support. Women have manipulated men this way for far too long. We have too many people on this planet, you should get a tax break for having an abortion.
@jdoodle, I was gonna be offended but it makes pretty great sense, if you look away from the fact that it's forcing an operation on a woman unwillingly, and that the woman gets psychologically bound to the kid, it's a huge press and stress on the woman because of the huge flow of hormones. Also, if you dont want kids, don't come in a woman, the man has the power, worst case you can force regretion pill in her.
@Awesome Naked Taco, Also, i agree, under some circumstances the man is left helpless and deserves a say. The problems is, that many men changes their mind because they dont want to pay for the mistake they made, and if they had a word, it could ruin more lives than help, as in a 90/1 ratio.
@jdoodle, even if a man wants a baby, if he doesn't communicate with his girl before he has sex with her, then gets her pregnant I don't think he has the right to force her to carry the child to term tho. Because in the end it is the woman's body and a man has to be clear whether he wants a child or not beforehand
@jdoodle, it should also be legal if the man wants her to get an abortion but she wants to keep it he should not be responsible for child support
@TheSecretSavage, I know I'm oversimplifying a very complicated issue just to make a counterpoint to a feminist perspective.
@Baby Cthulhu, I know I'm oversimplifying a very complicated issue just to make a counterpoint to a feminist perspective.
@Dexios S Divine, I know I'm oversimplifying a very complicated issue just to make a counterpoint to a feminist perspective.
@jouze, we're not talking about the woman's body, it's about the baby's body. The woman can do whatever she wants with her body.
@Oujosh29, but it is the woman's body who supports and provides for the baby, and you can't legally force someone into a medical procedure, even to save a life. Let me ask you can the government force you to give blood? To donate organs? No. So they shouldn't be able to force you to support another life for 9 months
@Baby Cthulhu, yep. That's where you hit the nail on the head. There are WAY too many situations for abortion for it all to be encompassed under 1 law. Therapeutic abortions (where the baby won't live outside the womb, baby is killing mother, etc) are just as illegal as consented abortions and also rape abortions. The spectrum of abortion situations is entirely too large to encompass under one law and/or belief
@jouze, why not? The government forces the parents to support and take care of the child till they are 18. The first duty of the government is to protect its citizens, there shouldn't be an exemption because a mother doesn't want to bother with their unborn baby. Regardless, it's not about the mothers body, it's about the babies.
@Oujosh29, financial support is different than medical support. And you ignored my question. Can the government force you to give blood or donate organs? Would you be ok if there was a government mandate to donate blood every month?
@jouze, no,however that a deflection because it's not the same thing. Me giving or not giving blood doesn't end someone's life. An abortion does. The government already does restrict what people do with their bodies. I can't legally sell an organ, women can't drink alcohol or do drugs while pregnant with breaking the law, and I can't end my own life if I wanted. Why should the government let mothers end their unborn babies lives just because they don't want them?
@Oujosh29, but it kind of does. If a person does not have enough blood or an organ during an operation they die (it happens still commonly). Because what a mother does for her baby is give blood, nutrients, protection, among other things. And the assisted suicide is another deflection as well. But I do agree if a woman decides to carry a child she shouldn't be doing things that harm it. But she also should be able to chose at first to carry it
@jouze, it's not the same thing. You are talking about the government forcing someone to take an action because it might indirectly help someone "for the greater good". Abortion is when a mother directly ends the life of her unborn baby. Not the same.
@Baby Cthulhu, not trying to start a political fight but curious. Those who are pro-choice, do the rights of the unborn child matter? Do you consider the unborn child to have rights?
@jdoodle, as someone who has dealt with this, I'm glad it's being brought into light.
@Oujosh29, but a woman carrying a child is an action. Like you said during the pregnancy she can not drink or smoke. She most times is unable to work after a certain point. She has to maintain different dietary standards to support the extra metabolic need, and she has to restrict most daily activities that are too physical. In reality carrying a child requires a lot more action on the woman's part than say donating blood or signing the organ donation box on your driver's license form
@jouze, that's true, but forgive me I don't really get why that's relevant. Carrying the baby to term won't be comfortable for the woman, but human life shouldn't be ended for the sake of someone's convenience,just like a mother shouldn't be allowed to "abort" her one year old even though taking care of a baby can be very demanding.
