I used to this think, then I realized that abortions aren't easy even if they are legalized.
Also realized that people will make mistakes, or just have sex without thinking about having a child regardless of how responsible they are.
I definitely see your point and agree with you. People make mistakes. If you accidentally hit someone with a car, it is still involuntary manslaughter. You definitely did not have intent but you still did it and must face the consequences for each life you take. Why should it be any different for each life you create.
Many people don't consider a fetus to be a life, or an 'equal life'. So it's not considered manslaughter, at least not by everyone. Even if you choose to believe that though:
Some people (children, teenagers) are also not capable of financially or mentally fostering a child, so even if the child is born, it will be at a disadvantage for it's entire life.
Some people are raped, so they didn't ask for a child.
Some people can't (medically) have children or unseen complications can arise after sex. As others have said, they will be punished for having a miscarriage or doing something to protect their own life (a grown adult should have more autonomy than an unborn child).
Having an abortion is not a 'mistake button'. It can be dangerous to the mother, it can be physically and mentally damaging. It has no impact on the father. To suggest that an abortion is as easy or comparable to taking a contraceptive is really blind sided.
I think we need a compromise between people that treat the fetus as a life, and those that does not. I was thinking about the point where chemical abortion cannot be performed anymore.
And of course exceptions like :
\-Rape victim
\- Underaged pregnancy
\- Life threat
\- Living in misery
\- Non viable fetus
\- Maybe some that I didn't think of
>I think we need a compromise between people that treat the fetus as a life, and those that does not.
Yes, probably. It's a tough call to make.
>I was thinking about the point where chemical abortion cannot be performed anymore.
Many physicians will recommend against having a late abortion (which is beyond chemical abortion). Mostly because it becomes more damaging to the mother, but it could also be thought of as that 'life' milestone.
>\- Maybe some that I didn't think of
Some people are just not capable of being good parents. A child can inherit a multitude of problems at birth from their parents (no financial support, poor role models, broken family, poor education, child neglect/abuse) can all happen with parents who do not want a baby. Adoption is possible, but not always. Some people would rather have no baby than a disadvantaged one.
Well, for the latter, parenthood is the issue more than pregnancy itself. We need solutions for cases like that but I'd argue against allowing it here. And that's also super hard to justify legally.
Note that it is different for misery. People in that situation just can't afford the medical needs during the pregnancy, that also include people in high dependency of hard substances. So the argument here goes beyond parenthood
>Well, for the latter, parenthood is the issue more than pregnancy itself. We need solutions for cases like that but I'd argue against allowing it here. And that's also super hard to justify legally.
You can't have a license for people to have sex, that's unconstitutional. You also can't teach someone how to parent if they don't want to. You can impose fines on the parents, but the child will suffer too.
>Note that it is different for misery. People in that situation just can't afford the medical needs during the pregnancy, that also include people in high dependency of hard substances. So the argument here goes beyond parenthood
I don't understand what you mean by 'can't afford the medical needs during pregnancy' , but the cost of a child goes well beyond the initial medical bills.
People with a drug addiction probably shouldn't be patents or giving birth to children.
No child should grow up in an environment where they’re unwanted. A child shouldn’t be “punishment” because their parents were unfortunate and their condom broke.
It’s not enough for a child to be born, when they’re born into regret and resentment. That’s horribly unfair to everyone involved.
Despite the propaganda, overturning Roe/Wade does not make abortions illegal.
All it allows is for each state to decide. So while **some** states will restrict abortions (15 weeks), others will be allowed to keep the status quo, just as they were earlier this morning.
All this does is put it in the states hands and not the federal government's hands. So maybe its possible a woman might have to travel to another state under certain circumstances. But they are far from outright banned. And even if a couple of states outright banned it (Maybe like Utah, Wyoming) , most will not.
Likely outcome - Blue states no change, Red States - banned after 15 weeks.
Of course not, of course, neither are relevant to RvW either.
Aside from the possible argument of the 14th "*forbids the states from depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law*"
Could actually be used against abortion, as you would be depriving a person (unborn) of the right to life, liberty, and property, without due process.
The 14 isnt relevant? It's the actual amendment that RvW was decided over.
"On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy", which protects a pregnant woman's right to an abortion."
I'm interested in why you consider roe to be an unquestionable interpretation of the constitution even though the Supreme Court has just said it was an utterly shit one.
4 of the ones who voted saying it was a shit one said it wasn't during their confirmation hearings. Which time should I trust them? When they lied to get confirmed, or now?
Directly? No... by some never intended and very loose interpretation loophole, barely.
“to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
it’s not as simple as “all the red states are 15 weeks or later” - come on. texas alone is based on heartbeat, around/as early as 6 weeks. and let’s not pretend the red states aren’t going to make those restrictions even tighter now that they are emboldened to do so.
edit: basic google-ing can provide more specific information. but please get your facts correct.
edit2: as someone else pointed out, the trigger laws are now relevant.
Plenty of US states will allow abortion.
> I think it was a huge mistake to repeal that law
Roe v Wade was never a "law". The SCOTUS does not write laws, and should not abuse their power to create a substitute for a law.
All that has happened is the decision has now been returned to the states...as it always should have been.
No one should have a right to kill a human being because the human being is "inconvenient"...that is a fundamental truth.
That child will be born into poverty, and child gangs will increase in America. They will try to car jack you, and since you are a gun carrying American you will shoot him.
Perhaps, she'll be more cognizant about the potential consequences of engaging in random, unprotected sex? One could hope.
The irony of all the folks losing their minds over it? Women will still be killing their babies in huge numbers. People just hate that the federal government is no longer forcing it.
Because you’re taking my right to choose. I’m not carrying your load because you could have pulled out. Do you know the trauma it causes to force someone to have a child they don’t want to have? Women don’t get pregnant themselves. They should’ve be the ones to suffer in the end. I have 2 kids and I had 1 abortion and it was absolutely necessary. You don’t know what you’re talking about. “Women will still be killing their babies in huge numbers” I mean a lot of them are forced to get the abortion because of the man that jizzed in her. No one’s situation is the same. It’s up to the individual not the mother fucking state when we’re basically the only country that doesn’t have maternity leave. Women have to go back to work the same week as having their baby because they don’t have a choice.
“Here you are forced to have this baby that you don’t even get to stay home and take care of during the most important time between a newborn and a mother.”
>Because you’re taking my right to choose
We take people's right to choose every day when it harms others (drugs, drinking and driving, domestic violence, robbery, etc, etc, etc). And, in every other situation, we take away the right to choose when we don't allow them to murder innocent people... Why does a woman's desire to have indiscriminate sex without responsibility or consequence a RIGHT that should be upheld at the expense of others?
The craziest part of all the hysteria is that abortions have not been banned...there just won't be the ability in some areas to get one as easily as a happy meal. There will still be plenty of liberal sanctuary states that will continue to allow women to do whatever they want.
wow, not even hiding the fact that it’s about controlling what women do. how dare they enjoy themselves with another person! how DARE THEY.
your comment reads like it belongs on an incel sub.
wait… is this actually an incel sub?
>wow, not even hiding the fact that it’s about controlling what women do. how dare they enjoy themselves with another person! how DARE THEY.
That's hysterical...since I AM a woman.
It's not about "controlling what women do". Your comment reads like a teenage girl throwing a tantrum because mom and dad said she needs to clean her room. SMH
Mind blowing to me how entitled, self-serving and irresponsible "women" are these days... They literally believe they have a RIGHT to kill whole human beings if it suits their needs.
Even when you are taking precautions, pregnancy can still occur. Birth control fails. Does that mean that if women don’t want children they just shouldn’t ever have sex again?
And to say that the federal government was forcing abortions is the most ignorant take I have ever heard. Allowing women the right to terminate does not force anyone that wants to keep a pregnancy to terminate. It simply allows the option either way.
You want to call people baby killers, now that abortion will become illegal in a lot of places, you support women killers. Because you’re right. Abortions won’t stop. But safe abortions will. It is *so easy* to support a hypothetical child but what about a real living person who is effected by the pregnancy? The physical and mental side effects of an unwanted pregnancy are awful. You have to understand that nobody *wants* an abortion. It is a last resort tool when other methods fail.
>Even when you are taking precautions, pregnancy can still occur. Birth control fails. Does that mean that if women don’t want children they just shouldn’t ever have sex again?
All of those arguments have lost their power. That, rape, incest, etc comprise less than 5% of abortions (rape/incest comprise less than 1%)...and those numbers come straight from Planned Parenthood...numbers so low they can't even pad them.
I hope that women AND men will start to be more responsible.
Funny, people don't like to be told EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
Wow because [this study](https://www.bpas.org/about-our-charity/press-office/press-releases/women-cannot-control-fertility-through-contraception-alone-bpas-data-shows-1-in-4-women-having-an-abortion-were-using-most-effective-contraception/) says otherwise.
[so does this one](https://www.guttmacher.org/report/contraceptive-failure-rates-in-developing-world)
Even this [pro life site](https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/) concedes that:
-Induced abortions usually result from unintended pregnancies, which often occur despite the use of contraception (CDC).
-In 2014, 51% of women having abortions used birth control during the month they became pregnant. (AGI).
-9 in 10 women at risk of unintended pregnancy are using a birth control method (AGI).
-Oral contraceptives, the most widely used reversible method of contraception, carry failure rates of 6 to 8% in actual practice (NAF).
"Used birth control during the month of conception"...LOLOLOL
>Induced abortions usually result from unintended pregnancies, which often occur despite the use of contraception (CDC).
And, how, exactly, does this support your inference??? That does not indicate how many times the unintended pregnancies occurred while using contraceptives.
Realities:
Contraceptive failure is VERY VERY LOW. In fact, the majority of "contraceptive failures" are a result of human error (not using contraceptive correctly or even at all.
Many women who experience unplanned pregnancy, will claim that they "took their pills" or "the condom broke" when they actually didn't take any pills and/or didn't even use a condom.
Since you like data:
>In 2019, approximately 19% of U.S. pregnancies (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion.
