By the way, while we're here squabbling about men taking responsibility for the children they father, this bill is really about granting the fetus rights via the father.

tonysprout you're confusing. You're against this bill in your first post and for it in your second. Which is it? And women don't force men to have sex with them, only men do that. So no man has to become a father if he doesn't want to. Can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Why is so many men refuse to be responsible for their own fertility? Maybe it's a maturity issue. Certainly some men understand that if they make babies they have a responsibility for them. Others seem to think they aren't responsible for anything they can run away from.

Dear sigma, I'm so sorry for you and your children. Your ex doesn't realize how important a loving father is for your children and the laws in this regard are grossly unfair. I know your only alternative is to spend a lot of money in legal and court fees to enforce your rights and that's unfair and too often impossible. I think the custody laws need to be changed, including regarding visitation. I know not all parents want shared custody, for whatever reasons, but visitation rights should be rigorously enforced without hardship. It seems to me that the noncustodial parent should be able to show up with the divorce contract and a policeman and the offending parent threatened with jail time without having to drag them into court. I know that at present it takes a court order to do that.

As for your last comment, there is no happy ending for that problem. I do wish our culture would teach our children to be responsible for their own fertility. They do it in Europe with far fewer out of wedlock pregnancies (particularly teen pregnancies) than we have. We already have 25% of our children living in poverty, most of them with single mother, and since the Clinton welfare "reform", a rapidly increasing number of them in dire poverty. Pretty unfair to the kids and not so good for our society either. At present the only solution I can see is if men father children they need to help support them. The alternative is for them to stop fathering children they don't want.

Although our culture doesn't encourage it, men's feelings are as deep and tender as those of any woman. As a mother of men I know that.

sigma:

I'm sorry you are in the situation you're in. I agree with you that it sucks and your ex is not being fair, nor is she doing what's best for your children if you are indeed a supportive and loving father. Furthermore, I agree with you that referring to men as "sperm donors" is a load of BS.

With that said, the legislation addressed by this article really does nothing to address your situation. I'm sure you probably know this, but figured I'd mention it anyway.

I do hope your situation takes a turn for the better, both for your sake and your kids'.

I can feel sympathetic for guys who want to have a kid and find themselves in this situation, but I absolutely do not agree with this bill. Once again, this is an instance where someone (a man) is deciding the woman cannot make a decision, but it's the woman's body and it is she who has to carry that baby if the man decides it so. It's amazing to me that some people continue to insist that women are not capable of making decisions without the input of a man? Adams says this would give the father-to-be "a say" as if he's letting both parties give input and make the decision together, but that's completely disingenuous since the father-to-be would actually have the final say. Granted, the woman currently has final say, but again, it's her body and her life that will be profoundly affected by having to carry the fetus for 9 months, not the man's.

My response to Rep. Adams' comment, "In most cases, when a child is born the father has financial responsibility for that child, so he should have a say" is twofold....first, what's that got to do with BEFORE a child is born and, second, last I checked, these days the vast majority of households have two incomes and both parents share financial responsibility. Rep. Adams' views and his proposed legislation is condescending to women on so many levels, it's almost impossible to believe.

This isn't "pro-life" legislation. This is chauvinistic, anti-woman legislation that says nothing more than "men know best." Regardless of Adams' views on abortion, this legislation does not say abortion is wrong; it says men should decide when abortion is okay.

BTW, I'm a guy.

Seeing the man as only a "sperm donor " is as wrong as saying a womans body does not belong to her. I am the father of two children by my first wife. She met someone else and we are divorced. I am required to pay around 40% of my income to her or I can 1. Go to Jail 2. Loose my drivers license 3. Lose my job. She can, and has, disregarded my "visitation" rights and there is NOTHING that I can do about it. I have spoken with the Judge, the Sheriff, and my lawyer. The only thing that I can do is take her back to court. They are my children as much as hers yet she has ALL the rights, while I have none. I love my kids and want to see them. As far as a women outside of a relationship, she has ALL the decision power, the man has none. But he has to live with her decision, and pay for it, for the next 20 years. I don't agree with this law, but the current situation sucks big time.

MA_Matriarch, it sounds like what you're saying is that Adam gets to have it both ways. He can choose to have a family (Christian standards) or run around screwing all the women he wants and walk away from the consequences scot-free.

That's his idea of equality? Sounds like having his cake and eating it too. What they used to call in the good old days "sowing your wild oats".

Adam, you simply put it that a woman can't have it both ways.

Either she lives by Christian standards...(hence doing her duty) or having a choice of giving birth and men having the option of supporting them.

You stated a woman can't have her cake and eat it too.

truthteller, it is a fact that the laws in many states are still archaic. And DNA proof hasn't kept the innocent from the death chambers as well. I also disapprove of states automatically granting custody to mothers. I think fathers can be just as good at parenting (although a challenge when it comes to breastfeeding) and what I consider ideal for the children is shared custody. The best divorce story I ever heard was when the parents bought the house across the street and the children moved freely between both houses. Generally children end up being the war zone with every bullet aimed at the other parent first passing through their little bodies. Didn't happen in my case because my husband didn't want to be a father anyway (which neither of us realized when we got married). Although as my oldest son said recently, now that he's old and in poor health, he is very regretful of his past behavior. And even if he didn't want the responsibility of fatherhood, he always loved his kids. That may sound contradictory, but I do understand it. When I was a young single mother and our lives were so hard and my sons were so sad that he didn't want to see them I was angry with him, but I feel peaceful toward him and I'm very glad my sons can forgive him and be there for him. For him and for them.

I guess my point is that we can't define life in simplistic terms. It isn't. It's a journey of growth. Or stagnation. Take your pick.

ADAMSLP I may have mistaken you for comments that sounded awfully similar to those of NOBODY SPECIAL, both seem to have dovetailed... if I linked you incorrectly to HIS comments, my apologies.

It's interesting that ADAMSLP used the same argument on both me and KathyDot... that we met bad men and somehow deserved that fate. What a simplistic/judgmental indictment! In any case, there is no use trying to talk sense to you as your mind is made up and it's obviously been programmed along fundamentalist/sexist notions for too long to reboot. Good luck. Maybe you'll find a woman who wants to carry your seed.
Of all the women I have ever known, I know of ONE who did sleep with a guy knowing she was fertile, but she lost that baby. Nature pre-empted her devious plan. Most of the women I know who have undergone divorce never end up with what the court grants them. Sadly, while single mothers (I was one) use incredible resourcefulness to get all the things they need for their children, it IS the children who suffer when MEN do not show a sense of responsibility towards their offspring. There are MANY men who do the right thing, but just as many who do not. This is why HRS has a whole department to go after delinquent fathers. In a perfect world, we'd all have consensual sex that led to long, meaningful relationships blessed by mutual trust and long-term compatibility. However, in this world odds are against that and therefore OTHER deviations on this theme give rise to adaptations of necessity.

