“I had grown up in a single-parent home with my mother, and I thought this is my chance to do something different... I feel like there are a lot of guys out there who, like me, want to have kids and build stable homes.”...
“I said that I would take full custody of the child and I even had my mom talk to her... She just wasn’t having it... The night before the abortion, I tried one more time to see if she would change her mind... She said no, so I kissed her stomach and I said, ‘Daddy loves you and I’ll see you in heaven,’ and I left.”...
“I personally had to take leave from work for a couple of months because it was emotionally a very difficult period.... It took me a while to realize that it was OK that the experience was hard on me as well.”....
“I don’t think either of us could even manage taking care of ourselves at that point.”...
“There wasn’t a ‘gee, let’s do a pros-and-cons list’ moment... The idea of having a child then just seemed insane... Do I pray for forgiveness? Yes, I do... Do I wish there had been a way to have kept my children? Yes. Do I regret my decision at the time? Not at all.”
To go back to the quote from the Planned Parenthood organizer: "Men really need to consider what losing access to safe and legal abortion means for them." That's open ended. Do men feel benefited by what has been very easy access to abortion or will they feel benefited if sex and pregnancy do tie women to childbirth? We'll see how actively they participate in the post-Roe legislative process and which side they take. I wonder if men's feelings about abortion vary depending on whether the question is what happens to the pregnancies they've caused or to pregnancies in general.
ADDED: About that man who said "Daddy loves you and I’ll see you in heaven," the New York Times writes: "He wanted her to keep the fetus." Keep the fetus!
AND: From the second-highest-rated comment:
"She said no, so I kissed her stomach and I said, ‘Daddy loves you and I’ll see you in heaven,’ and I left.”
What a terrible thing to say. Our culture is characterized by a surplus of loudly voiced male opinion, I'm not sure we need more. In fact I'm sure we don't. My takeaway from this article - men, who are still far less likely to be responsible for the actual day to day feeding and care of their children, hold romantic and unrealistic ideas about the "fatherhood". Something something tossing a ball back and forth. Not sure, can't really relate.This man swears that he would have cared for his girlfriend's unborn child, he even sicced his mother on her, GROSS, but his former girlfriend surely understood what women everywhere do- if this man had, against his expectations, found fatherhood not to his liking she would most likely be the one stuck with physical custody of their kid and best of luck with the child support process.I really don't care what men think about my basic human right to make my own medical decisions and control my own body.
पोस्ट्स
१०८ टिप्पण्या:
What's a "man"?
What's a "woman"?
I am going to need one of our lefties/nevertrumpers (but I repeat myself) to update me on whatever the latest (last 5 minutes) changes to these definitions happen to be before I can properly assess these comments.
“I really don't care what men think about my basic human right to make my own medical decisions and control my own body.”
Agreed. No one should have the medical decision to take an experimental vaccine forced on her.
Two things.
men, who are still far less likely to be responsible for the actual day to day feeding and care of their children, hold romantic and unrealistic ideas about the "fatherhood".
And yet are still the ones more likely to provide for the majority of their children's physical upkeep, regardless of custody. That said, my husband's deadbeat father made exactly one child support payment for his two sons in his years of being on the hook for them. When he died, destitute in a state home, California managed to contact my husband (who didn't live in California) to stick him with the funeral expenses; my husband told the person, "If you're as good at collecting this from me as you were at collecting all the child support my dad owed, then I have nothing to worry about." The person on the phone sighed and said, "Well, I had to try."
But again, that man was an epic deadbeat. I believe those are in the minority, though thankfully I have no personal experience of it.
Second: after 50 years of hearing that men don't have a right to any opinion about abortion, now we're supposed to listen to them? (I feel pretty certain that this sentiment will echo many of the comments.)
Men are going to vote, so their opinion matters.
The solicited stories from men and women about how this messes up their lives having to have the child will pour out like a river overflowing it's banks over the next 6 months. Expect CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN to do a number of slick vignettes showing the harm it's causing. Expect NYT and WaPo to print out story after story.
In the meantime...there are other issues facing most of American and in every poll, abortion is simply not the most important topic for most people- men and women. (for the record, neither is 'climate change'.)