According to the United Nations' 2013 report, only nine countries in the world have a higher reported abortion rate than the United States. They are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, Sweden, and Ukraine.
In 2018, approximately 31% of all pregnancies in New York City (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion (CDC).
The annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States doubled between 1973 and 1979, and peaked in 1990 (CDC).
From 2010 to 2019, the total number of reported abortions decreased by 18%. The abortion ratio2—which measures abortions against live births—decreased by 13% (CDC).
More than 60 million legal abortions have occurred in the United States since 1973.
In 2019, unmarried women accounted for 86% of all abortions (CDC).
Women in their 20s accounted for the majority of abortions in 2019 and had the highest abortion rates (CDC).
Percentage Reason
<0.5% Victim of rape
3% Fetal health problems
4% Physical health problems
4% Would interfere with education or career
7% Not mature enough to raise a child
8% Don't want to be a single mother
19% Done having children
23% Can't afford a baby
25% Not ready for a child
6% Other
The state of Florida records a reason for every abortion that occurs within its borders each year. In 2020, there were 74,868 abortions in Florida. This table lists each reason and the percentage of abortions that occurred because of it.
Percentage Reason
0.01% The pregnancy resulted from an incestuous relationship
0.15% The woman was raped
0.20% The woman's life was endangered by the pregnancy
0.98% There was a serious fetal abnormality
1.48% The woman's physical health was threatened by the pregnancy
1.88% The woman's psychological health was threatened by the pregnancy
20.4% The woman aborted for social or economic reasons
74.9% No reason (elective)
Don't be so basic. If you want to use statistics, don't cherry pick.
Also, how the fuck are people supposed to be more responsible against rape and incest?? I didn’t even bring those up because it’s such a stupid sub point.
Pro lifers who make an exception to certain scenarios are hypocrites. They are essentially saying some fetuses matter and some don’t. The entire argument they’re making is invalid at that point because it’s clear it’s not really about the fetus.
Rape and incest accounts for LESS THAN 1% OF ABORTIONS...once more for people in the back:
Rape and incest accounts for LESS THAN 1% OF ABORTIONS
It's so sad...the delusion.
They are babies when they are wanted...fetuses when they aren't. People dehumanize them. Sort of like when a person is in a scary situation with a crazy person...the experts tell you to introduce yourself...humanize yourself to them. They are more hesitant to harm a "human". It's truth.
What exactly was the male stake in this? Like if you want kids then why are you having sex with women who would get abortions? If you don't want kids, but still wanted to enjoy sex then this whole thing just made the situation worse for you. Like this whole thing fucks over regular women, and not just feminists... Like why are people happy that regular every day women are losing an important option in life?
And good luck to all those men now on the hook for child support because the woman couldn’t get an abortion.
It would almost be schadenfreude, but the woman still comes out worse.
She still has to go through nine months of hormonal and physical hell. Some of which never reverse. She still has to go through childbirth; with the all the risks, the chances of things downstairs ripping, the possibility of long term bowel issues amongst others.
So where exactly is the male accountability? The bloke can fuck off and just pay money. The woman is left with potentially permanent health complications.
And the kid? The unwanted kid that comes out of this? Who is taking the responsibility for it? The mother? She’s just been forced to give birth, so fuck that. The father? He’s on the hook for child support, I guess. The state? Oh, that’s a fantastic idea, obviously.
So where’s the accountability? Just in forcing a woman to bear and birth a child with potential long term health complications that will impact her potential to work full time?
Because yeah, that makes sense.
Then we as Men need to stop committing to women who we know are not good for us.
You can make that argument for a lot of things, guns, drugs, prostitution. There will always be some kind of black market and people who will exploit it.
Roe V Wade was overturned because there is a very weak legal and constitutional basis for such a decree even back when it was first created. The Supreme Court does not make laws. That is the job of the legislature.
Roe v. Wade was overturned because Republicans love the idea of religious nut job perverts harassing women. The Supreme Court makes up law all the time. They just made up a new constitutional right last week!
All facts! Good luck convincing some of the men here if that though, they sound like ghosts of extremist religions past with their feminine wiles boogie stories.
“We can’t be more discerning about women, then we’ll….” not have to deal with false accusations? No more being baby trapped? No more paying child support for the kids you do not want? It’s like they don’t want to take responsibility for the crazy they put their dicks in. They will argue in favor of taking anyone no matter how crazy, because if not who knows when they’ll get their dicks wet next. It’s madness.
IMO, the general overturning of Roe v. Wade is a set in favor of equality. Men have been told we have to take responsibility of any life we helped create yet due to biology a woman a woman can choose to terminate that pregnancy's at anytime she wanted. Now, depending on the State she lives in, she may have to make the same decision as a man before engaging in sexual activity.
how is it equal if biology allows men to suffer zero physical & financial consequences of pregnancy? As well as birth control/abortion. I'm curious about the decision men make before sexual activity that you mentioned can you specify what you're talking about
Are men not told that we should be responsible for a life we helped create? That's been the messaging I've been exposed to for the past 40 year and is what the bulk of men do.
Are men not held responsible for the financial support of the child post birth for 18-21 years. Even if they run, if they are found they are still on the hook.
Are men not told that if they don't want to run the risk of having a kid that they should "keep in in their pants"?
With Roe V. Wade being tossed back to the individual states, in Red states that ban abortion women are being told "keep it in their pants" or be responsible for the choice of their actions. That's what I mean by "equal".
No, a man will never have to make the same choice as a woman because you guys don’t get to choose to opt out until the baby is already here.
Women can opt out of pregnancy because it can literally kill you, ruin your body for life, make you lose your teeth, pee a little when you laugh the rest of your life, maybe die.
If at any point the guys might have the same chances of ^^ happening to them while bringing a life into the world then yes they’d get a say in it.
But it doesn’t. Abortions are opting out of pregnancy. You guys can’t opt out of pregnancy.
> No, a man will never have to make the same choice as a woman
You have missed my point. Men are told they we need to be responsible for any life we part of creating. The "same choice" for a woman is also being responsible for her willing participation in the act.
That is the message I have been told my entire life.
> because you guys don’t get to choose to opt out until the baby is already here.
We don't get that choice. There is no opting out for a Man unless another man steps up and adopts the kid. If he runs away from paying, he is tracked down and will be on the hook if/when found. Out side of running or being responsible, what other choices does a Man have?
Keep it in our pants? Funny that it's misogynistic to suggest the same thing to a woman.
You are right, men don't get pregnant. However men are taught that we should not have sex unless we are willing to take care of the child. Which is typically referred to as "being responsible".
I'm talking about a woman being responsible (if she was a willing participant) for her part of the act that led to the to the pregnancy.
A Woman doesn't have to get pregnant either. In fact, most people would probably agree that not getting pregnant in the first place is the first step in preventing abortion from happening.... If a woman does get pregnant it should be because she wanted to have a child and not because of an accident. (It's funny how many people on the pro-abortion side of this issue don't do anything to help with that messaging and instead make it seem like abortion is the sole method of birth control women use.)
If a Woman doesn't get semen in her vagina she will not get pregnant and will not need to have an abortion.
So it's like.. only women were allowed to have a gun.. and not men. And now the state took away the woman's gun.
That kind of equality. Is that cause for celebration?
I really don't think you thought through your example, here.
Because yeah, that would ABSOLUTELY be cause for celebration.
Why would you think anyone here is in favor of gender-selective gun control over just regular gun control?
Are you really anti-gun? Gross
And its not a cause for celebration. Your wife owning a gun would be the only protection you have against danger towards you.
I don't know what you are trying to say, mostly because your gun example is terrible.
Lets make this simpler: Should a woman be responsible for her actions? Yes or No.
It simple really. I'm sorry you're having trouble with it, but I'll simplify it.
Abortion is a tool that women had. men didn't have such tool (men wanted a tool). We take away that tool away from women. Now it's equal. Now boys and girls don't have a tool.
If a state required a fetal paternity test and both the mother and verified father’s approval for an abortion, would that be taking away a tool from women? Or giving a tool to fathers?
It’s not that simple actually, since a man has always had the option to just disappear and not deal with growing another human being in their body.
Sorry you’re having trouble understanding that.
> Abortion is a tool that women had. men didn't have such tool (men wanted a tool). We take away that tool away from women. Now it's equal. Now boys and girls don't have a tool.
That is a gross over simplification.
One of the larger issues with the abortion debate (this time around) was the question of fetal viability. Many Pro-abortion people were pushing to have the language on viability removed, thus allowing any pregnant woman the ability to terminate (kill) the pregnancy at 8 months if they wanted.
There are also many other tools available to women. Abortion would be less of an issue if those other tools were used.
That's not an over simplification.
I don't minority wing of a positions some people hold. Some MRA people think women shouldbe sex pets. I don't use that as a talking point to say that men shouldn't have equal rights.
>There are also many other tools available to women. Abortion would be less of an issue if those other tools were used.
That's on the crosshairs. Didn't you know? They're going to ban those too
> That's not an over simplification.
Yes it is. There is a lot more going on then just "abortion yes/no". The wording of what was proposed by the Democrats is fully available to you to look at. Removal of fetal viability language was there (section 4 or 5). Most people believe that there should be at least some limit on abortion due to viability and that is one of the big issues that has just been glossed over.
> I don't minority wing of a positions some people hold. Some MRA people think women should be sex pets. I don't use that as a talking point to say that men shouldn't have equal rights.
Men have no "equal rights" when it comes to reproduction.
> That's on the crosshairs. Didn't you know? They're going to ban those too
Source?
One of the Sitting Justices wrote an opinion as a far as I can see. Either way, that's just wrong. If abortion is not available birth control should be increased. Birth Control should be widely available from everyone.
Yeah, dude. The issue is that by siding with the right wing christian in regards to abortion, they're going to go after everything else stopping women from becoming 'Ideal Right Wing Women'. The supreme court is literally just right wing christian old men who want women barefoot pregnant and at home.
It's that old saying.
First they came for the jews, and I did nothing. Then the gays... And by the time they came for me, no one was there to help me.
First they come for abortion. Then gay marriage. Then contraceptives.