@Oujosh29, that's obviously true and clearly a deflection, of course an abortion can't be chosen part way through carrying for convenience it must be decided upon immedistely after the discovery of the pregnancy. It's relevant because at the first moment it should be an option that a woman has at that point to not go through with the whole "procedure" if you will
@jouze, it's not a deflection because abortion doesn't have to happen at the beginning. It depends on the state, but some allow late term abortions.
@RogueKnight, I believe that the mother's rights supersede that of the foetus until it is capable of surviving outside of the womb, by extension if the foetus is at that stage however it is dying or hasn't developed a brain it is kinder to terminate the pregnancy rather than inflict psychological damage on the mother
@LeafOnTheW1nd, thank you for posting your perspective and belief on the subject. Much appreciated.
@TheSecretSavage, and you know, 100% the baby's body.
@RogueKnight, i don't consider a fetus to be a person until it's potentially viable outside the womb, which is about 23 weeks.
@LeafOnTheW1nd, i agree with you entirely
@Ruupasya, thank you for your response. Follow-up question for you based on your answer. If someone murders a pregnant woman, in many states the suspect is charged for two murders. Assuming you agree with that, should the suspect only be charged for two murders if the fetus was viable outside the womb?
@RogueKnight, the murder should never be charged with 2 murders because there's no way of knowing that the fetus would have successfully made it to term. maybe 1 murder & 1 manslaughter, that seems more fair.
@Ruupasya, fair enough.
@Oujosh29, that is something I don't entirely agree with, obviously people should get a short period to decide when they find out and some people find put later. But once you begin to carry you shouldn't be able to go back for convenience like you said. But there should be an option to not begin the process once you find out. This may be something I change with more info but yeah late term abortions to go further into a gray area
@TheSecretSavage, i put my DNA in there for storage and she threw it out on the streets like if it was on a used kleenex
@RogueKnight, but women have rights as well, I guess we could just grow them as test tube babies. Also why add more children when there are so many in foster care. Like why not take care of the kids that are actually here first.
@TheSecretSavage, the baby isn't actually part of a woman's body though so to say that it is her body and therefore her choice is kind of insane. Yes, her body is hosting the baby but I don't see why that gives her any more say than the man.
@TheSecretSavage, but only half the chromosomes needed for a baby vs all the time and energy needed to actually grow the thing plus the pain of having to birth it. Kinda skews the scales in the womans favour a bit
Men can't back out of pregnancies, they can back out of fatherhood, but not pregnancies
@Oreobunbun, that's called pulling out if I'm not mistaken though I've heard some men are lacking the game needed to achieve it properly.
@Runnin with scissors, rofl
@Runnin with scissors, pulling out is also known as "Vietnam" because America "pulled out"
Do you want to sound racist because that's how you become racist
@Craigslist, well... statistically not wrong.
@Craigslist, plus it's a joke. On. Joke app.... so... being racist doesn't matter. It's just funny.
@Craigslist, yeah. Racist jokes are ok. But not when killing or politics are involved
@ThaSmoothieKing, I heard that 75% of black American children grow up without fathers. I'm not sure if this is true, but if it is, definitely not statistically wrong!
@Craigslist, It's just a joke! It's hilarious one at that! Given the fact that 70% of black children grow up without dads, there's some truth to it which makes it funny.
@merimar3, There is a statistic that says about 70% of black children do grow up fatherless. It's true. Also, blacks are only 12-13% of the population, but make up 50% of the prison population.
@ThaSmoothieKing, black fathers at more likely to leave their kids because poor people are more likely to leave their kids and black people are disproportionally more likely to be poor because of past inequality that has not yet stabilized into equality.
Men who leave are forced to pay for child care until the kid is 18, so they don't really get out of it.
@AmazingLife, not if they give up all their rights to the kid unfortunately :/
@AmazingLife, I've been paying child support for over 10 years. I kicked my ex out cause I caught her cheating. She took her kids and my son and left for Sydney. I haven't seen my son in over 10 years. He's 17 in May. Last I talked to my son was 2 years ago. He wanted an Xbox one and I said no. Ask mum. I'm buying a house which will be yours when I die. And Cause I pay child support. He said he had asked her and she always said "I will buy you something when some money comes in from dad" he's never gotten anything. When he's 18 child support stops. But I will never know if he wants to see his dad :(
@AmazingLife, not all men, not causing an argument here I'm just saying that what you've said isn't fully factual & even less so if the women don't put their names on the birth certificates... but it's all messed up anyways.