I hope all you men who want to be free to create children and then dump them never have any. Then they won't have to wonder why they have Daddies who don't want to have anything to do with them. Why don't you all just get vasectomies? End of problem.

My goodness Adamslp, I've gone from kathywhatever to dotbimbo. Pretty rude. Actually I am a Registered Nurse. Although I don't see what my educational level has to do with this discussion, I am aware that some people do judge people by their job titles and degrees. At the time I left my alcoholic husband (who I married right out of high school), I had been a homemaker, as were almost all women of my generation, and had no job skills.

And no, I know some wonderful men. And I have three wonderful sons, who in spite of their difficult childhoods, have done well, are good fathers, and have ethical standards that I admire. Glad to hear you're not intending to post any further on this subject since you're jumping to conclusions and not making a lot of sense. And I can see that this topic is as hot a button as the pro-anti-choice issue. Evolved men agree with women that men should be responsible for their own fertility. Unevolved men think they should not have any share of responsibility for an unintended pregnancy besides coercing a woman into an abortion regardless of her beliefs, feelings or safety. I guess if I were an unevolved man it would sound good to me too. Or a Libertarian, who seems to believe it's every man for himself, and first one to the life boat wins.

Esclavo, I too would love to see all parents have the choice to send their children to public or private schools, but my question to you is, who pays for it? Our current "voucher" system doesn't cover private tuition, leaving the poor no alternative.

Dotbimbo,
I find it extremely amusing (Sorry but my temper is not showing), that you don't have the intellectual capacity to read my entire posting and comment on its meaning rather then pick out parts of it and use it out of context to try and support your world view of men in general.
If I may say so, it sounds to me as though you have had some bad experences with men and are are generalizing your hurt feeling to all men. You need to let go of your negative feelings.
Read truthtellers posting again. Good stuff.
By the way, What is your educational level. Just because you read a book once doesn't make you educated.

MA Matriarch
Where in the heck did you get that information. Certainly not from reading my posting. Good People. Thats my last word on this subject

truthteller, I agree with you, there is enough deceit and unfairness to go around, and if you read my posts, you will see I never pretended there isn't. My point is that males are taught - most unfortunately - that they are NOT responsible for their own fertility. Why should they rely on a female's assurance that she won't get pregnant? Personal responsibility. No, condoms aren't a lot of fun, but neither is 18 years of child support. And the idea of abandoning a child you helped create to the tender mercies of this society with it's vicious attitude toward the poor -which most single mothers are - and being raised by an overworked stressed out single parent is also a cruelty toward your offspring and should be unacceptable to any decent person, of which not everyone on this website seems to be.

By the way, I was a single mother; my former husband did pay child support (about 5% of his income) and my sons were raised in poverty. He didn't care. He saw his kids about twice a year. And I fed my kids on food stamps and bought our clothes in thrift stores and paid for childcare out of my meager paychecks. So don't talk to me about what a cakewalk it is to be a single parent. I know the laws have changed somewhat; fathers have to share childcare expenses now. It's still a very hard life, don't think it isn't. In more evolved countries, there is more family support, but this country is the most family hostile of all the Western industrialized countries on the planet. Unless of course, you are rich.

kathyodat, Ever been one?

Yes I have. I was was also married when I was with child. His own parents tried to do all they could do to try to encourage me to NOT take support and encouraged his son not to pay it and I was physically disabled none the less.

My former mother-in-law who was 73 at the time physically attacked me at MY house on Christmas Eve right in front of her grandson. She degraded me for my need of financial assistance as her daughter never took a dime from the father of her child.

My goodness just try to find affordable housing never mind anything else like day care while a mother works. I can't believe the way people of this country treat family's.

Even the most liberal probably don't want to go there, but if women truly want equal rights, and I'm all for that, and very pro-abortion rights to boot, then maybe the unfairness of child support laws needs to be addressed as well. Why are women allowed to string a guy along, tell him they are using protection, or had a tubal and then have a little "oops" and get the guy on the hook for the next 18 years of child support? If women want equal rights then they need equal responsibility to take care of their "mistakes". Yes, children do better with two parents and a lot of guys are dogs that breed indiscriminately and take off. But, there are also a lot of women who do dirty things to guys with pregnacy so they can get taken care of. (I know, the well educated women on this site can't imagine doing something like that, but I've seen it happen in the lower social strata.) A lot of poor young women just can't wait to get pregnant by some guy and get him to support them. Also, why do men in many states still have to pay child support if it can be proven through DNA that they are not the father of a child they have been paying support for? Let's get some fairness in the process so the right won't have a leg to stand on in their paternalistic view of women's rights.

Adamslp, as you know, I am not Kathywhatever. Your temper must be showing. Aside from that, we are looking at two different worlds. The word missing in your world is "seduction". Besides appearing endlessly as a theme in novels and movies, it is also in the dictionary. It appears that in your world men are innocent victims, just doing their God-given right to insert their sperm into any vagina they can find without any consequences for their actions. Women, however, have the entire responsibility of preventing or terminating pregnancy or bearing all the consequences of a child resulting. Meanwhile, they are treated as second class citizens in all ways. A little education might be in order here. I recommend "The Addictive Society" by Anne Wilson Schaef.

You say no woman can be taken advantage of unless that is what she wants. Without using the terms, you are describing women as sluts or Madonnas. I understand that many men do see women in those terms. But even worse is that you are promoting the idea that men are free to impregnate women and walk away from the consequences. Sounds like Lords of the Manor to me. We've been there, and fortunately, many men don't want to be there anymore. We've heard from some of them on this site. They want true equality and mutual respect. They understand that our society is unfair to women, they accept co-responsibility for creating a child, and that the woman carries the greater burden of pregnancy and it's costs and they grant her the right of decision for that burden. You however, do not want to accept co-responsibility. You want to blame the woman for getting pregnant, and dump the entire problem on her. Still sound fair?

By the way, society is not overly helpful to single parents, although single fathers do make more money. In fact, our society is brutal to single parents. Ever been one?