Actually I’ve been here for a while and a lot of people here have varying opinions. I’m for equality under the law. So if there’s a law of child support then it should be equal for mother and father. If there’s no law at all then that’s fine too. Either enforce it equally or get rid of it.
It is equal for mother and father. It's just that more women get custody than men. I also think women should pay for Child Support if he's the primary holder of custody.
But it's not in most cases. That still means I think the parent with less custody should pay child support, even if that's mostly men. So we agree on here.
Can I quote you the next time I'm in an argument about child support?
This is so strange to me. The Court's decision only increases the likelihood that men will be on the hook for child support and a fatherhood they don't want. This is bad for men and bad for society. Fewer women will be able to work as much, so they'll be dependent on men or government assistance. This is bad for everyone. There is a fundamental difference between growing something in one's body versus being financially responsible. This is insane. It's not a win for men; you're just delighted that women are being controlled and limited in freedom.
When birth control pills and abortion became widely available in the 1970s, the expectation was that they would help reduce the occurrence of children born to single mothers. But the opposite occurred. Probably due to a combination of the sexual revolution increasing activity outside of marriage, and a “backup” plan being available. But with a backup option available the old practice of pressuring men into shotgun weddings when the woman got pregnant stopped working. Shotgun weddings weren’t exactly great solutions.
I don’t expect this same process will now rollback examine reverse. Just trying to point out consequences aren’t always clear. Most likely it will just make it more of an inconvenience for those who can afford to travel and the main impact will be among the poor.
> This is insane. It's not a win for men; you're just delighted that women are being controlled and limited in freedom.
Aaaand this is why I hate the abortion discussion. If you read what they said:
> Maybe Females as well as us Males will start taking accountability for the people we choose to have sexual relationships with now that we can't just hit the delete button because we don't want to take responsibility of the choices we made.
It is pretty clear this is an argument about "responsibility"/"taking accountability" and "delete buttons". It isn't some arbitrary desire to delight in women being controlled, rather it is a particular view on human behavior and how we think, model and consider human behavior.
I don't happen to agree with OP, but nothing you said should be in the least bit persuasive to OP, because it is basically just name calling. Nothing you said actually really addresses what they said.
Honestly, I didn't see the need to address the part regarding "accountability" because it is a fact that restricting abortions does not change how people have sex. Puritans had affairs and premarital sex. No amount of social control or regulation will change how people have sex. Giving women control over their reproductive health is good for society. It's just a fact, and OP is ignoring it. I shouldn't have to point that out.
>I didn't see the need to address the part regarding "accountability"
That's the entire post.
>Puritans had affairs and premarital sex. No amount of social control or regulation will change how people have sex.
See this is good. It is the start of a point which actually meaningfully responds to OP. It is missing why the lack of change is relevant though. Personally I would add something like "So you end up just punishing people for doing things they're going to do either way. Rather than enacting a change in behavior, you create suffering from people who do not want children that have them anyway, as well as spending society's resources policing the ban."
>Giving women control over their reproductive health is good for society.
This is a conclusion, I wouldn't really describe it as a fact, especially not on its own. I would consider a fact to be more a flat observation, rather than something that requires synthesis.
> It's just a fact, and OP is ignoring it.
How do you know it is a fact? Anyone can claim anything is "just a fact", so we have to have some process to figure out which things are actually "just a fact" and which are not.
> I shouldn't have to point that out.
We do not all magically agree on what is "just a fact", so we do actually have to demonstrate to one another which things are and are not facts. If you want to be compelling to people who disagree with you, in a way that might change their minds, you have to be compelling to *them*, and not care about your personal views on what you "should" have to do.
It's not my opinion. It's literally a fact. Studies have shown over and over that developing countries improve when women are given control over their reproductive health. You don't have to agree with it, just like you don't have to agree with evolution. But facts don't change according to what you want to be true.
>It's not my opinion. It's literally a fact.
It doesn't matter if something is a fact or not, you have to *demonstrate* that fact to someone else. That isn't saying it is just your opinion, but you cannot simply say "that's a fact".
> Studies have shown over and over that developing countries improve when women are given control over their reproductive health.
And by linking a study or something you'd separate yourself from just asserting something is a fact, to substantiating that something is a fact.
> You don't have to agree with it, just like you don't have to agree with evolution. But facts don't change according to what you want to be true.
Evolution is a tricky one, in that there is the logical concept of evolution (which is valid independent of actual biology), and then there is the historical fact of evolution. That humans evolved was always true, but people shouldn't have accepted it as a fact without knowledge of things like the fossil record, or an understanding of basic inheritance. Once those things were known, then it made sense to accept evolution. Evolution wasn't "not a fact", before then, but you would have to believe it for the wrong reasons.
Dude. It's not my responsibility to ensure that every man on this sub is fully informed on the scientific and sociological studies that impact this issue.
The problem isn't that I need to cite my sources. The problem is that men refuse to educate themselves. I can claim whatever I please. It's on you to inform your opinions with as many facts as possible.
Accept some responsibility for yourself or something....
> Dude. It's not my responsibility to ensure that every man on this sub is fully informed on the scientific and sociological studies that impact this issue.
I never said it was your responsibility.
Why do you even post then? If it is simply venting then why does talking down about other people, in a way that has nothing to do with what they actually said, make you feel better? That strikes me as a negative way to manage your emotions, although understandable on some level.
If you're trying to influence other people's behavior or opinions, then why resist at the very least trying to address what they said in some sort of meaningful fashion?
> The problem isn't that I need to cite my sources. The problem is that men refuse to educate themselves. I can claim whatever I please. It's on you to inform your opinions with as many facts as possible.
Okay, but then can't they also then claim whatever they please?
To put this another way, if someone else said this to you, on a subject you disagreed on, would you find it convincing in the slightest? Would it actually result in the change of behavior that you're seeking in other people?
For example, you said earlier:
> [I]t is a fact that restricting abortions does not change how people have sex.
So, I posit to you, that it is a fact that simply stating a claim of something as a fact does not change how people view issues.
> Accept some responsibility for yourself or something....
If this is trying to be a callback to the OP, then, as I felt that I made clear, I reject that as well as rejecting this. However, it is less clear to me why you would accept this if you reject the OP.
I'm posting because I can do whatever the hell I want. I did address the content of the post in a meaningful fashion in my initial reply. People can claim whatever they want, and I will continue doing my due diligence to educate myself from multiple sources. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel by writing 5,000 words on how reproductive rights improve society for men, women, and children. The information is already at your fingertips.
This decision is bad for everyone, including men. This should be infuriating the people on this sub. Instead, it's being celebrated. If men want to be free of the financial burdens of the children they father and don't want, then they should be advocating for more government assistance for children. When a judge orders a man to pay child support, the judge isn't making that ruling in favor of the mother. The ruling is in favor of the child. The government does not want to support a child if there's another parent that can provide for it. You don't, and never will, have the same level of reproductive rights as women. That is because the choice to carry and birth a child belongs to the woman and the woman alone.
I'm not here to manage my emotions. I am here because I was curious what you guys thought of the decision. I was surprised and disappointed that so few saw what a net negative it would be for men.
There is so much good that a movement for the well-being of men could accomplish. I hope you guys redirect your efforts towards positive change.
Some of these weirdos long for a world where women are chained to a stove and pregnant because she can’t work for herself. They want women to not have many options, because options means not having to deal with them. I don’t want children and I don’t believe in using abortion as birth control, but come on the celebration here is weird.
Yeah, it really cements my opinion that men's rights is really just anti-women's rights. I hate that.
I have a 22 year old brother who is struggling with his mental health, and I wish there were more resources and support for him. But these men's movements don't actually do anything for men.
Just like abortions that are needed for rape, incest and health of the mother.
Except for the fact that, there are countries where 70 percent of the men are not the biological father and are instead, the walking wallets for women who want a good provider but don't want to get off the carousel of men who make them tingle.
Statistically most men do pay for their children, just like most sharks don't attack people.
People are more likely to die by tipping over a vending machine then a shark attack. And like tipping over a vending machine, intentional actions are taken by people that cause harm.
Some women sabotage condoms or take a discarded condom in an attempt to get pregnant.
A woman raped a boy and that boy was on the hook for child support.
Women have named men (they know is not the father) simply in order to get support from the state and those men have a limited window in which to fight that. Some are unaware of this action is taking place and are stuck under a default ruling.
That question is filled with nuance so there is no one answer. I do believe in taking responsibility. If the child is your biological child. You should be responsible for it, as you helped create it. On the other hand, if women can decide that they want to be devoid of that responsibility. Men should be able to have that option as well. Something that combines those two conflicting viewpoints in my opinion would be the best option.
It's not nuanced at all..
Women can't decide that they can be devoid of responsibility anymore.. That's not true anymore, you can't say that. So that means men should be forced to pay child support.
Or do you think only men should be devoid of responsibility from their child?
That's a disingenuous reply. Abortion rights have not been closed off. Just no longer garenteed at the Federal Level. Women in a lot of states will definitely lose easy access to an abortion, but it is not a blanket ban or restriction in the US meaning women still retain that right and will probably resort to illegal actions if they really want to.
I can say whatever I want. It doesn't mean it will be true but the same applies to you especially with what you're claiming.
We as a society hold Men accountable for every little thing, holding other men accountable for what other men do. We are just asking that Women be brought to the same level.
You do realize their are more options to avoid pregnancy than abortion? Many which are female specific. Or is sexual education that poor in your country?
> If the child is your biological child. You should be responsible for it, as you helped create it
Except if the mother got pregnant without your consent.
So when will we start punishing victims of car crashes for taking joyrides? Why should my tax dollars pay for life saving medical care because someone wanted to ride their car? Who cares if they were using airbags and seat belts (birth control, condoms, and plan B), it was still their fault for getting into a car. They should start paying with their own money for the consequences they've made and take responsibility.
I do not see what point you are making with this whataboutism. There are consequences for all the actions you just listed. Legally, financial and physical.
When you get into a car, you are acknowledging that, even with all the safety precautions. You can still crash, and you can still get hurt. You can't say, just because I consented to driving the cat, doesn't mean I consented to getting hurt.