@AmazingLife, even if these men do pay child support depending on the state and how the law is set up they may be paying almost nothing. I only get $332 a month and my daughter is on my insurance and i pay full daycare. Then the state gives him all month to pay it so he waits until the very end of the month which messes me up for the month because the bills are due at the beginning. The only time the woman truly gets the long end of the stick is if it's support after a divorce. Other single moms are usually always getting the greater burden unless they get knocked up by an athlete or celebrity. That's why I'm a string advocate now to girls younger than me to just wait until marriage. It's not worth it! Just wait! It's not that fun anyway plus society judges you for being a single a mom when you work your ass off everyday to make ends meet and sacrifice so much. But God forbid there's a single dad out there and he's freaking Saint Teresa! Sorry off my soapbox now.
@TheMasterBaiter, Yo, I'm saying this as a guy who went without having contact with his dad through all of high school, he will definitely want to see you again. Not much can keep a kid from wanting to hang out with his dad. Call him up sometime, for reals.
@BJ Savage, I just chocked on my spit when i read your name, Bj savage whos a single mom XD. I have no problem with casual sex, sex really isn't that big a deal to treat it like it's something you only open once a month or something, its healthy to have an active sex life. But do it with contraceptive, and if he starts asking to do it raw, you start asking him if he wants to pay for a kid. I'm pro choice, and pro-lifers keep thinking abortions are for "sluts", but its not. There will be some, but i'm sure no one treats abortions like a condom, using it without a second thought. Its always used way more for when the mother has to have one, not when they want to have it cuz they want to keep fücken. I'd also like some more help for single moms from guys who ditch em, but i can never come up with anything that can't be abused. Hope you and your kid do well.
@Dexios S Divine, thank you and i agree there are always some who will want to abuse the system. And how many times must i explain to you people! My real legal name is BJ Savage! I'm a black girl, University of Alabama graduate, momma just trying to get people to realize I'm a real person. This is my name! BJ FREAKING SAVAGE! And my daughter is doing wonderfully. She's 18 months and super smart anx auch a sweetheart. She's my morning sunshine. 😊
@Hoenheim, giving up their rights doesn't effect child support. They still have to pay till the kid is 18.
@TheMasterBaiter, Not to be insensitive or anything but you should have knocked up someone who would cheat on you while having a kid and then leave you unable to see you kid. Child support isn't at all enough to run a familiy, and you should have kept the connection to you child, not accept your fate. No matter if you think you're gonna fail or not, you're right.
@Oujosh29, maybe in your state, but where I'm from if they give up all legal rights and visitation they pay nothing.
@Hoenheim, what state do you live in
@Hoenheim, not completely true. Men usually will get sued into paying it. They can fight it, sure, hit they'll usually lose. A lot of times men are stuck paying child support for kids they want to but will never see because the mom won't let them. I've had friends forced to live with alcoholic or abusive moms who can't live with a dad who loves them because it's just not their choice. 100% parenthood disputes unfairly favor moms
@KingHamletsGhost, dude I just said it may be different where you live. Didn't say that was the case everywhere, so chill. And in Georgia that is very much the case, whether there actually be a law or not I've watched people give up all rights and visitation and courts do nothing to them.
@Hoenheim, A) I was completely chill. B) I was reading your first comment, "so chill" C) "visitation" has nothing to do with child support. You can have no visitation rights and still have to pay child support.
There are absolutely ways to get it of child support, say another person adopting the baby - I don't live in Georgia but I highly doubt a father could just say "lol nope" and not have to pay; then no one who didn't want the child would chose to pay child support, so there'd really be no point in having those laws
@KingHamletsGhost, so you don't even read everything posted before putting your unwarranted and unproven opinion. And yes they sign their rights away they don't just say nope. Are you 12? Bc you're logic is awful. And wow you don't live in Georgia either, but you're trying to tell how laws work here. So please don't try me again.
@Hoenheim, It's a frigging iPhone app dude chill the fvck out.