Adam, here is the implication that I got from your statement. The time a mother spends nurturing a child is valueless. The only responsibility that counts is financial. So if indeed a man wants to have 10 children it is the woman's God given "duty" to do so.

So if a woman is given a choice whether or not she wishes to spend her life performing her "duty" then so should the man.

If indeed a woman chooses to dedicate her life to her family then it is only fair to a man that she find a way to financially support it.

That is equality all right! NOT!

No Kathywhatever. You are the one trying to have your cake and eat it too.

1. Girls, women are the ones who get pregnant.
They are the ones who have to protect themselves. I've never met a woman who was "manipulated" into bed unless that is where they wanted to be in the first place.
2. There are two major models of behavior for women in this world. One is the old fashioned religious model in which proper woman value chastity and don't have sex until they are married. The male is held accountable for all offspring from that union. In this society women are given less options in life regarding what their role in life can be, due to the fact that the men where responsible for supporting the family unit. The second model is where women are completely free to have sex with whoever and whatever they choose. In this society, the males are reduced to sperm donors who have no say as to whether or not the baby will be born or aborted. Society as a whole helps to provide for the children's needs, therefore the male is not needed to provide for the offspring. This is the society that Marija Gimbutas in her book "the living goddess" made famous. In the western world these societies no longer exist. We must come to terms of what values from each model we are going to take from.
Many women in our western world, still value chastity and want to be treated like a lady. They may not want until marraige to have sex but they are certainly down that road in their relationships before they give it up.
Other women want to hook up and party and don't have any common sense in their heads. They think that they world owes them everything and they don't have to be responsible for their own actions.
THE MAJOR POINT OF THIS ARTICLE IF WE CAN BE ALLOWED TO GET BACK TO IT IS: Can women have abortions without getting the man's permission. If you think the answer is no, them you must logically and consistently believe that men do not have to be personally financially responsible for the baby when it arrives (goddess model). If you think the answer is yes, then the logical conclusion is that the men have to be responsible (biblical model). Would you like the cake or the eat it part?

People stick it out until they have the means to do what they must do and they shouldn't be forced to do otherwise.

In the long run the only thing society would do is run these innocent's down as burdens on society worse than they do now.

It is bad enough there is NO true assistance for teens and women to make it on their own in this country. There would be no value left for a woman to be forced to file a police report if indeed she was sexually assalted........none!

I know of a young women who was sexually assaulted by her father and she didn't have a place to go. So what good would it be for her to be dead?

Missing the point, JH. You are assigning equal rights for men and women to women's bodies. Why do men think it's no big deal to go through pregnancy, labor, delivery, postpartum, lactation, hormonal and psychological changes? Maybe because they never have? It's a woman's body, not an object that others get to decide what will be done with it. Will you people please stop telling us what to do with our bodies? No one's telling you what you can and can't do with your body!

OK, if father gets veto, then father should be willing to foot the bill for raising the child -- and be held accountable to do so. It's easy to say the mother can't terminate
'cause father had something to do with it, as long as the responsibility of supporting, nurturing, and educating is also accepted. Equal rights, right?

canuckchuck, you're funny!

I think an Ohio general booty stike is called for here.

If a woman can't have control of her own womb, she shouldn't let anyone near it until she does

KATHY DOT: Thank you for exhibiting so much patience in seeking to educate those that may not be ABLE to hear other than what they have already made up their mind to believe. And thanks to those that validated my comments/position.
Canuck Chuck--gallows humor, but true.
Adamslp: I think your # 4 might placate some of the men in this forum who think it's unfair that they be obligated to pay child support. I understand if there was NO relationship, kind of an accidental conception from what would have otherwise constituted a "one night stand." Or As Cheryl Crow put it, "My favorite mistake."
Moses, you do sound like a really evolved male. Wish there were more like you; although I've "located" a few on C.D. One expects a higher count of enlightened men in a progressive forum; yet it's spellbinding that this sadly is too often NOT the case.

Adamslp, I'm just saying you're not talking about the real world. Let's talk about the real world. First of all, it's the first 11 weeks. After that, it gets trickier to do an abortion. Not safe to do the vacuum procedure. And no, some women haven't figured it out before then. And some states place obstacles, such as only one facility in the whole state, a waiting period, financial difficulties, etc.

But that's not the point. We have an unequal society. In an ideal world females stand up for themselves, but in reality too many are vulnerable to manipulation. That's the fact. I think boys should not be taught that they can manipulate a girl into sex and then tell her it's her problem if she becomes pregnant. What you're saying is that the man can have his cake and eat it too. If he doesn't want to help support a child for 18 years, he should be responsible for not creating one. It's his sperm. Shouldn't he be responsible for what he does with it?

Hi Kathyodat,
I'll bite. Just to clarify the mischaracterizations of my comments.

1. I was not discussing minors. My feelings on that issue is that an adult who knowingly has sex with a minor should be imprisoned. Their assets should be impounded and they should have to pay for the child's upbringing if it is not aborted.
2. According to Rowe V. Wade a woman has the entire 1st trimester to get a safe abortion. If she can't figure out she is pregnant by then. ??????????????????????????????
3. Boys absolutely should be taught to wear protection, but as I said, other then in the case of rape, the woman is in charge of what she puts in her virgina. She is the one who needs to be the enforcer. No condom, no booty. It doesn't matter if the man is a seducer or not, the bottom line is that the girl is the one who gets pregnant.
Better education is the Key. Parents (or perhaps society through the schools) need to tell their daughters (and sons) what the rules have to be. Abstinance only education doesn't work. STD's, pregnancy, AIDS are the result of not arming our kids with the facts. Girls also need to be taught to be selective and then not to give it up (if not until marraige) until she has a better idea of who the young man is, and does he truly care about who she is as a person. Does he love her. Then safely first.
Then if the impossible happens and a baby is conceive through both condoms and BCP's, then both people should have a say in bringing a dependent child into this world. If the woman wants it and the dad doesn't he shouldn't be held responsible, if the man wants it and the woman doesn't, then she should be allowed to have an abortion without anyone's permission. Problem solved. You can't have your cake and eat it too, as my mother used to say. On the contrary though, she wouldn't have approve of premarital sex.

I can see this conversation:

"As you husband, I demand that you carry my baby to term"

"Newsflash Hubby..It ain't yours"

My prediction is...guys in Ohio ain't gonna be getting very laid much anymore..

Cool, As a male, I always wanted to own my very own uterus.... especially if atached to a perky white breeding slave.