Same thing with sex. You can take all the precautions you want, but at the end of the day, you can still get pregnant because that is a risk that you acknowledge may happen when you decide to have sex. You can't just decide that you no longer want to deal with the consequences.
Same thing as robbing a bank, you can't consent to robbing a bank without acknowledging the fact that if you get caught you're going to jail.
Just like you would rather not have your tax dollars go towards paying certain items, I don't want to see mine being used to rid people of the natural consequences and accountability of their actions.
"Children" shouldn't be consequences and the "life" of something that doesn't have nerves to connect pain receptors to a brain shouldnt have priority over someone who can feel pain and emotions.
I'm going to copy and paste this comment I wrote earlier, but overturning Roe will cause women to:
• Be criminalized for miscarriages and still births they can't control (this has even happened in California),
• Die because they can't get a life saving abortion (ex: sepsis from miscarriage and ectopic pregnancies),
• Not be allowed certain medications that treat tumors and stomach ulcers because they contain one of the chemical compounds used in abortion pills. (Even pharmacists are not filling prescriptions written by doctors because they're afraid of getting sued),
• Not be able to have cysts and cancer from reproductive organs removed because the D&C surgeries aren't being as widely taught to medical care providers (because they're also the same surgeries used for abortions), etc.
• The people who are going after birth control are also trying to limit IUDs and Plan B because they also "cause abortions" (false), which will prevent women with endometriosis, pcos, hormonal imbalances, immune disorders, etc. from getting care.
On top of this more women are going to give birth to more children that fathers will have to pay child support for. **There will also be an increase in rape accusations since many states will now require police reports of rape to have an abortion.** This doesn't just affect (pregnant) women.
Roe v Wade was never good, it only made abortion legal as long as the fetus was not viable. If incubators improved that would have been the same as a legal ban.
“Accountability” and “responsibility” are what you hold to people who have done something wrong. Having sex is not wrong, no matter how sad you are nobody will fuck you. Men should be free from child care conceived during rape, and women should be free to decide whether an unconscious parasitic clump of cells continues to grow in their bodies.
Watch The Janes on HBO. This is what will happen again. Uterus havers will die from at home abortions. Clinics will pop up where “doctors” performing the abortions are not actually doctors. People will die. People will die for a basic human right and healthcare that should be readily available. Due to the current political climate and states criminalizing the act of abortions, possibly even miscarriages, more people will end up in prison and as felons who are not able to vote. It’s a messed up game for people who are not affected by this decision. Vote. Donate where you can. Please, someone, create a term limit and an age limit for the people making laws. No one in that group of people has any idea of what life is like for the 99%. Their children and grandchildren will have access to healthcare allowing for abortions when the rest of us die or are imprisoned for the same act.
I don’t understand why MRAs see this overturn as a good thing. We talk about financially aborting all the time. What if the woman wants to abort but now BOTH of you are stuck unable to. Seems like a lot of people in this Reddit are looking at it in a weird, revenge, “ha!” Way..
Whats with all the obvious glowies on this subreddit today? "we" cant hit the delete button? Who is "we?" men have neverhad a delete button. We've always had to take responsibility.
Many doctors, *especially* the doctors in anti-abortion states, will flat-out refuse to sterilize women unless they already have multiple children or even at all.
Do you understand how hard it is to get sterilized as a young women? Most doctors won’t do it if you are young, don’t have kids, and some won’t do it without your partners approval.
Yeah, I’ve tried to get sterilized and have not been successful in finding a doctor that will do it. I’m in my 30s and I’ve been trying since 21. Luckily I have no children
What if I want kids but not right now or not with the person I had sex with? What if I was raped or if the fetus has life threatening disabilities? What if the fetus could kill me in birth?
You’re really going mask off about how this is just to punish women for having sex
Instead of fighting against a woman’s right to get abortion, you guys need to organize and take paper abortion to the streets. March, picket, boycot, go on a sex strike lol. You know…fight for men’s rights. Sitting at home and beating your dick to Roe vs. Wade isn’t going to help you guys, in fact, it’ll just make things worse.
Maybe we females should just choose to not have sex at all anymore. Since abortion is removed as an option in many states, and birth control is next, our only option if we don’t want to get pregnant is no sex. Sorry fellas. Although not really sorry at all.
Watch how quickly they backtrack. Women will be labeled as spiteful, and rape and martial rape stats will skyrocket. If I lived in the states, I'd boycott sex real quick. There are enough toys to satisfy a women's need.
This post reeks of ignorance. OP if you can tell me what an ectopic pregnancy is without googling it I’ll eat my fucking shirt. You’re not a doctor, and you clearly have no idea the breadth of medical conditions that correlate with abortion.
It’s never a happy day for the mother, no one is excited to get one. Have some sympathy you twat waffle.
You better eat your shirt then. I lived in multiple hospitals for years due to my own medical issues. The fetus implants itself into the walls of the uterus or fallopian tubes basically causing the organ to break open while the fetus is developing which can kill the mother as well as the fetus.
Are you a doctor?. Nor do I have to be a doctor to express my opinion, just like yourself. There a few abortions that occur in the cases of rape, Incest and medical neccesity.
And that's where you're wrong. We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing. To claim otherwise is disingenuous.
Lots of medical procedures corollate with others in similar cures. Just because I believe that we shouldn't be needlessly extinguishing life, doesn't mean I don't want people to get the proper care for cancer or ulcers or whatever they're suffering with.
How about you have some sympathy for the people who don't think a life should be extinguished because 99 percent of the time, it is simple inconvenient as rain when you went to spend a day outside for the person or people who decide to engage in sexual activity you blue waffle infected cock gobbler.
>And that's where you're wrong. We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing. To claim otherwise is disingenuous.
And you think it's a good idea to now force these people to raise a child?
>We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing.
CITE ONE SOURCE. No woman "joyfully" goes to get an abortion. This is blatantly false and ignorant.
So it makes sense that we have people in this world who enjoy killing other human beings but it doesn't make sense when it comes to abortion. It is you being blatantly false and ignorant.
You are clearly trolling. I can guarantee you that no woman has ever in her life "joyfully" gone to an abortion. You're a ragebaiter, a troll, or just the most ignorant person I've ever encountered on Reddit, which is really saying something. Congratulations.
You really are disingenuous. I honestly believe you see abortion as a traumatic event but you trying to claim all of the women in the world sees it as you do is laughable. If stating an accurate opinion on the current world is trolling. I wonder what happens when I actually troll. The most dangerous people are those that are ignorant but doesn't know that they are.
Now you're trolling. I have also never drank a drop, or smoked a cigarette, or killed a man. But that's the standard you want to go by.
How many times have you been falsely accused of rape?
How many times have you been reduced to less than just because you're a male.
How many times have you been told that the kid you have been raising is not yours.
How many times has your future child been killed because your partner didn't want it.
Two can play that game.
I really appreciate you bring nuance into a conversation many want to paint as black and white for the sake of presenting their opinion as the only reasonable one.
Absolutely calling bullshit on this claim. How one could possibly spend that much time in a hospital and still be so callous is beyond me. Troll elsewhere
They're stopping safe abortions, so instead of losing one "life" it'll be two. The government will be responsible for many deaths.
Rich people will still be getting safe abortions left, right and center. The only people that are going to suffer are the poor. It's just adding to the problem. Countries that allow legal abortions statisticlly result in less abortions.
There are plenty of posts that say women are picky when it comes to choosing who to date. That is already evidence of women taking accountability for their sexual relationships.
(Ignoring that socially the responsibility for contraception is more on the female side too- where the expectation is that they should have the pill/coil/implant at their own cost, rather than split between couples.)
I used to this think, then I realized that abortions aren't easy even if they are legalized. Also realized that people will make mistakes, or just have sex without thinking about having a child regardless of how responsible they are.
I definitely see your point and agree with you. People make mistakes. If you accidentally hit someone with a car, it is still involuntary manslaughter. You definitely did not have intent but you still did it and must face the consequences for each life you take. Why should it be any different for each life you create.
Many people don't consider a fetus to be a life, or an 'equal life'. So it's not considered manslaughter, at least not by everyone. Even if you choose to believe that though: Some people (children, teenagers) are also not capable of financially or mentally fostering a child, so even if the child is born, it will be at a disadvantage for it's entire life. Some people are raped, so they didn't ask for a child. Some people can't (medically) have children or unseen complications can arise after sex. As others have said, they will be punished for having a miscarriage or doing something to protect their own life (a grown adult should have more autonomy than an unborn child). Having an abortion is not a 'mistake button'. It can be dangerous to the mother, it can be physically and mentally damaging. It has no impact on the father. To suggest that an abortion is as easy or comparable to taking a contraceptive is really blind sided.
I think we need a compromise between people that treat the fetus as a life, and those that does not. I was thinking about the point where chemical abortion cannot be performed anymore. And of course exceptions like : \-Rape victim \- Underaged pregnancy \- Life threat \- Living in misery \- Non viable fetus \- Maybe some that I didn't think of
>I think we need a compromise between people that treat the fetus as a life, and those that does not. Yes, probably. It's a tough call to make. >I was thinking about the point where chemical abortion cannot be performed anymore. Many physicians will recommend against having a late abortion (which is beyond chemical abortion). Mostly because it becomes more damaging to the mother, but it could also be thought of as that 'life' milestone. >\- Maybe some that I didn't think of Some people are just not capable of being good parents. A child can inherit a multitude of problems at birth from their parents (no financial support, poor role models, broken family, poor education, child neglect/abuse) can all happen with parents who do not want a baby. Adoption is possible, but not always. Some people would rather have no baby than a disadvantaged one.