@KingHamletsGhost, exactly what I was about to tell you, but also thanks for basically admitting I was right haha
@Hoenheim, ??? I was calm this entire time, you're the one who freaked out when strangers on an app told you you were wrong. If you're 100% sure you're right move on with your life. Goodbye bud, have fun with you're...whatever
@TheMasterBaiter, my parents divorced when I was 2 and my father couldn't afford to drive to see me when I was 13 and I was angry at him and refused to talk to him. When I turned 18 he was the reason I finally worked to get my drivers license and the 1 week before I could take my road test he died. I tried to see my father when I reached a point of my life where I started understanding why he didn't see me. Even with all his flaws my mom had told me about him. Hopefully one day he'll come to see you no matter what has happened.
World War II was one of the most atrocious periods in human history when approximately 60 million people were murdered. Since Roe vs Wade, approximately 60 million *lives* have been murdered in the United States alone. Why is this even a discussion anymore? One child gets killed and people lose their minds over it, but this carnage continues and is endorsed by many of the same people. Frankly, I am sick of it. I have a precious 5-year old Goddaughter. She is adopted. For her birth mother, abortion was an option that wasn't used. Thankfully. I can't imagine the joy of life that little girl spreads all around on a daily basis being nullified at the very start. Sorry to rant in your funnies. I wish they would keep controversial topics out of Funny Pics. I come here to escape it. I realize by posting this, I am essentially part of the problem, but I couldn't let it be.
@PloppyPants, I think that abortion is an important topic that needs to discussed. In the spirit of discussion, I think that it's probably fair to call very late term abortion murder, on the other hand a fertilized egg doesn't know it's alive and can't want to be alive. It's unreasonable to declare that the potential for human life is the same as human life. Is protected sex murder too? Things just spiral out of control when moral judgements include "what if". I think a large part of the problem is that pro life people think the debate is about murder and pro choice people think it's about a woman's control of her body. There's no engagement. It's not that they don't care about the other side's issue, but that they aren't even engaging it intellectually.
@PloppyPants, because the issue is the legal right to your own body. My question to you to parallel the abortion issue is could we legally force you into a medical procedure? Say you were in a hospital for a routine procedure and suddenly a man came in needing part of a liver immediately or he will die (obviously work around for this but for that case of the scenario just imagine it's an immediately needed procedure). The doctors find out your the only person in the hospital capable of donating to save this person's life. Ignoring whether or not you should, if you didn't want to should the government be able to force you to carry out a medical procedure to save the life of another?
@ReeseBobby, I respect your point of view and welcome any discussion that doesn't involve shouting. To respond, your sentence, "A fertilized egg doesn't know it's alive" actually makes my point. It is a life. Trying to debate this is merely fooling one's self. Protected sex isn't murder, it is merely the prevention of creating life. Much like driving carefully isn't an accident until there's an actual crash. I believe that many people have abortions to eradicate a mistake or accident. I also believe many people do so with a heavy heart. Perhaps murder is a harsh word that detracts from a valid point, but when one believes that from the earliest points of conception that a future human life, is in fact, a life, then one is doing nothing short of killing a human that is incapable of defending itself. I am actually a "liberal", though in the minority of liberals with this point of view. I believe in many rights for all. I don't believe that anyone reserves the right to purposely end life.
@PloppyPants, I think that saying a fertilized egg is a life is a poor way to define life. I mean if a single cell counts as a life then washing your hands is genocide. I think there's a distinction between technically "alive" like the bacteria on your hands and "human life" like a newborn or fetus. Killing a zygote is functionally identical to washing your dishes. That said this is the debate worth having, "what is a human life?" rather than "is a woman's right to chose more important that someone else's right to be alive?" It's nice to actually discuss important things in a civil manner for once.
@ReeseBobby, When life becomes life is an interesting discussion. I think comparing a fertilized egg to bacteria is by far a skewed argument. Bacteria, or any other single-celled organisms are nothing more than that. A human is in it's growing stages from the very beginning. When the baby leaves it's mother's womb, it is not a fully developed human. It takes years. Same thing as the nine months prior. It develops. A fertilized egg is a developing human from the very start. If I gave you two seeds and told you that one would grow into a tree that gave you a dollar and that one would grow into a tree that gave you a trillion dollars, which one would you keep and treat like the most important thing you possess? One seed is virtually useless, while human life is the seed that grows into something special that you would protect from the very start. Nobody in their right mind would discard a seed that when nurtured would provide a trillion dollars. Nobody should discard a human.