In response to Nobody special, " . . . How about the woman saying, I'm responsible to, so I'll be on the pill." That statement is implicitly understood. Women have been made responsible for all birth control, especially back in my day (way back in the dark ages when girls had to be flown out of state and only daughters of the wealthy could afford the cost) we were told, 'a boy will only go as far as you let him' making even the boy's responsibility her responsibility. I'm just saying that it is way past time that we teach our young boys and young men that they are responsible for where they put their sperm, no matter what a girl says she is taking or using. A common cold can knock out the protection of the pill. I am saying that women have had near sole responsibility for "protection" in the bad old days. It is time for men to step up to the plate and take responsibility for their own part of the procreation process. Depend on yourself to provide birth control and depend on yourself not to bring an unwanted fetus into existence.

Hi Adamslp, Nice thoughts, but life is a little more complicated than that. Sometimes men lie about their own fertility (as do women), and sometimes a woman, due to uneven cycles, may not know she's pregnant until it's unsafe to have an abortion. Some men are seducers and make promises they don't intend to keep. And in fairness, some women try to trick a man into a relationship by getting pregnant. And half of the 15 to 17 year old girls who get pregnant, the father is between 20 and 29 years old. And some men get females pregnant and vanish.

How about if men AND women are responsible for their own fertility? Why put it all on the woman? Why should men get to run around impregnating women and refusing to take any responsibility for their acts? Sounds feudal to me, although perhaps attractive to men who want to play without having to pay.

And by the way, you're presuming a short lifetime for men (18 years). Although men who care about their children are fathers for the rest of their lives, even if not legally financially responsible after the first 18 years.

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Long list of responses. I wonder if anyone will even read mine.

My Vote:
1.Bad idea on the woman getting permission from the man for an abortion.
2.Woman are responsible for their own bodies. They should have the say whether or not to have an abortion.
3.Woman are responsible for their own bodies and are thus responsible (except, of course, in the case of rape) for making sure they do not get pregnant either by insisting that the man wear condom or by using birth control pills/ or other device or preferably both.
4. Good people make mistakes and get pregnant, thus the law, in my opinion should be that the woman should have to get permission from the man to HAVE the baby (not permission to have an abortion). If the man refuses the child and if the woman still wants the baby, then the man shouldn't have to be held financially responsible for an unwanted baby for the rest of his life.

NobodySpecial, I'll try once more. Not everyone is respectful on this forum, although I have tried to be, even when my rights are being threatened.

I did not say we live in a society of equal rights and respect. Obviously we don't, as those at the top make abundantly clear.

People do bad things to each other, and the majority of relationships are dysfunctional.

Domestic violence and incest are epidemic, which if you read the studies, you will know. They aren't being addressed on a societal level. In fact, there is a taboo against speaking of incest, but not against incest itself, since a taboo has the effect of extinguishing a behavior (sorry, I have iconoclastic tendencies).

A large part of our social service budget is spent on support service collection activities, since we have many deadbeat dads and a few deadbeat moms as well. So much for mutual parental responsibility. Our skyrocketing divorce rates leave many kids with single parents, and most of the rest have two working, stressed out parents. And our social attitude toward childcare is neolithic. Not a very kid-friendly society we have.

Some of those statements you refer to as screaming insults are simply facts. Yes, more babies in dumpsters and dead young women. And what about the rising number of pregnant young women who are being murdered by their boyfriends because they are pregnant? Because they didn't choose abortion? What about the rising rate of infanticide? To me, this is a society that is getting sicker.

There are a couple of medical studies showing that the larger the gap in wealth in a society, the less healthy everyone is, including the wealthy. Their conclusion is that we are hardwired to be egalitarian - equals. That doesn't mean we have to become communists, but that we should not have policies that let the richest 1% run off with almost all the nation's wealth.

NobodySpecial, I have no daughters. I have three sons. Obviously you didn't carefully read my post replying to Smashette and Moses Kassandra. I raised them at a time when I didn't know anyone who didn't spank, but I refused to do that to my children, or leave them to cry. I am very glad they don't spank their kids either. It's a cruel and vicious thing to do to tender children. It seems to me that you see anger where it isn't, perhaps through a veil of your own anger?

This law is great! It means that if I get some religious extremist pregnant and she's all like "It's my body" and "Jesus hates to see dead fetuses in heaven" then I can just be like "Shut up" and force her to get an abortion. That's cool! This is the real meaning of equality for men and women!

Better yet? Abort all babies! Humanity SUCKS.

kathyodat you said:
"We can't have peace and freedom without equality and respect. "

Now pit that against some arguements made by this bills opponents:

-The Rapeublican party and the Pro-Sperm movement show their colors
-So if a father rapes his daughter
-Ohio Talibanate
-ignorant trolls should not reproduce
-nice alias dork
-perhaps every woman who wants an abortion in Ohio should list these misogynist legislators as 'possible fathers'…
-90% of US families are dysfunction
-Truly loving relationships based on mutual respect and caring are RARE
-If men really wanted equality between the sexes, they would pass effective laws and policies regarding spousal abuse.
-By the way YOU are the SEXIST PIG!!!!
-If that actually happens, you should also count on finding more babies in dumpsters.

Where is the mutual respect in these arguements? Sounds like a bunch of man-hating, angry women screaming insults and threats.

I sincerely hope any children you do have are daughters. It would be a shame for you to raise a son and him grow up to be the violent, abusive, disloyal man that you always assured him he'd grow up to be.

NobodySpecial you are a complete doofus and nobody cares what you think.

kathyodat, you are right, and I ran out of time to edit my statement above. The fundamental point is that a woman's body is hers alone, and no man or legislation should control it.

Thank you, marxymark, and Poet. It's good to see so many men step forward and support equality for women. We can't have peace and freedom without equality and respect.

Kathy

Smashette: Yeah- that'll be just great Nobody Special.
If that actually happens, you should also count on finding more babies in dumpsters.

And many more women and girls dying of back alley coat hanger abortions. Anyone remember those days?

Moses Kassandra, if this world had many more men like you, bless you, it would be a sane, safe, peaceful world. My son also organized his life around his kids, and put them above all else. You sound like him. Your family is very lucky to have you.

Fetuses will grow on any human tissue, but I haven't seen any serious efforts to pursue that beyond a movie. Of course, no man will ever get to experience labor, the birth canal is missing. Too bad.