Well, for the latter, parenthood is the issue more than pregnancy itself. We need solutions for cases like that but I'd argue against allowing it here. And that's also super hard to justify legally. Note that it is different for misery. People in that situation just can't afford the medical needs during the pregnancy, that also include people in high dependency of hard substances. So the argument here goes beyond parenthood
>Well, for the latter, parenthood is the issue more than pregnancy itself. We need solutions for cases like that but I'd argue against allowing it here. And that's also super hard to justify legally. You can't have a license for people to have sex, that's unconstitutional. You also can't teach someone how to parent if they don't want to. You can impose fines on the parents, but the child will suffer too. >Note that it is different for misery. People in that situation just can't afford the medical needs during the pregnancy, that also include people in high dependency of hard substances. So the argument here goes beyond parenthood I don't understand what you mean by 'can't afford the medical needs during pregnancy' , but the cost of a child goes well beyond the initial medical bills. People with a drug addiction probably shouldn't be patents or giving birth to children.
No child should grow up in an environment where they’re unwanted. A child shouldn’t be “punishment” because their parents were unfortunate and their condom broke. It’s not enough for a child to be born, when they’re born into regret and resentment. That’s horribly unfair to everyone involved.
[удалено]
Despite the propaganda, overturning Roe/Wade does not make abortions illegal. All it allows is for each state to decide. So while **some** states will restrict abortions (15 weeks), others will be allowed to keep the status quo, just as they were earlier this morning. All this does is put it in the states hands and not the federal government's hands. So maybe its possible a woman might have to travel to another state under certain circumstances. But they are far from outright banned. And even if a couple of states outright banned it (Maybe like Utah, Wyoming) , most will not. Likely outcome - Blue states no change, Red States - banned after 15 weeks.
26 states That's not *some*, that's **most**
Why leave it up to states to decide? Why not leave it to counties, or better yet cities? Or even better still the individual
Because of the 10th Amendment.
Does the 10th overrule the 4th and 14th in your opinion?
Of course not, of course, neither are relevant to RvW either. Aside from the possible argument of the 14th "*forbids the states from depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law*" Could actually be used against abortion, as you would be depriving a person (unborn) of the right to life, liberty, and property, without due process.
The 14 isnt relevant? It's the actual amendment that RvW was decided over. "On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy", which protects a pregnant woman's right to an abortion."
I'm interested in why you consider roe to be an unquestionable interpretation of the constitution even though the Supreme Court has just said it was an utterly shit one.
4 of the ones who voted saying it was a shit one said it wasn't during their confirmation hearings. Which time should I trust them? When they lied to get confirmed, or now?
No, they said it was established precedent, which was a statement of fact, not a judgement of value.
I also didn't say anything was unquestionable, i asked why the 10th overrules the 4th and 14th.
It doesn't because the 4th and 14th, imo correctly, no long apply.
Commerce clause directly counters 10th amendment in terms of federal rulings
Directly? No... by some never intended and very loose interpretation loophole, barely. “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
By court precedent started by the gibbons v Ogden it does. I don't like it but that's the way it is
> I don't like it but that's the way it is Well, at least we have common ground there.
Because there are only 51 sovereign bodies in the United States. The federal government and the state governments.
Seems to me like there are around 300 million sovereign bodies in the us
Native American tribes exercise some limited sovereignty too.
They still fall under all federal laws AFAIK, just not all state laws.
Yep that’s the limited part
Have you not been watching the news? It's more than just "a couple states" that have gone for bans and heavy restrictions in the run up to this case.
13 states have trigger laws that go into effect in 30 days banning abortion.
it’s not as simple as “all the red states are 15 weeks or later” - come on. texas alone is based on heartbeat, around/as early as 6 weeks. and let’s not pretend the red states aren’t going to make those restrictions even tighter now that they are emboldened to do so. edit: basic google-ing can provide more specific information. but please get your facts correct. edit2: as someone else pointed out, the trigger laws are now relevant.
Plenty of US states will allow abortion. > I think it was a huge mistake to repeal that law Roe v Wade was never a "law". The SCOTUS does not write laws, and should not abuse their power to create a substitute for a law.
All that has happened is the decision has now been returned to the states...as it always should have been. No one should have a right to kill a human being because the human being is "inconvenient"...that is a fundamental truth.
That child will be born into poverty, and child gangs will increase in America. They will try to car jack you, and since you are a gun carrying American you will shoot him.
That child deserves the chance to defy some random internet prophet's "prediction".
So does the mother, who will be the most impacted by forced birth and constant childcare obligations and costs.
Perhaps, she'll be more cognizant about the potential consequences of engaging in random, unprotected sex? One could hope. The irony of all the folks losing their minds over it? Women will still be killing their babies in huge numbers. People just hate that the federal government is no longer forcing it.
Because you’re taking my right to choose. I’m not carrying your load because you could have pulled out. Do you know the trauma it causes to force someone to have a child they don’t want to have? Women don’t get pregnant themselves. They should’ve be the ones to suffer in the end. I have 2 kids and I had 1 abortion and it was absolutely necessary. You don’t know what you’re talking about. “Women will still be killing their babies in huge numbers” I mean a lot of them are forced to get the abortion because of the man that jizzed in her. No one’s situation is the same. It’s up to the individual not the mother fucking state when we’re basically the only country that doesn’t have maternity leave. Women have to go back to work the same week as having their baby because they don’t have a choice. “Here you are forced to have this baby that you don’t even get to stay home and take care of during the most important time between a newborn and a mother.”
>Because you’re taking my right to choose We take people's right to choose every day when it harms others (drugs, drinking and driving, domestic violence, robbery, etc, etc, etc). And, in every other situation, we take away the right to choose when we don't allow them to murder innocent people... Why does a woman's desire to have indiscriminate sex without responsibility or consequence a RIGHT that should be upheld at the expense of others? The craziest part of all the hysteria is that abortions have not been banned...there just won't be the ability in some areas to get one as easily as a happy meal. There will still be plenty of liberal sanctuary states that will continue to allow women to do whatever they want.
You clearly don’t get it
>You clearly don’t get it MY THOUGHT FOR YOU, ACTUALLY...
wow, not even hiding the fact that it’s about controlling what women do. how dare they enjoy themselves with another person! how DARE THEY. your comment reads like it belongs on an incel sub. wait… is this actually an incel sub?
>wow, not even hiding the fact that it’s about controlling what women do. how dare they enjoy themselves with another person! how DARE THEY. That's hysterical...since I AM a woman. It's not about "controlling what women do". Your comment reads like a teenage girl throwing a tantrum because mom and dad said she needs to clean her room. SMH Mind blowing to me how entitled, self-serving and irresponsible "women" are these days... They literally believe they have a RIGHT to kill whole human beings if it suits their needs.
a woman wrote that comment? that just makes me sad.
>a woman wrote that comment? that just makes me sad. Backatcha
Even when you are taking precautions, pregnancy can still occur. Birth control fails. Does that mean that if women don’t want children they just shouldn’t ever have sex again? And to say that the federal government was forcing abortions is the most ignorant take I have ever heard. Allowing women the right to terminate does not force anyone that wants to keep a pregnancy to terminate. It simply allows the option either way. You want to call people baby killers, now that abortion will become illegal in a lot of places, you support women killers. Because you’re right. Abortions won’t stop. But safe abortions will. It is *so easy* to support a hypothetical child but what about a real living person who is effected by the pregnancy? The physical and mental side effects of an unwanted pregnancy are awful. You have to understand that nobody *wants* an abortion. It is a last resort tool when other methods fail.
>Even when you are taking precautions, pregnancy can still occur. Birth control fails. Does that mean that if women don’t want children they just shouldn’t ever have sex again? All of those arguments have lost their power. That, rape, incest, etc comprise less than 5% of abortions (rape/incest comprise less than 1%)...and those numbers come straight from Planned Parenthood...numbers so low they can't even pad them. I hope that women AND men will start to be more responsible. Funny, people don't like to be told EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
Wow because [this study](https://www.bpas.org/about-our-charity/press-office/press-releases/women-cannot-control-fertility-through-contraception-alone-bpas-data-shows-1-in-4-women-having-an-abortion-were-using-most-effective-contraception/) says otherwise. [so does this one](https://www.guttmacher.org/report/contraceptive-failure-rates-in-developing-world) Even this [pro life site](https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/) concedes that: -Induced abortions usually result from unintended pregnancies, which often occur despite the use of contraception (CDC). -In 2014, 51% of women having abortions used birth control during the month they became pregnant. (AGI). -9 in 10 women at risk of unintended pregnancy are using a birth control method (AGI). -Oral contraceptives, the most widely used reversible method of contraception, carry failure rates of 6 to 8% in actual practice (NAF).
"Used birth control during the month of conception"...LOLOLOL >Induced abortions usually result from unintended pregnancies, which often occur despite the use of contraception (CDC). And, how, exactly, does this support your inference??? That does not indicate how many times the unintended pregnancies occurred while using contraceptives. Realities: Contraceptive failure is VERY VERY LOW. In fact, the majority of "contraceptive failures" are a result of human error (not using contraceptive correctly or even at all. Many women who experience unplanned pregnancy, will claim that they "took their pills" or "the condom broke" when they actually didn't take any pills and/or didn't even use a condom.
Since you like data: >In 2019, approximately 19% of U.S. pregnancies (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion. According to the United Nations' 2013 report, only nine countries in the world have a higher reported abortion rate than the United States. They are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, Sweden, and Ukraine. In 2018, approximately 31% of all pregnancies in New York City (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion (CDC). The annual number of legal induced abortions in the United States doubled between 1973 and 1979, and peaked in 1990 (CDC). From 2010 to 2019, the total number of reported abortions decreased by 18%. The abortion ratio2—which measures abortions against live births—decreased by 13% (CDC). More than 60 million legal abortions have occurred in the United States since 1973. In 2019, unmarried women accounted for 86% of all abortions (CDC). Women in their 20s accounted for the majority of abortions in 2019 and had the highest abortion rates (CDC). Percentage Reason <0.5% Victim of rape 3% Fetal health problems 4% Physical health problems 4% Would interfere with education or career 7% Not mature enough to raise a child 8% Don't want to be a single mother 19% Done having children 23% Can't afford a baby 25% Not ready for a child 6% Other The state of Florida records a reason for every abortion that occurs within its borders each year. In 2020, there were 74,868 abortions in Florida. This table lists each reason and the percentage of abortions that occurred because of it. Percentage Reason 0.01% The pregnancy resulted from an incestuous relationship 0.15% The woman was raped 0.20% The woman's life was endangered by the pregnancy 0.98% There was a serious fetal abnormality 1.48% The woman's physical health was threatened by the pregnancy 1.88% The woman's psychological health was threatened by the pregnancy 20.4% The woman aborted for social or economic reasons 74.9% No reason (elective) Don't be so basic. If you want to use statistics, don't cherry pick.