@PloppyPants, that is a fair point but in my mind murder is wrong not because life has some intrinsic value, but because it hurts other people. I evaluate everything by asking if it causes more suffering in the world. An egg can't suffer and while sure we are preventing someone from living means we lose that trillion dollars, it doesn't cause anyone any harm. (Unless it's a late term abortion)
@ReeseBobby, Robyn Williams once said, "I was once on a German talk show, and this woman said to me, Mr. Williams, why do you think there is not so much comedy in Germany? And I said, Did you ever think you killed all the funny people?". Are we sure that abortions have not caused immense harm? A billion people in recent history. It staggers the imagination to think that one of those people could have made humanity better. What if one of those little eggs became the person to end all disease in the world? It's also possible that one of those people could have destroyed all life as we know it. It's a two-way argument. If the majority of the 60 million in the US leaned a certain way, that would now be of voting age, it could have swayed something like the election of Trump. Lol. It's mind-boggling to think about how the world has been changed by something like Abortion. Better or worse? Who knows? But no doubt that it has meddled with the natural course of human history. :-)
@PloppyPants, that's kinda the point I made earlier, what if scenarios like that are interesting, but it's unfair to make moral judgments based on them. If the butterfly effect consequences of an action have any bearing on the morality of an action then it's impossible to know if something is right and the whole concept of morality becomes to confused to be use. In addition that what if is not unique to abortion and applies just as much to protected sex, and to a lesser extent all actions.
@ReeseBobby, I don't make the moral judgement of abortion based on what-if scenarios. In my mind, the moral judgement is the cause and the what-ifs are the effects. Anyway, it's been great having this little discussion. I have spent a considerable amount of my free time pondering it and responding. I now have a plethora of recent funnies to explore. :-)
PITCHFORKS FOR SALE! PITCHFORKS! GET YOUR PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES HERE!
@Firecracker Jim, You got a lighter for my torch?
How about everyone just stop screwing unprotected unless you want a baby. Women keep your legs closed. Men go jerk off. Or just do butt stuff problem solved.
This is ridiculous, everyone knows most black people don't vote anyways
@Daynste, thanks in part to their high proportionality of a "criminal" record and voting restrictions in the crazy racist counties. (Not many but they're there)
@mas2de, name one voting restriction that still exists against black people in "racist" counties.
Also covered by The NYT and other reputable news sources.
Shelby county, Alabama; North Carolina, Kansas, Wisconsin, Ohio. The list is only a quick Google away if you want to open your eyes.
@mas2de, Having a higher rate of felonies isn't anyone else's fault but theirs.
@CriTiKa1, while that is entirely true (stay within the law and you won't go to prison) there is a whole heap of shjt piled up against black people in America. Too much to address on a funny app. I recommend watching "13th". It's a pretty good looking documentary about our for-profit prison system. It had some eye opening facts and numbers and gave background to cases and movements of recent date that I had never seen. It was good and I recommend it to anyone in America.
A couple of other points is the time since roe v wade is longer than ww2 so it's not like it all happened at once and people die everyday. Also the abortion rate per capita has dropped greatly since that time due to better sex education and birth control options, which are usually also restricted by birth control laws. And it sets a strange precedent. If the government can force you to carry a baby to "save a life" could they mandate everyone to have a blood donation quota to save the lives that due from lack of blood donation regularly? Or to force people to be organ donors? Because the answer is no. Obviously abortion shouldn't be something you can just change your mind to at the last minute it should be discussed as soon as it is discovered. But people should have bodily autonomy under the law.
@jouze, Yes, Roe vs. Wade has been over 24 years now, and WWII lasted over a six year period, but worldwide from 2010–2014, an estimated 56 million induced abortions occurred *each year* worldwide, according to the WHO. This number represents an increase from 50 million annually during 1990–1994, mainly because of population growth. There have been a mere 60 million in the United States since 1973, but worldwide the number is over a billion!
@PloppyPants, 24 years. Lol. I meant 44. Math is hard. :-)
T R I G G E R E D ! ! !
This joke did not go the direction I thought it was. Namely, back, out of the woman you're making love to.
Women's right versus babies right to live....hmmmm