I can understand men feeling left out of this momentous decision, but the point is, it's not their bodies. If they can't get that through their heads, then there is nothing to talk about. They refuse to respect the autonomy of women, they will never see women as having the right to determine what will happen to their own bodies, which they reserve for themselves. How about enforcing vasectomy laws? Are you ready for that?

As a male, I often am unaware of the extent of my male privilege. I can't imagine what it would be like to become pregnant from a rape and then bear the burden of proving that a rape occurred. If this bill passes, how many women will have to lie using a fabricated rape in order to terminate an unwanted pregnancy? And then how many women who actually were raped will face an uphill battle to prove the truth? Of course, the majority of unwanted or unplanned pregnancies come from consensual sex. And there are heartbreaking situations for well-meaning men who want children. That is a personal problem and should not become a legal problem. This bill is a nightmare and a huge invasion of privacy. It's a clever strategy by the champions of chauvinistic patriarchy, and it must be defeated.

nobody special, keep it in your pants.

I don't know if my post was just ignored in this thread, but I wanted to point out that I don't support this bill in any way; I advocate socialized child support. This bill claims to employ principals of the 'men's movement' only as a farce to justify the right wing agenda, shared by people like ron paul, of overturning roe vs. wade.

Yeah- that'll be just great Nobody Special.
If that actually happens, you should also count on finding more babies in dumpsters.

I'm not pro-life. I simply think that a male should be informed and made responsible (including in decision making) when a pregnancy occurs. I'm not pro-life. I'm pro-choice. I just think it's more than one person's choice.

The mother's right to choose is not based on her "ownership" of the fetus. It is based on completely different considerations, all having to do with privacy and personal integrity, and none of those apply to the father. This bill is idiotic. To say that the father has rights over a fetus brings the fetus to the status of chattel and is the most un-pro life position imaginable.

To those who think this has no chance of passing.

From ABC NEWS --

"As long has been the case, women and men support legal abortion in roughly equal numbers. In this poll 61 percent of women and 58 percent of men say it should be legal in all or most cases. And while 58 percent of men say abortion should be illegal to end an unwanted pregnancy, so do 52 percent of women."

When you throw in a father's rights to his children, this is an issue that will go forward. If you want to have any abortions on the down-low, better get them now. Soon you'll have to obey the unfortunate rule of letting the father know. Soon everyone (male and female) will start to be held accountable.

r06ue1
"This bill will never go anywhere so not to worry"

50% of the country is male. 50% of the remaining women are Christian fundamentalists. That's 75%.

This bill's not going anywhere? That's right. Just keep thinking that. It's perfectly okay to let your guard down...even for a minute.

rockowl
"What happens if the man wants the abortion and the woman doesn't."

Then there would not be an abortion...cause then they would have the same rights...equal rights.

This bill will never go anywhere so not to worry

This is the most grotesque attack on women's right to choose other than all out bans.

What happens if the man wants the abortion and the woman doesn't.

Also from ABC News---

"85 percent support abortion rights when the woman's life is endangered.

77 percent support abortion rights when the woman's health is endangered.

76 percent support abortion rights when the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest.

55 percent support abortion rights when there is evidence the baby's physical or mental health may be impaired.

35 percent support abortion rights when the woman or family cannot afford to raise the child. "

Soon we WILL have equal reproductive rights.

pittgirl,

Good Post. While I'm not the Christian Right someone accused me of earlier (far from it), I do value the nuclear family with both masculine and feminine roles, so I don't think it's necessarily good to completely exclude males from responsibility to their children, but it would be fair.

I would find that acceptible (because I value fairness above my idea of conventional upbringing).

This topic brings up an entire world of debate.

What if the male half of the equation has no viable means to support himself, let alone any offspring he produces. Does he STILL get to choose?!

What if the pregnant woman believes the father lacks the maturity, skills or emotional stability to be a parent? Does he STILL get to choose? Lets not forget, the "father" could be a young teen.

What if the pregnancy is the result of an unreported date rape? Will a woman have to PROVE this?

How is it not a total invasion of a woman's privacy to demand she give a listing of all her sexual partners? Maybe when some politicians are included on these lists, some of these legislators will sing a different tune.

Whats to stop a woman from bringing along a male friend who agrees to sign consent? Once the abortion is performed, there's no way to prove paternity.

This is a sad, sad backwards step for women's rights.

The decision to carry a pregnancy to term should legally rest with the woman, end of discussion. But since the man (currently, and lets hope it stays that way) has no legal options to influence her decision, forcing him to pay child support is unfair. So do away with child support; it doesn't seem to be enforced very well anyway. Of course, this would likely lead to more abortions, so those posters who bemoan the child support requirement but are also anti-choice might want to reconsider your stand. Otherwise, you come across as being supremely hypocritical, wanting to dictate a woman's life, but hands off that poor man's money!

WmC said...

"Seems if the "sperm donor" has a right to prevent an abortion, he also has a right to require one, even when the "incubator" does not want one to occur. If a fetus is truly "joint property," this conclusion is inescapable."

That is your flawed logic. The point would be that neither party could unilaterally decide to have an abortion. You act like this law is about ripping women from there homes and forcing abortions on them... no, it's about a woman having to tell the father that she plans on terminating the offspring that they share. Just as he has a lot of responsibilities thrust on him, he should be able to stop the abortion.

If a man could unilaterally terminate an pregnancy, then the concept of a woman unilaterally terminating a pregnancy would reflect equality. However men do not (and should not) have the ability to force a women to give up her children. Women should not have that power. That is power that should be shared. That is equality.

mosses kasandra, an absolutely perfect post.

"If you do not have the power of reason at your disposal to work with this woman to do what is best for your child, then you probably should not have bred with her. Hm. Maybe I don't mean to venture into the marriage advice, but it does seem that if partners KNEW each other, this would hardly be an issue."

Right on Moses Kassandra. I tried to say this earlier, you said it better (or less offensively).

*~ The CULTURE OF LIFE is turning abortions into the grateful dead ~*

to all you prolifers that are bringing god into the equation. where the hell is he, she, it, when there are 20,000 children dying every day from starvation and preventable health conditions. there is never a mention of them. but ohhhh ,don't you dare destroy those cells in a pietry dish. this is all about your ego. some of your reasoning leaves me shaking my head.

so i guess this means that if a father WANTS an abortion, that he would trump the womans choice to go to term.

Seems if the "sperm donor" has a right to prevent an abortion, he also has a right to require one, even when the "incubator" does not want one to occur. If a fetus is truly "joint property," this conclusion is inescapable.