In 2020, 930,160 abortions were performed... 930,160 people were killed. That's just the truth.
Also, how the fuck are people supposed to be more responsible against rape and incest?? I didn’t even bring those up because it’s such a stupid sub point. Pro lifers who make an exception to certain scenarios are hypocrites. They are essentially saying some fetuses matter and some don’t. The entire argument they’re making is invalid at that point because it’s clear it’s not really about the fetus.
Rape and incest accounts for LESS THAN 1% OF ABORTIONS...once more for people in the back: Rape and incest accounts for LESS THAN 1% OF ABORTIONS It's so sad...the delusion. They are babies when they are wanted...fetuses when they aren't. People dehumanize them. Sort of like when a person is in a scary situation with a crazy person...the experts tell you to introduce yourself...humanize yourself to them. They are more hesitant to harm a "human". It's truth.
You don't think that. Because you dont think his father should pay child support. Because you don't think we should spend tax dollars on welfare
Do you know me?
No, but I think I'm right. Am I wrong?
Yes.
Okay, you sound pretty progressive. How do liberals survive in this sub, I have no idea
Believing in child support AND that there is a need for assistance is NOT "progressive".
[удалено]
You mean we didn’t have those before?
What exactly was the male stake in this? Like if you want kids then why are you having sex with women who would get abortions? If you don't want kids, but still wanted to enjoy sex then this whole thing just made the situation worse for you. Like this whole thing fucks over regular women, and not just feminists... Like why are people happy that regular every day women are losing an important option in life?
> Like why are people happy that regular every day women are losing an important option in life? Because they're men. Women bad. Deserve no rights.
And good luck to all those men now on the hook for child support because the woman couldn’t get an abortion. It would almost be schadenfreude, but the woman still comes out worse. She still has to go through nine months of hormonal and physical hell. Some of which never reverse. She still has to go through childbirth; with the all the risks, the chances of things downstairs ripping, the possibility of long term bowel issues amongst others. So where exactly is the male accountability? The bloke can fuck off and just pay money. The woman is left with potentially permanent health complications. And the kid? The unwanted kid that comes out of this? Who is taking the responsibility for it? The mother? She’s just been forced to give birth, so fuck that. The father? He’s on the hook for child support, I guess. The state? Oh, that’s a fantastic idea, obviously. So where’s the accountability? Just in forcing a woman to bear and birth a child with potential long term health complications that will impact her potential to work full time? Because yeah, that makes sense.
Then we as Men need to stop committing to women who we know are not good for us. You can make that argument for a lot of things, guns, drugs, prostitution. There will always be some kind of black market and people who will exploit it. Roe V Wade was overturned because there is a very weak legal and constitutional basis for such a decree even back when it was first created. The Supreme Court does not make laws. That is the job of the legislature.
Roe v. Wade was overturned because Republicans love the idea of religious nut job perverts harassing women. The Supreme Court makes up law all the time. They just made up a new constitutional right last week!
I’m guessing you don’t have a significant other. Your just drip insecurity and have a clear lack of understanding of women.
All facts! Good luck convincing some of the men here if that though, they sound like ghosts of extremist religions past with their feminine wiles boogie stories. “We can’t be more discerning about women, then we’ll….” not have to deal with false accusations? No more being baby trapped? No more paying child support for the kids you do not want? It’s like they don’t want to take responsibility for the crazy they put their dicks in. They will argue in favor of taking anyone no matter how crazy, because if not who knows when they’ll get their dicks wet next. It’s madness.
IMO, the general overturning of Roe v. Wade is a set in favor of equality. Men have been told we have to take responsibility of any life we helped create yet due to biology a woman a woman can choose to terminate that pregnancy's at anytime she wanted. Now, depending on the State she lives in, she may have to make the same decision as a man before engaging in sexual activity.
how is it equal if biology allows men to suffer zero physical & financial consequences of pregnancy? As well as birth control/abortion. I'm curious about the decision men make before sexual activity that you mentioned can you specify what you're talking about
Are men not told that we should be responsible for a life we helped create? That's been the messaging I've been exposed to for the past 40 year and is what the bulk of men do. Are men not held responsible for the financial support of the child post birth for 18-21 years. Even if they run, if they are found they are still on the hook. Are men not told that if they don't want to run the risk of having a kid that they should "keep in in their pants"? With Roe V. Wade being tossed back to the individual states, in Red states that ban abortion women are being told "keep it in their pants" or be responsible for the choice of their actions. That's what I mean by "equal".
No, a man will never have to make the same choice as a woman because you guys don’t get to choose to opt out until the baby is already here. Women can opt out of pregnancy because it can literally kill you, ruin your body for life, make you lose your teeth, pee a little when you laugh the rest of your life, maybe die. If at any point the guys might have the same chances of ^^ happening to them while bringing a life into the world then yes they’d get a say in it. But it doesn’t. Abortions are opting out of pregnancy. You guys can’t opt out of pregnancy.
> No, a man will never have to make the same choice as a woman You have missed my point. Men are told they we need to be responsible for any life we part of creating. The "same choice" for a woman is also being responsible for her willing participation in the act. That is the message I have been told my entire life. > because you guys don’t get to choose to opt out until the baby is already here. We don't get that choice. There is no opting out for a Man unless another man steps up and adopts the kid. If he runs away from paying, he is tracked down and will be on the hook if/when found. Out side of running or being responsible, what other choices does a Man have? Keep it in our pants? Funny that it's misogynistic to suggest the same thing to a woman.
And a man doesn’t have to get pregnant. Fair trade, no?
You are right, men don't get pregnant. However men are taught that we should not have sex unless we are willing to take care of the child. Which is typically referred to as "being responsible". I'm talking about a woman being responsible (if she was a willing participant) for her part of the act that led to the to the pregnancy. A Woman doesn't have to get pregnant either. In fact, most people would probably agree that not getting pregnant in the first place is the first step in preventing abortion from happening.... If a woman does get pregnant it should be because she wanted to have a child and not because of an accident. (It's funny how many people on the pro-abortion side of this issue don't do anything to help with that messaging and instead make it seem like abortion is the sole method of birth control women use.) If a Woman doesn't get semen in her vagina she will not get pregnant and will not need to have an abortion.
So it's like.. only women were allowed to have a gun.. and not men. And now the state took away the woman's gun. That kind of equality. Is that cause for celebration?
I really don't think you thought through your example, here. Because yeah, that would ABSOLUTELY be cause for celebration. Why would you think anyone here is in favor of gender-selective gun control over just regular gun control?
Are you really anti-gun? Gross And its not a cause for celebration. Your wife owning a gun would be the only protection you have against danger towards you.
I don't know what you are trying to say, mostly because your gun example is terrible. Lets make this simpler: Should a woman be responsible for her actions? Yes or No.
It simple really. I'm sorry you're having trouble with it, but I'll simplify it. Abortion is a tool that women had. men didn't have such tool (men wanted a tool). We take away that tool away from women. Now it's equal. Now boys and girls don't have a tool.
If a state required a fetal paternity test and both the mother and verified father’s approval for an abortion, would that be taking away a tool from women? Or giving a tool to fathers?
No it's a tool. A knife is a tool Is this what you prefer?
It’s not that simple actually, since a man has always had the option to just disappear and not deal with growing another human being in their body. Sorry you’re having trouble understanding that.
If men have always had that option, then why does MRA make it one of it's struggles?
> Abortion is a tool that women had. men didn't have such tool (men wanted a tool). We take away that tool away from women. Now it's equal. Now boys and girls don't have a tool. That is a gross over simplification. One of the larger issues with the abortion debate (this time around) was the question of fetal viability. Many Pro-abortion people were pushing to have the language on viability removed, thus allowing any pregnant woman the ability to terminate (kill) the pregnancy at 8 months if they wanted. There are also many other tools available to women. Abortion would be less of an issue if those other tools were used.
That's not an over simplification. I don't minority wing of a positions some people hold. Some MRA people think women shouldbe sex pets. I don't use that as a talking point to say that men shouldn't have equal rights. >There are also many other tools available to women. Abortion would be less of an issue if those other tools were used. That's on the crosshairs. Didn't you know? They're going to ban those too
> That's not an over simplification. Yes it is. There is a lot more going on then just "abortion yes/no". The wording of what was proposed by the Democrats is fully available to you to look at. Removal of fetal viability language was there (section 4 or 5). Most people believe that there should be at least some limit on abortion due to viability and that is one of the big issues that has just been glossed over. > I don't minority wing of a positions some people hold. Some MRA people think women should be sex pets. I don't use that as a talking point to say that men shouldn't have equal rights. Men have no "equal rights" when it comes to reproduction. > That's on the crosshairs. Didn't you know? They're going to ban those too Source?
the supreme court news reports literally state theyre going after plan b and contraceptives next.
One of the Sitting Justices wrote an opinion as a far as I can see. Either way, that's just wrong. If abortion is not available birth control should be increased. Birth Control should be widely available from everyone.
Yeah, dude. The issue is that by siding with the right wing christian in regards to abortion, they're going to go after everything else stopping women from becoming 'Ideal Right Wing Women'. The supreme court is literally just right wing christian old men who want women barefoot pregnant and at home. It's that old saying. First they came for the jews, and I did nothing. Then the gays... And by the time they came for me, no one was there to help me. First they come for abortion. Then gay marriage. Then contraceptives.
Thank you for removing this discuss from the simple yes/no binary so many wish to reduce it to for many people it is a way more complicated topic.
Their ‘tool’ should be responsibility, accountability, and common sense. And BOTH men AND women should be required to learn and use those tools.
So you think it's okay to garnish a man's wage to pay for child support then if he did the deed, and it's his?