That said, men need to take responsibility. Period. This is as much about men not taking responsibility for being men as it is anything else. We own the bullets. We have to know how and when to use those bullets. And if you let a bullet go astray, well then...time to be a man and stick around to be a father.
Somehow, we as a species still cannot figure this stuff out. We're so sophisticated until we're required to take part in actual life.
“There wasn’t a ‘gee, let’s do a pros-and-cons list’ moment... The idea of having a child then just seemed insane... Do I pray for forgiveness? Yes, I do... Do I wish there had been a way to have kept my children? Yes. Do I regret my decision at the time? Not at all.”
Two things that struck me about this. First is the word “children” so it was not a one-time thing and he has an inkling that human lives were snuffed out. Second is the understanding that the abortions were morally wrong. Otherwise there would be no need for forgiveness.
Who was more reprehensible, the Auschwitz administrator who was a rapid Nazi who believed, heart and soul, that he was doing humanity a favor or the administrator who knew it was evil but did his work because he was ordered to or he needed the job?
I would guess a super majority of men have little problem with abortion weeks 1 to 14. But up until the moment of birth is infanticide. If you’re comfortable with that, the over turning of Roe allows both women and men to pull the lever for infanticide candidates. Sign you’re name right here....
Good news FakeCons!
The very very very "principled" "TrueCons" of The Lincoln Pedophile Project have come out strongly against the overturning of Roe/Casey.
You know, the way all "principled" "TrueCons" would......
Gadfly hardest hit.
" Our culture is characterized by a surplus of loudly voiced male opinion, I'm not sure we need more. In fact I'm sure we don't. "
Why have we decided it's ok to dehumanize men?
I get that the "Girl Power!" movements in the 90s were supposed to be empowering, but I worried then and I worry now that it was/is becoming ok to disregard the humanity of individual men.
'If you think men should help decide if a woman gets an abortion, just shut up.' -- Jessica Valenti ('The Guardian,' 2014) -- she explained.
Abortion, again. Remember the good old days when all we were forced to talk about was transgenderism. It was a so much simpler time.
We have now raised two generations of boys in a culture where the most innocent of life has been devalued. What do we have to show for it? Boys who will enter a school and kill children and their teachers. The breakdown of the family, especially black families. Absent fathers. Single mothers. Weekend after weekend of street killings in places where abortion is most prevalent. I think men should have more to say about abortion. The ones who believe it's no big deal to impregnate a woman, and the ones who suffer a great loss. So we know which ones are the "good guys". Mother Teresa said it best- "And if we can accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
I getting real sick if this one-sided opinion of abortion.
Why isn’t anyone talking to women who regret their abortions? Or to the men who’s girls friends/wives had abortions that they (the men) didn’t want them to have, and the grief that haunts them?
You can tell one side of the story all you want, it doesn’t stop the other side from existing. And talk about disingenuous.
What this illustrates is abortion is overwhelmingly a means to avoid parental responsibilities, not the oft cited, but extremely rare situations where the child poses a genuine threat the mothers life, will not survive the pregnancy, or is the product of rape or incest.
Men and fathers hope and pray their daughters never have to have and abortion, or end up in a situation where it is the “only” option. We understand it’s not an easy decision, and carries emotional scars and regret. We also don’t want them getting knocked up by some loser who can’t pay his way, or would just leave her high and dry.
But, I suppose the PP bitches want us out of our daughters lives as well.
No doubt I am a mean person, but if you don't want a kid, why the f*ck are you f*cking without birth control?
I am very surpised the NYT is asking for men to step up and be part of the conversation. The commenter you quoted is what I expect from the radical left:
I really don't care what men think about my basic human right to make my own medical decisions and control my own body.
Men have been told to shut up. They have no choice in the matter. If the woman keeps the child, they are on the hook for support.
I am fine with that. They should keep it in their pants until they are ready for the responsibility.
The commenter should not have children. She is bitter and angry and hateful toward men. All men should avoid her as they will not enjoy the experience. If she does have a male child, I feel sorry for the damage she will do to him.
Perhaps, just perhaps BOTH men and women will take birth control more seriously....