The day is not far off when medicine will be able to implant artificial wombs in men, so that they'll be able to bear the child they don't want aborted. Then we'll see how many are genuinely anti-abortion.

Moral issues raised by politicians are a smoke screen for general incompetence.

Wow! What a nice discussion. I'm pretty sure asking if someone is a lesbian or not is missing the topic entirely, however, and let's me know that we have a person either a) completely lacking in the ability to defend his position with reason or, b) so RIGHT WING that it is assumed by this person that calling someone a lesbian scores a point in the same way one used to be scored by saying, "You sound like a COMMUNIST to me." But, I guess that gets right back to the lack of rhetorical skills, doesn't it.

I am a man, and a man more devoted to his kids you cannot imagine. I have organized my working life so that I am always there for my kids. I stayed at home with them until they started school and am still there when they leave for school and when they get home. I think my entire purpose in life is to protect those kids, to make sure they are safe, happy, well educated, and get the chance to try whatever interests their little minds. I'll skip the 40 page speech on just how much kids (not just mine, but I feel a strong responsibility for all kids that come under my watch) and get to the point.

As strongly as I feel about my children, I fully recognize that they do not spring from my body. Yes, I contribute part of their biology. Yes, I am more than a sperm donor. However, for nine months, they are completely dependent on my significant other for their existence, and the risks related to health are not shared. I can give whatever support I am able, but I CANNOT give myself to the job. I cannot take the risks she faces. If I COULD take the child into my body, then, yes, I might have something of a say, but I can't. It is her body ENTIRELY. Her RISK to face and no one else's. Anyone who would dare to legislate what a woman can and cannot do with her body has never really considered that other person's life. Never imagined themselves in that position, and CERTAINLY never experienced love, empathy or compassion for the person carrying the child. This is not a WAR, it is a fact of biology and the only answer is that the person whose body is in jeopardy makes the choices. If you do not have the power of reason at your disposal to work with this woman to do what is best for your child, then you probably should not have bred with her. Hm. Maybe I don't mean to venture into the marriage advice, but it does seem that if partners KNEW each other, this would hardly be an issue.

Historically, men have not been bearing the burden for children. They have had (and still often have) the ability to opt out. The statistics on which gender is left, unsupported, with a child are staggering. Try having an enlightened, respectful attitude toward those who bear your children and see if that doesn't buy you a little say rather than reaching for the LAW and concepts of chattel.

I've never heard of the two biggest idiots in this thread. I assume they are here just to stir up trouble rather than to be of any use. I suspect they are part of the Christian Right, trying to stir up men on this sense of entitlement, a bit like the conservatives try to stir up men on Affirmative Action, falsely connecting things like the outrageous labor situation with color rather than capitalists. Thanks to everyone who has argued so effectively in the face of such thoughtless vitriol. As far as I'm concerned, this debate was carried a long time ago by Siouxrose and Kathyodat. All I really meant to say was directed to them: Right on!

C H I L D R E N , C H I L D R E N !
.
PLEASE STOP FIGHTING!
.
This is too important to waste all this anger on. Just because the NaziCons are into domination we need not fight each other just to amuse their twisted EGOs. Creating strife is their only game. Enough of this pointless, Mazdalike struggle over 'good' and 'evil.' Everyone knows that the Frost Giants win in the end. The past is gone and the future is always Tantalizing out of reach. We only have the NOW. The 'kingdom' of heaven (and hell) is upon the earth and eternity isn't measured with a clock.
.
Making, mending and terminating life is the job of the Godess. Providing the energy is the job of the God. Mother Earth and Father Sun. That's the way it is. Trying to deny our own true nature is the only mortal sin.
.
-whatfools' opinion

Annika--Thank you for sharing your "lunch room" experience. Such verbal jujitsu is exactly what argumentative and dysfunctional people need to reveal their cognitive dissonance--a polite way of saying hypocrisy.

Kathyodat--you have explained very clearly for the mentally challenged why support is not some 50-50 arrangement since woman are required to give so much of themselves by their very nurturing role and working for substandard wages as to make further "contribution" demands a sick joke.

Spoken like a mom and working woman.

"Had Enough August 3rd, 2007 12:55 am
munchkinpup, are you a lesbian?

I'm not going to read your crap, but you sound like a lesbian, from what I read. And a bitch."

Which is it? Did you read her "crap" or not? If you didn't read the comment, how could you possibly come to the conclusions that the commenter is a lesbian and bitch. You sound like "whatever" - ignorant, juvenile and without a clue that you are a miscreant.

"whatever August 2nd, 2007 7:07 pm
In a way I agree with this peice of legislation. Men have no say what so ever in a life changing descion. Woman can use men as sperm donors and then make them pay for 25 years while they deny the father so many of his rights as a father. Its bad for men and its bad for children. There must be more balnce in this matter than just "a womans right to choosw."

Your spelling and grammar lead me to believe you are, either physically or mentally, around the age of 12. I further surmise that you are male, as males seem so much more concerned with the issue of abortion, while having not a clue as to what pregnancy and motherhood entail.

Men DO have a say in the "life changing decision" to create a life. As someone so simply remarked, "it takes two to tango." Perhaps men should keep "it" in their pants or, as women are so often instructed to do, "just say no." You are incorrect in your estimate (allegation? assumption?) that men have to "pay for 25 years" to be a sperm donor. First of all, you assume that all women become pregnant for financial gain. Secondly, you are ignorant of the law. There's not a court in the land that requires child support of an illegitimate child after that child has reached the age of 18.

I actually hope this bill passes. Then, I hope every woman seeking an abortion in Ohio will fill out the "possible father" list, and name every single male in the Ohio legislature who voted for this bill. After the misogynists are through paying for DNA tests and reassuring their wives or significant others, they might think twice about passing laws which tell another human being what they may or may not do with their own body.

Siouxrose and annika--you rock!!!
Watch your mouth "Had Enough." Try washing it out with arsenic. You can stuff the "bitch " and the "sexist pig" comments where the sun doesn't shine.
By the way YOU are the SEXIST PIG!!!! You want to add nasty into the discussion? BRING IT ON!

VIexpatriate, or what ever the hell your name is-- your intolerance of women's reproductive rights and YOUR anger is truly stunning, as well as your blatant hatred of women. Pedal your misogynistic garbage elsewhere.

Quote:
"After a woman becomes pregnant, it is not her body anymore, she is sharing that body with the child of the father. It is unbelievably selfish for women to think that they should decide whether that man's baby is born..."