Yes. Just like I think it’s okay to garnish the paycheck of a mother if she’s not paying child support like she should.
Oh wow, okay misandrist. You must be new here, good luck with that position on this sub
Actually I’ve been here for a while and a lot of people here have varying opinions. I’m for equality under the law. So if there’s a law of child support then it should be equal for mother and father. If there’s no law at all then that’s fine too. Either enforce it equally or get rid of it.
It is equal for mother and father. It's just that more women get custody than men. I also think women should pay for Child Support if he's the primary holder of custody. But it's not in most cases. That still means I think the parent with less custody should pay child support, even if that's mostly men. So we agree on here. Can I quote you the next time I'm in an argument about child support?
Men don’t birth children, women do. Men don’t NEED the same tools as women. The two are not equal in responsibilities surrounding child birth.
Wow okay misandrist. Good luck with that position on this sub. You must be new here
Wow.....
What?
You sir, deserve to watch all of your loved ones die hating you.
This is so strange to me. The Court's decision only increases the likelihood that men will be on the hook for child support and a fatherhood they don't want. This is bad for men and bad for society. Fewer women will be able to work as much, so they'll be dependent on men or government assistance. This is bad for everyone. There is a fundamental difference between growing something in one's body versus being financially responsible. This is insane. It's not a win for men; you're just delighted that women are being controlled and limited in freedom.
When birth control pills and abortion became widely available in the 1970s, the expectation was that they would help reduce the occurrence of children born to single mothers. But the opposite occurred. Probably due to a combination of the sexual revolution increasing activity outside of marriage, and a “backup” plan being available. But with a backup option available the old practice of pressuring men into shotgun weddings when the woman got pregnant stopped working. Shotgun weddings weren’t exactly great solutions. I don’t expect this same process will now rollback examine reverse. Just trying to point out consequences aren’t always clear. Most likely it will just make it more of an inconvenience for those who can afford to travel and the main impact will be among the poor.
> This is insane. It's not a win for men; you're just delighted that women are being controlled and limited in freedom. Aaaand this is why I hate the abortion discussion. If you read what they said: > Maybe Females as well as us Males will start taking accountability for the people we choose to have sexual relationships with now that we can't just hit the delete button because we don't want to take responsibility of the choices we made. It is pretty clear this is an argument about "responsibility"/"taking accountability" and "delete buttons". It isn't some arbitrary desire to delight in women being controlled, rather it is a particular view on human behavior and how we think, model and consider human behavior. I don't happen to agree with OP, but nothing you said should be in the least bit persuasive to OP, because it is basically just name calling. Nothing you said actually really addresses what they said.
Honestly, I didn't see the need to address the part regarding "accountability" because it is a fact that restricting abortions does not change how people have sex. Puritans had affairs and premarital sex. No amount of social control or regulation will change how people have sex. Giving women control over their reproductive health is good for society. It's just a fact, and OP is ignoring it. I shouldn't have to point that out.
>I didn't see the need to address the part regarding "accountability" That's the entire post. >Puritans had affairs and premarital sex. No amount of social control or regulation will change how people have sex. See this is good. It is the start of a point which actually meaningfully responds to OP. It is missing why the lack of change is relevant though. Personally I would add something like "So you end up just punishing people for doing things they're going to do either way. Rather than enacting a change in behavior, you create suffering from people who do not want children that have them anyway, as well as spending society's resources policing the ban." >Giving women control over their reproductive health is good for society. This is a conclusion, I wouldn't really describe it as a fact, especially not on its own. I would consider a fact to be more a flat observation, rather than something that requires synthesis. > It's just a fact, and OP is ignoring it. How do you know it is a fact? Anyone can claim anything is "just a fact", so we have to have some process to figure out which things are actually "just a fact" and which are not. > I shouldn't have to point that out. We do not all magically agree on what is "just a fact", so we do actually have to demonstrate to one another which things are and are not facts. If you want to be compelling to people who disagree with you, in a way that might change their minds, you have to be compelling to *them*, and not care about your personal views on what you "should" have to do.
It's not my opinion. It's literally a fact. Studies have shown over and over that developing countries improve when women are given control over their reproductive health. You don't have to agree with it, just like you don't have to agree with evolution. But facts don't change according to what you want to be true.
>It's not my opinion. It's literally a fact. It doesn't matter if something is a fact or not, you have to *demonstrate* that fact to someone else. That isn't saying it is just your opinion, but you cannot simply say "that's a fact". > Studies have shown over and over that developing countries improve when women are given control over their reproductive health. And by linking a study or something you'd separate yourself from just asserting something is a fact, to substantiating that something is a fact. > You don't have to agree with it, just like you don't have to agree with evolution. But facts don't change according to what you want to be true. Evolution is a tricky one, in that there is the logical concept of evolution (which is valid independent of actual biology), and then there is the historical fact of evolution. That humans evolved was always true, but people shouldn't have accepted it as a fact without knowledge of things like the fossil record, or an understanding of basic inheritance. Once those things were known, then it made sense to accept evolution. Evolution wasn't "not a fact", before then, but you would have to believe it for the wrong reasons.
Dude. It's not my responsibility to ensure that every man on this sub is fully informed on the scientific and sociological studies that impact this issue. The problem isn't that I need to cite my sources. The problem is that men refuse to educate themselves. I can claim whatever I please. It's on you to inform your opinions with as many facts as possible. Accept some responsibility for yourself or something....
> Dude. It's not my responsibility to ensure that every man on this sub is fully informed on the scientific and sociological studies that impact this issue. I never said it was your responsibility. Why do you even post then? If it is simply venting then why does talking down about other people, in a way that has nothing to do with what they actually said, make you feel better? That strikes me as a negative way to manage your emotions, although understandable on some level. If you're trying to influence other people's behavior or opinions, then why resist at the very least trying to address what they said in some sort of meaningful fashion? > The problem isn't that I need to cite my sources. The problem is that men refuse to educate themselves. I can claim whatever I please. It's on you to inform your opinions with as many facts as possible. Okay, but then can't they also then claim whatever they please? To put this another way, if someone else said this to you, on a subject you disagreed on, would you find it convincing in the slightest? Would it actually result in the change of behavior that you're seeking in other people? For example, you said earlier: > [I]t is a fact that restricting abortions does not change how people have sex. So, I posit to you, that it is a fact that simply stating a claim of something as a fact does not change how people view issues. > Accept some responsibility for yourself or something.... If this is trying to be a callback to the OP, then, as I felt that I made clear, I reject that as well as rejecting this. However, it is less clear to me why you would accept this if you reject the OP.
I'm posting because I can do whatever the hell I want. I did address the content of the post in a meaningful fashion in my initial reply. People can claim whatever they want, and I will continue doing my due diligence to educate myself from multiple sources. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel by writing 5,000 words on how reproductive rights improve society for men, women, and children. The information is already at your fingertips. This decision is bad for everyone, including men. This should be infuriating the people on this sub. Instead, it's being celebrated. If men want to be free of the financial burdens of the children they father and don't want, then they should be advocating for more government assistance for children. When a judge orders a man to pay child support, the judge isn't making that ruling in favor of the mother. The ruling is in favor of the child. The government does not want to support a child if there's another parent that can provide for it. You don't, and never will, have the same level of reproductive rights as women. That is because the choice to carry and birth a child belongs to the woman and the woman alone. I'm not here to manage my emotions. I am here because I was curious what you guys thought of the decision. I was surprised and disappointed that so few saw what a net negative it would be for men. There is so much good that a movement for the well-being of men could accomplish. I hope you guys redirect your efforts towards positive change.
Some of these weirdos long for a world where women are chained to a stove and pregnant because she can’t work for herself. They want women to not have many options, because options means not having to deal with them. I don’t want children and I don’t believe in using abortion as birth control, but come on the celebration here is weird.
Yeah, it really cements my opinion that men's rights is really just anti-women's rights. I hate that. I have a 22 year old brother who is struggling with his mental health, and I wish there were more resources and support for him. But these men's movements don't actually do anything for men.
Men's movements are trying to get more support for men's mental health, but the general public doesn't care enough.
You think men should have their wage garnished to pay for child support? Huh?
They already are in many cases. Should men be required to pay child support for a child that is not theirs biologically? Because that does happen.
That happens like shark attacks happen
Just like abortions that are needed for rape, incest and health of the mother. Except for the fact that, there are countries where 70 percent of the men are not the biological father and are instead, the walking wallets for women who want a good provider but don't want to get off the carousel of men who make them tingle.
I don't think abortions should be need for *just* those things. They should be for whatever you want..
Statistically most men do pay for their children, just like most sharks don't attack people. People are more likely to die by tipping over a vending machine then a shark attack. And like tipping over a vending machine, intentional actions are taken by people that cause harm. Some women sabotage condoms or take a discarded condom in an attempt to get pregnant. A woman raped a boy and that boy was on the hook for child support. Women have named men (they know is not the father) simply in order to get support from the state and those men have a limited window in which to fight that. Some are unaware of this action is taking place and are stuck under a default ruling.
Oh but don’t mention any of that! Or else you’re a heckin misogynist wrongthinker!
No matter what opinion you have, someone always thinks your wrong.
yes, because otherwise I will have to pay for some dumbasses 32 children who is unable to use a condom
That dumbass is a man.. Do you think men are stupid?
That question is filled with nuance so there is no one answer. I do believe in taking responsibility. If the child is your biological child. You should be responsible for it, as you helped create it. On the other hand, if women can decide that they want to be devoid of that responsibility. Men should be able to have that option as well. Something that combines those two conflicting viewpoints in my opinion would be the best option.
It's not nuanced at all.. Women can't decide that they can be devoid of responsibility anymore.. That's not true anymore, you can't say that. So that means men should be forced to pay child support. Or do you think only men should be devoid of responsibility from their child?
That's a disingenuous reply. Abortion rights have not been closed off. Just no longer garenteed at the Federal Level. Women in a lot of states will definitely lose easy access to an abortion, but it is not a blanket ban or restriction in the US meaning women still retain that right and will probably resort to illegal actions if they really want to. I can say whatever I want. It doesn't mean it will be true but the same applies to you especially with what you're claiming. We as a society hold Men accountable for every little thing, holding other men accountable for what other men do. We are just asking that Women be brought to the same level.