Maybe CNN's legal beagle Jeffery Toobin can weigh in on a man's thoughts on unwanted pregnancies and abortion. Although, at least on one recent occasion he chose a sexual release without chance of pregnancy. Progress, Jeffery, progress.
The highest level of support for abortion is men between 25 and 30. I don 't really think that applies to late term, though. That is a money maker for Planned Parenthood.
NYT commentor -
When she wants the baby:
“Pay up for the next 18 years you jerk this is YOUR baby”
When she doesn’t want the baby:
“How dare you tell me what to do with MY body”
If legislators want to take a step towards leveling the playing field, then by law biological fathers ought to be financially responsible to the mother and child until the child reaches 21.
This man hatred by the affluent white PP women is one of the reasons the term “Baby Daddy” is so common in the hood, and abortions are disproportionately concentrated. Tell men they are irrelevant to a family, or a woman’s life....they will become irrelevant. ,
Try and fix that Madison, WI.
Men feeling threatened about women’s access to abortion?
I’m having trouble understanding why I should care about men losing the benefit of E-Z-Gone disposal service for those little mistakes they helped to author.
Men aren't allowed to have a say according to them, so screw off baby killers. Many men WANT to keep the child, but the woman kills it instead. But.....if SHE decides she wants it HE has to support her decision?? Fuck that. The decisions SHOULD be made by both...otherwise suck eggs with the support.
Eleonor said....
Mother Teresa said it best- "And if we can accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
6/26/22, 9:09 AM
THIS^^^ THIS^^^ THIS^^^^^^^
Temujin said...
In the meantime...there are other issues facing most of American and in every poll, abortion is simply not the most important topic for most people- men and women. (for the record, neither is 'climate change'.)
When I pointed this out at the time the Supreme Court decision was leaked, I got some (understandable) blowback here on this site. But it is reality: Most voters will not base their vote on this issue. It only really matters to the relatively few zealots on each side of it. And very few votes will be changed either way.
I don't see anything gross here. I see the same mixed feeling, indecision, guilt, and relief women express.
And that man didn't sic his mother on his girlfriend. It is quite normal to talk to your parent and among the parents of the child. I wonder if you would feel differently if it was an ethnic name? And if so, why? Why do we celebrate "coming out" as gay or this or that and offer support groups to parents and make all schoolchildren contemplate having sex but leave this one subject of having the child taboo -- and you know we do. Why is it fine to discuss anal sex with teens but not choosing life?
When I used to train political groups (mostly grandparents), I told them if they wanted to stop abortion OR prevent a pregnancy, above all else they had to focus on their boys. They had to offer love and support and teach their sons and grandsons to say the following ten words: "I love you. Let's get married and have the baby."
Considering this is filtered through Times readers and then Times editors, the examples you list seem pretty thoughtful and human.
Closing the abortion chambers, withdrawing religious ("ethical") sanction and advice for human rites, means that "benefits"... women and girls (e.g. rape... rape-rape, incest) will be less affordable, less available, and less taxable for feminists and masculinists, and that human life will have increased value. That both planned parenthood (i.e. baby) and planned parent/hood (i.e. granny) to relieve "burdens" h/t Obama in several Democrat districts (e.g. Whitmer/Michigan, Cuomo/New York) will have to be exercised with liberal license in darkness... at the twilight fringe in order to indulge social progress.
That said, civilized society has compelling cause to discourage elective abortion... human sacrifice... homicide for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes. The wicked solution is neither a good nor exclusive choice that has proliferated under left-wing ideology for a century too long.
"The highest level of support for abortion is men between 25 and 30."
Bwahaha. Thirty years later: "bUt wHaT iF I wAnTeD tHe bAby...oh well too late."
Good luck organizing around Dobbs. My hunch is that the abortion issue is drowned out by the flood of bad economic and social issues going forward. Vegetable farmers in California are contemplating drastically cutting back next year because of water restrictions, another Progressive policy slowly killing the Golden State. But if domestic production of food takes many more hits then the coming* recession could turn depressiony quickly.
*Some say it is here already and we’re soaking in it. But go ahead run on “abortion is so important our current majority failed to codify it and only you can help us help you now!”