Oh really??? Not the woman's body ANYMORE? How is that true exactly?? As a happily married woman who has given birth to two children, my body most definitely BELONGS TO ME and no one else!!
It was MY body which which became larger during both pregnancies--my body which supported the life of the fetus-- my body which underwent medical tests to determine if the fetus(s) were developing normally--my body which experienced the excruciating pain of childbirth--WITHOUT MY BODY, my children could not exist!! And, even after their births, it was MY BODY which continued to nourish them (it's called breastfeeding) and it was my body which tirelessly cared for my children at all hours of the day and night!! IT is very difficult to raise children. Children must be loved and wanted by BOTH parents if that is at all possible. Parents must have their act together or the child will suffer from some type of deprivation or physical and emotional abuse. Where are all these wingnut assholes AFTER the child is born?? Will the Ohio anti-choice groups be taking up a collection for the children born to those unfortunate women who cannot access the father's permission?? What if Daddy changes his mind and decides that after hours with the guys is more fun than staying up all night with an infant?!

Pregnancy, childbirth and childcare ain't no picnic, Wingdings-- Enough already, Serendipity dippity-do and whatever your name is, I repeat: CHILDREN MUST BE LOVED AND WANTED, and SOMEONE MUST CARE FOR THEM FOR MANY YEARS!!

Get that through your ignorant low IQ brain cells--if you have any. Obviously you do not. And by the way, IF I had not wanted to be pregnant, my husband would have respected my wishes, because he understands that my body does indeed belong to me and no one else. He just read this piece and said it is a disgusting power play against women.

This "legislation" is utter nonsense, written by men to protect the so called rights of fathers and nothing more than a deranged attempt to control the reproductive lives of women. Just how bad are things going to have to get before sane women wake the hell up and demand their full reproductive rights??

We are living in a PATRIARCHAL culture, as someone has already mentioned. That is ALL THIS IS. How can anyone believe it is a good idea to FORCE women to have an unwanted or developmentally abnormal child?? Someone (veive) suggested it might be "okay" if a couple is married. Ever heard of domestic abuse?? What was the name of that pregnant woman who was murdered at eight months pregnant by her slime boyfriend? REMEMBER her name: Jessie Davis.
Additionally, the issue of non-viability of the fetus is not even discussed in this pathetic piece of misogynistic trash by Adams, etc.

Sounds like everyone's all over the map here.

Kawms, I never said what you attributed to me: I cant help pointing out to kathyodat that her comment "the land does not belong to us, we belong to the land," so, too, does life belong to no one!" contradicts her position.
Although I don't see that as contradictory to my position. Care to explain yourself?

My position is that a woman is The Decider about what will happen in her own body. Period. If a man wants to have a child, go find a woman who wants to be a parent with him. Children deserve two loving parents anyway.

As for these trolls, suggesting that women should be forced to have a child they don't want and can't afford to support and a man should only pay half the child's support while she works, raises and supports the child, earning 70 cents for every dollar he earns: get real. And her body is not a factory for his wishes should he want to be a single parent. There are plenty of abandoned children out there needing parents anyway, go find one. And why are these trolls so eager to control womens' bodies, and so irresponsible about their sperm?

Although Munchausen by Proxy has no bearing on this issue, domestic violence is related. It is part of the power of men over women which is what this debate is really about. If men really wanted equality between the sexes, they would pass effective laws and policies regarding spousal abuse. Which actually can go both ways, but so much more rarely are the men abused, that they are willing to let that pass.

What about the woman who gets pregnant by a man out of state or out of the country? Is the state going to go through the effort of extraditing him to get him to sign papers in Ohio? If not, there's going to be a booming market in out of country "consent forms" by companies in the Caymans, Maldives, etc.

Are women going to need men's consent to HAVE a child as well? What happens when the man says "no"? Is she then going to be forced to have an abortion.

Do you see the absurdity of this type of proposal?

It does seem strange that only children with no identifiable father will be required to be born.

Is this some kind of twisted way to provide poor people born of promiscuous mothers with memory problems as a slave class for corporations?

I have never been comfortable with the total exclusion of fathers in this abortion debate by feminists in light of the child support, inheritance and other family issues. Have no idea of how to fix this system except to provide a social safety net to remove some of the financial fear in an unplanned pregnancy to reduce the number of these sad dilemmas.

No government, State or Federal, should be in the business of forcing women to carry their pregnancies to full term. The decision to bring a person into her world is made by the mother and her doctor, period. Men simply have no say in the matter. ( What kind of uniforms would pregnancy police wear? )

Whenever a story comes up involving women, it never fails to amaze me that no matter how outrageous the infringement on the rights of women, men will always show their true colors and true sexism in the comments.

Yes, sexism is reserved for men by the laws of all the countries that exist. It has existed in all societies since the 5th century BC, or roughly the birth of agriculture -- which was incidentally a FEMALE achievement. But all of us are now inculcated to be sexist towards women -- even women. Patriarchy exists men. Deal with it. It's your problem as much as it is women's. You have male privelege. Use it so we don't have to have these arguments anymore.

I agree with Dichterfreund and Nobodyspecial. Further, I think that the state and social programs should 100% cover "childsupport" for single parents of either sex. That will protect men's choice to not have children, instead of being forced to live in poverty for the rest of their lives on behalf of children they will never see (often because they are not allowed to.) Otherwise, yes, it would be most kind if two sexual partners could openly discuss whether they want the child of a pregnancy together, or whether one of them wants to raise the child alone; in a healthy, communicative relationship, it really isn't going to be any different if she has the child so he can raise it alone like he wants to.

I know of so many deadbeat moms, abusive mothers, physically abusive wives...so I can't be swayed by the ignorance of "feminist lit" written by people who misuse statistics and want to prove to everyone that their problems are more important instead of standing up for real equality. 90% of it is openly sexist. I've had a lot of experience with emotionally and physically abusive women, so I don't tolerate the vapid projections of feminists. Plenty of mothers who will rabidly defend the "right" to mutilate the genitals ("circumsize") of infant boys who they claim to own; what about his body, his choice? The same with the billions of women who hit their sons in disproportionate amounts to how much they hit their daughters; making claims on an invading, disrespecting the rights of the male body.

Why do all the women on here act like all men are out to rape, abuse, and enslave them? Did I accidentally log on to an abuse forum?

God, nature, evolution, call it what you will. The point is, that women carry babies. That's just how it is. That's how it's always been. That's how it always will be. Nothing can change it.