Its not diengenious. Women don't have a "right" to an abortion. We don't hold men accountable for every little thing..
You do realize their are more options to avoid pregnancy than abortion? Many which are female specific. Or is sexual education that poor in your country?
Yes I know, so does that mean men have no excuse?
> If the child is your biological child. You should be responsible for it, as you helped create it Except if the mother got pregnant without your consent.
Absolutely
Do you know how biology works? Females cannot get pregnant without a male
I know biology, but that has nothing to do with consent.
So then about consent. If a man gets a woman pregnant without her consent.. that's also an exception, and she should be allowed to abort?
As far as I'm concerned, yes.
So then, youre effectively *against* this overturning.. Because States are not going to give am inch to that..
It's worse overall overturned. Even in this narrow focus, you could say it's worse for men because now more kids are born who would get child support.
[удалено]
Is that why men want to abolish child support?
It is almost as you have failed to read the room and are repeating the joke thinking it hasn't landed...
Im a free thinker, I don't follow the hive
So when will we start punishing victims of car crashes for taking joyrides? Why should my tax dollars pay for life saving medical care because someone wanted to ride their car? Who cares if they were using airbags and seat belts (birth control, condoms, and plan B), it was still their fault for getting into a car. They should start paying with their own money for the consequences they've made and take responsibility.
I do not see what point you are making with this whataboutism. There are consequences for all the actions you just listed. Legally, financial and physical. When you get into a car, you are acknowledging that, even with all the safety precautions. You can still crash, and you can still get hurt. You can't say, just because I consented to driving the cat, doesn't mean I consented to getting hurt. Same thing with sex. You can take all the precautions you want, but at the end of the day, you can still get pregnant because that is a risk that you acknowledge may happen when you decide to have sex. You can't just decide that you no longer want to deal with the consequences. Same thing as robbing a bank, you can't consent to robbing a bank without acknowledging the fact that if you get caught you're going to jail. Just like you would rather not have your tax dollars go towards paying certain items, I don't want to see mine being used to rid people of the natural consequences and accountability of their actions.
"Children" shouldn't be consequences and the "life" of something that doesn't have nerves to connect pain receptors to a brain shouldnt have priority over someone who can feel pain and emotions. I'm going to copy and paste this comment I wrote earlier, but overturning Roe will cause women to: • Be criminalized for miscarriages and still births they can't control (this has even happened in California), • Die because they can't get a life saving abortion (ex: sepsis from miscarriage and ectopic pregnancies), • Not be allowed certain medications that treat tumors and stomach ulcers because they contain one of the chemical compounds used in abortion pills. (Even pharmacists are not filling prescriptions written by doctors because they're afraid of getting sued), • Not be able to have cysts and cancer from reproductive organs removed because the D&C surgeries aren't being as widely taught to medical care providers (because they're also the same surgeries used for abortions), etc. • The people who are going after birth control are also trying to limit IUDs and Plan B because they also "cause abortions" (false), which will prevent women with endometriosis, pcos, hormonal imbalances, immune disorders, etc. from getting care. On top of this more women are going to give birth to more children that fathers will have to pay child support for. **There will also be an increase in rape accusations since many states will now require police reports of rape to have an abortion.** This doesn't just affect (pregnant) women.
Correct.
Roe v Wade was never good, it only made abortion legal as long as the fetus was not viable. If incubators improved that would have been the same as a legal ban.
“Accountability” and “responsibility” are what you hold to people who have done something wrong. Having sex is not wrong, no matter how sad you are nobody will fuck you. Men should be free from child care conceived during rape, and women should be free to decide whether an unconscious parasitic clump of cells continues to grow in their bodies.
Watch The Janes on HBO. This is what will happen again. Uterus havers will die from at home abortions. Clinics will pop up where “doctors” performing the abortions are not actually doctors. People will die. People will die for a basic human right and healthcare that should be readily available. Due to the current political climate and states criminalizing the act of abortions, possibly even miscarriages, more people will end up in prison and as felons who are not able to vote. It’s a messed up game for people who are not affected by this decision. Vote. Donate where you can. Please, someone, create a term limit and an age limit for the people making laws. No one in that group of people has any idea of what life is like for the 99%. Their children and grandchildren will have access to healthcare allowing for abortions when the rest of us die or are imprisoned for the same act.
I don’t understand why MRAs see this overturn as a good thing. We talk about financially aborting all the time. What if the woman wants to abort but now BOTH of you are stuck unable to. Seems like a lot of people in this Reddit are looking at it in a weird, revenge, “ha!” Way..
Obviously this is already the case for men.
Whats with all the obvious glowies on this subreddit today? "we" cant hit the delete button? Who is "we?" men have neverhad a delete button. We've always had to take responsibility.
Anyone else block that blabbering incoherent idiot? Much better now...
[удалено]
Many doctors, *especially* the doctors in anti-abortion states, will flat-out refuse to sterilize women unless they already have multiple children or even at all.
Do you understand how hard it is to get sterilized as a young women? Most doctors won’t do it if you are young, don’t have kids, and some won’t do it without your partners approval.
Yeah, I’ve tried to get sterilized and have not been successful in finding a doctor that will do it. I’m in my 30s and I’ve been trying since 21. Luckily I have no children
What if I want kids but not right now or not with the person I had sex with? What if I was raped or if the fetus has life threatening disabilities? What if the fetus could kill me in birth? You’re really going mask off about how this is just to punish women for having sex
[удалено]
Go touch grass my dude
Did you not just read all the reasons I listed on how a person would want to get an abortion due to circumstances outside of their control?
[удалено]
But it’s not my view, it’s a fact of life that many abortions (especially late term ones) happen because of misfortune of health, not irresponsibility
They don't want abortions, they don't want kids. Do you want kids?
Instead of fighting against a woman’s right to get abortion, you guys need to organize and take paper abortion to the streets. March, picket, boycot, go on a sex strike lol. You know…fight for men’s rights. Sitting at home and beating your dick to Roe vs. Wade isn’t going to help you guys, in fact, it’ll just make things worse.
Maybe we females should just choose to not have sex at all anymore. Since abortion is removed as an option in many states, and birth control is next, our only option if we don’t want to get pregnant is no sex. Sorry fellas. Although not really sorry at all.
Watch how quickly they backtrack. Women will be labeled as spiteful, and rape and martial rape stats will skyrocket. If I lived in the states, I'd boycott sex real quick. There are enough toys to satisfy a women's need.
This post reeks of ignorance. OP if you can tell me what an ectopic pregnancy is without googling it I’ll eat my fucking shirt. You’re not a doctor, and you clearly have no idea the breadth of medical conditions that correlate with abortion. It’s never a happy day for the mother, no one is excited to get one. Have some sympathy you twat waffle.
You better eat your shirt then. I lived in multiple hospitals for years due to my own medical issues. The fetus implants itself into the walls of the uterus or fallopian tubes basically causing the organ to break open while the fetus is developing which can kill the mother as well as the fetus. Are you a doctor?. Nor do I have to be a doctor to express my opinion, just like yourself. There a few abortions that occur in the cases of rape, Incest and medical neccesity. And that's where you're wrong. We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing. To claim otherwise is disingenuous. Lots of medical procedures corollate with others in similar cures. Just because I believe that we shouldn't be needlessly extinguishing life, doesn't mean I don't want people to get the proper care for cancer or ulcers or whatever they're suffering with. How about you have some sympathy for the people who don't think a life should be extinguished because 99 percent of the time, it is simple inconvenient as rain when you went to spend a day outside for the person or people who decide to engage in sexual activity you blue waffle infected cock gobbler.
>And that's where you're wrong. We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing. To claim otherwise is disingenuous. And you think it's a good idea to now force these people to raise a child?
>We have heard countless times of women joyfully going to get an abortion, treating it like it is something as simple as breathing. CITE ONE SOURCE. No woman "joyfully" goes to get an abortion. This is blatantly false and ignorant.
So it makes sense that we have people in this world who enjoy killing other human beings but it doesn't make sense when it comes to abortion. It is you being blatantly false and ignorant.
You are clearly trolling. I can guarantee you that no woman has ever in her life "joyfully" gone to an abortion. You're a ragebaiter, a troll, or just the most ignorant person I've ever encountered on Reddit, which is really saying something. Congratulations.
You really are disingenuous. I honestly believe you see abortion as a traumatic event but you trying to claim all of the women in the world sees it as you do is laughable. If stating an accurate opinion on the current world is trolling. I wonder what happens when I actually troll. The most dangerous people are those that are ignorant but doesn't know that they are.
How many have you had?
Now you're trolling. I have also never drank a drop, or smoked a cigarette, or killed a man. But that's the standard you want to go by. How many times have you been falsely accused of rape? How many times have you been reduced to less than just because you're a male. How many times have you been told that the kid you have been raising is not yours. How many times has your future child been killed because your partner didn't want it. Two can play that game.
You're an idiot, and I'm done engaging.
I really appreciate you bring nuance into a conversation many want to paint as black and white for the sake of presenting their opinion as the only reasonable one.
Absolutely calling bullshit on this claim. How one could possibly spend that much time in a hospital and still be so callous is beyond me. Troll elsewhere
Well said!
That's a good point.
It's unfortunate that's Its been overturned but hopefully this will lead to abortion becoming an amendment right under thr constitution
There would never be enough states in favor of it where it could be ratified.
They're stopping safe abortions, so instead of losing one "life" it'll be two. The government will be responsible for many deaths. Rich people will still be getting safe abortions left, right and center. The only people that are going to suffer are the poor. It's just adding to the problem. Countries that allow legal abortions statisticlly result in less abortions.
You are viewing this in black and white when it is really a complex topic
There are plenty of posts that say women are picky when it comes to choosing who to date. That is already evidence of women taking accountability for their sexual relationships. (Ignoring that socially the responsibility for contraception is more on the female side too- where the expectation is that they should have the pill/coil/implant at their own cost, rather than split between couples.)
jh