In the meantime...there are other issues facing most of American
Progressive prices conceived and birthed in single/central/monopolistic solutions and practices, catastrophic anthropogenic immigration reform, Green industrial environmentalism, World War Springs with kickback sanctions, transgender conversion therapy, Mengele mandates, diversity [dogma], inequity, and exclusion (DIE) under Pro-Choice ethical religious sanction and advice.
Milo: men are required to pay. But the mother has to file a (very simple) form, paternity confirmed through DNA, and then child support is determined. Many if not most women who do not do this are expecting Uncle Sam to have deeper pockets than the father. They aren't wrong: see rational choice theory. The fathers in the underclass take every bit as much advantage of the system, living with their child's mother in rent we subsidize, eating food we subsidize, using utilities we subsidize. Often they move between women they have impregnated. Once, we caught these welfare frauds (remember the movie Julia?). Now we don't dare. We need to change policies to encourage aboveboard marriage and employment for young fathers.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan noted this in 1965.
“I was just kind of agog listening to her talk... This feeling washed over me — I don’t know if it was shame or humility — and I remember thinking to myself: ‘Why did I think I had a right to have an opinion on this subject?’”
I bet she thinks she has a right to her opinion about you paying child support for the next 18 years.
Go ahead, ask her.
Wear a condom.
Get a vasectomy..
Grow up and be responsible adults.
Say no to the Hunter Biden ways.
Grow up.
Ooop- I just go cancelled.
I'm closer to a DINO than a RINO. I've got mixed feelings about abortion. I like to live in a society where abortion is legal and discouraged. I see nothing wrong with those abortion pills that women can take early in their pregnancy in order to terminate it. I understand that's now how most women choose to proceed. I'm not opposed to first term abortions either. I think a viable fetus is synonymous with baby. There should be a very high bar for abortion at this stage.....The left talks about men making decisions over women's bodies. Fair enough. I think China's One Child Policy was something that the men there thought up and enforced. That was a program of enforced abortions. If you think outlawing abortions is evil, you should see the evils associated with enforced abortions. It is useful and informative to note how little fuss the feminists made about China's One Child Policy. Hijabs, female mutilation, sex trafficking are all horrible, but leaving female babies by the side of the road to cry and perish tops every known horror inflicted on women.
Natatomic - thank you
Many men WANT to keep the child, but the woman kills it instead
Sex and conception is a mystery. Women and girls, and men and boys, possess neither the dignity nor agency to self-moderate their behavior, thus requiring mortal gods and goddesses ("experts") to direct and sanction liberal excess and exploitation for profit. Elective abortion relieves "burdens" h/t Obama and offer "benefits" that are kept affordable, available, and taxable.
That said, women, men, and "our Posterity" are from Earth. Feminists are from Venus. Masculinists are from Mars. Social progressives are from Uranus.
The idea of a man's opinion being a non-starter has (partially) been put to rest because now, the people - women AND men, will decide the appropriate guidelines through their state governments. Will that be unfair to women and the notion of choice? Probably not because since more than half of abortions are done with medication (up to 10 weeks) that will also likely continue even in states having the strictest laws.
Temujin - ###
Just for ease of reference, I would be grateful if a list could be supplied of things about which I am not allowed to form an opinion. Are people who don't own cars allowed to weigh in on gas taxes?
[sigh] Feminists find themselves in trouble, and like women since before h. sapiens was a species, they now want to turn to men to bail them out.
Maybe as a first step hardcore feminists can start the process of winning men to their position by publicly denouncing organizations like “Jane’s Revenge” and “Ruth Sent Us” and the violence that they explicitly (“Jane’s Revenge”) or implicitly (“Ruth Sent Us”) advocate. Maybe even take their PP donation and send it instead to help rebuild burned out crisis pregnancy centers? Just sayin’
Question. If it is your body and you don't want a child for whatever reason, shouldn't YOU be playing DEFENSE here? Safe birth control has been available since the middle of the LAST Century. Reminds me... "I won't grow up, I don't wanna go to school".
Feminists, liberal white women, have spent decades trying to destroy masculinity.
The left has created this mess, with the willing help of the courts.
Personal responsibility, something people have viewed as a patriarchal nuisance, is going to reappear.