A man is required to procreate and is responsible for his offspring (at least according to the courts and nearly every culture to inhabit the earth). That was not my decision. That was God, nature, evolution, call it what you will. The point is, men are needed to create babies. That's just how it is. That's how it's always been. That's how it always will be. Nothing can change it.

If that is true, then why the lopsided decision as to the child>?

NobodySpecial wrote:

Take that arguement up with God, we didn't have anything to do with that decision.

That doesn't mean that a man should be unable to try to save his decendants from optional deaths (or aborted lives as some might say).

-----

Oh I see, it's what "God" did that's important here.

In that case, riddle me this, Batman: If God had really intended that men should "own" (ugh) half of the potential child, then why did God place the ENTIRE potential child inside the woman's body?

And besides, what's stopping Man from inventing his own artificial womb and inseminating that? Leave both God and Woman out of it, if you find them so hostile.

Rape and domestic violence. You act as if the majority of women experience these things. I'll let you in on a little secret...I've never raped anyone, or been violent with anyone I was dating, and I'm an average guy.

Why do so many of you make this about woman-hating. It's not about misogyny. It's about a man sharing the decision on a shared obligation. You make it about us being against you (which makes sense given the selfishness of your arguements)...but it's about a fetus that shares the DNA from two people. If the woman so chooses, she can make the man be financially responsible AND have his parental rights denied (if I was as non-sequitor as Siouxrose, I would now add in a reference to dangers of Muchausen-by-proxy and post-partum depression and say women should be seperated from their children before they do them harm...but I'm not like that). THEY should choose together. If men are as bad as you think they are, they won't stand in the way of you terminating the pregnancy.

Well I like some guys comment on it. He said he would like to know. That sounds reasonable. I would like to know if I had any kids/pregnancies aborted.(what ever you want to call the conceived cell bunches that is P.C.) I've supported girlfriends of mine and other guys who have had abortions. I have no kids but it does hurt to find out well after the fact that your girlfriend or ex had an abortion and didn't want your support. Talk is cheap anyhow.

Actually, my first reaction to this story was: right! The guys don't trust women to make thoughtful, thought-out decisions! It's a variation on that old standard "oh don't worry your pretty little head about it!". We wise men will make the decisions.

There's quite a lot of anti-woman vindictiveness shown on many of the posts here; I sure wouldn't want any of those angry men making a decision on my pregnancy. I'm particularly concerned about all that anger because so often that anger results in domestic violence--with completely lack of self-awareness on the part of the guy. "I didn't mean to do that!" or "If you hadn't made me so angry this wouldn't have happened!" All of which leads me to suggest that men do anger management courses before carrying this discussion further.

I think that people have to come to grips with rape by a family member (not nec. the father, though often). There is a lot of it and you can imagine both why a woman made pregnant this way would want to abort--and the horrible situation she's placed in by having to get permission from the very person who raped her!

Finally, I just want to say that I absolutely support what siouxrose has written! She writes clearly and expresses how I feel as well.

XigXag---

Take that arguement up with God, we didn't have anything to do with that decision.

That doesn't mean that a man should be unable to try to save his decendants from optional deaths (or aborted lives as some might say).

Siouxrose,

Your bringing up domestic violence in this debate would be like me bringing up Muncheusen-by-proxy... You vastly underestimate the good in the average man. STICK TO THE TOPIC!

Is this a private fight, or can anyone join in? :)

Seriously though, it sounds like somebody in Ohio read "The Handmaid's Tale" and thought, "Hey, that's a pretty good idea."

The part about needing to produce a police report to 'prove' rape or incest just made my blood run cold. Because, you know, every time some guy rapes his daughter, there's automatically a cop standing there, jotting everything down in his book. You could probably take this one part of the proposed law and use it as a sort of generic intelligence test: "Do you agree with this? If so, you are a moron."

However, my 'favorite' quote from the article is from Denise Mackura of the Ohio Right to Life Society:

"Pregnancy is a unique human condition and obviously a woman is affected differently than a man."

So pregnancy affects women differently than men, eh? Hmmm. Would this difference, perhaps, be the fact that men CAN'T GET PREGNANT? I'm just guessing here, I'm not a doctor or anything.

Hey Seredipity,

I wonder if these feminists are rallying to the cause of that mother with the four self-aborted fetuses lying around her house. By they're logic, it was her right to do that, even though her husband, the father, knew nothing. And I guess since they are HER fetuses (instead of THEIR babies bodys) it was cool for her to leave that in the home she shared with the father...he didn't even need to know about the fetus/bodies, since they were really just a part of her body that she could do with as she pleased.

What do you think?

According to the WHO, UNICEF, and UNFPA in a world study done in 2000, in the developed world (US, Europe, Canada, Japan, etc...), the maternal mortality rate is roughly 2 in every 10 thousand births. (You can google "maternal mortality in 2000" to see the study.)

This may not seem like much, but when you realize that there are more than 11 thousand births per day in the US, that number is not THAT small. Throw in that it's not just in women who receive poor care or have access/finance problems for care that these deaths occur, but every pregnancy carries major health/life risks including previa, diabetes, and pre-eclampsia, among others.

So until pregnancy carries a LIFE risk for men, they should NOT have the same say whatsoever. Period.

How about the woman saying, I'm responsible to, so I'll be on the pill.

Pregnancy requires two people. It is both their responsibility. Don't put the entire onus on the man (and believe it or not, some pregnancies happen in spite of proper condom use). It takes two to tango.

If "fathers" want a 'say' they should have said something in the beginning, such as "I'm a responsible human being and I will be using a condom to make sure that you do not have to make the decision of whether or not to have an abortion.

Several years ago a group of men where I work were tossing around their rather self righteous opinions on abortion, deliberately trying to get me to comment. I told them that men have the power to put just about every abortion clinic out of business within the next 4 months. Raised eye brows and shocked expressions, "How?" they asked. I replied, "Keep you fly zipped. Just say no to that pushy woman who wants unprotected sex. Tell her you will not be a party to bringing an unwanted fetus into being." "Hey!," one of them said, "It takes two to tango." I told him, "Then you be the one to stop dancing." I've never seen a lunch room clear out so fast and no one has ever asked my opinion of abortion since. I am highly in favor of a woman being able to make the choice over her own body. I am also TREMENDOUSLY in favor of men taking responsibility for their own sperm. The only place where fathers should have a say is in whether or not they want to be a father, then take responsibility for the consequences by supporting the woman's decision.