Shockingly, we might even begin to realize that traditional male and female roles, values, and outlooks are necessary for a society to function.
the most interesting thing, to me, is that having spent decades trying to remake men into androgynous robots, liberal women are finding they don't much like it.
We need to change policies to encourage aboveboard marriage and employment for young fathers.
Absolutely. The progress of elective abortion has a two-sex forcing, and tripartite special and peculiar interests: government, business, and advocacy/activists. The change from one-child to selective-child policy occurred through official sanction, advice, and delegation. Demos-cracy is aborted at the twilight fringe (i.e. faith, conflation of logical domains, secular purpose) through religious ("ethical") realignment that has occurred regularly and with renewed fervor in the past century.
Splooge stooges days are numbered.
This makes me LMAO. Lets be honest. Abortion makes easy sex more available for men.
The unborn child was unavailable for comment.
I am very surpised the NYT is asking for men to step up and be part of the conversation. The commenter you quoted is what I expect from the radical left:
One of the weirdest columns I've ever seen was in the NY Times a few years ago. The writer described a dinner he had with his girlfriend the night before her abortion. It sounded like a celebration. At one point she declined a glass of wine because "It might hurt the baby." The night before she was planning to kill it.
No one should have the medical decision to take an experimental vaccine forced on her.
A non-sterilizing, mutagenic medical treatment with known short-term and unknown long-term adverse events, which is suitable for distribution to high-risk cohorts by choice, but is ill-advised for general distribution through Choice and force.
Suddenly men are allowed to have an opinion?
The unborn child was unavailable for comment.
A minority without arms and deprived a voice for political, economic, and social progress. All's fair in lust, abortion, and profit.
Agree with the comment upthread. Don't want your girlfriend to get pregnant? Wear a condom. Or pull a Jeff Toobin and ejaculate in your hand.
People keep talking like an unwanted pregnancy is akin to getting struck by lightning.
* Abortion makes easy sex more available for men.
* Splooge stooges
Em-pathetic masculinity.
* Or to the men who’s girls friends/wives had abortions that they (the men) didn’t want them to have, and the grief that haunts them?
* We also don’t want them getting knocked up by some loser who can’t pay his way, or would just leave her high and dry.
Toxic masculinity.
Can Congress pass a law guaranteeing access to abortion nationally? The Senate just tried to pass such a law and it failed by one vote (Manchin's vote). Why is passing such a law not the primary focus of the pro-choice movement? (Yes, there is the filibuster, but it can be waived and has been waived repeatedly recently.)
Up until the opinion issued, the left insisted men could get pregnant. Now the left insists pregnancy is just a woman's right and men cannot even comment. Not surprisingly, the left gets it wrong both time.
I really don't care what men think about my basic human right to make my own medical decisions and control my own body.
One-child policy delegated as selective-child rites through religious ("ethical") sanction and advice. Women, and men, do not possess the agency to comprehend the mystery of sex and conception. Women, and men, do not possess the dignity to be capable of self-moderating their behavior. Abortion chambers and services should remain affordable and available throughout her... pregnancy, and, in some cases, after birth "baby on slab" to remove "burdens" h/t Obama deemed unworthy of life for profit.
As a guy, I say it's all about me.
For instance, girlfriend or wife says, "I'm pregnant and want an abortion."
Me: I assume it's mine?
G/W: Of course!
Me: Let's not.
*************
G/W: I'm pregnant and want an abortion.
Me: I assume it's mine?
G/W: Well, actually . . .
Me: OK, do what you want and have a nice life.
‘Why did I think I had a right to have an opinion on this subject?’”
You heard this All the time.
My Great Great Grandfather was traveling through Mississippi and Texas with a group of like minded people*..
Working to convince the people down there of the WRONGNESS of their ideas..
People would say to him:
"You don't own a plantation! WHY should YOU have any say on the matter?
What *I* do with MY plantation is MY business! NOT YOURS"
But it didn't Sway him, he kept right on convincing them; until they saw the folly of their ways.
a group of like minded people* The 38th Iowa Volunteers
Condom use was known in ancient times, and was relatively common in Europe from the mid-1500s or before.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649591/
More recently, women themselves have had independent access to IUDs, pre- and post-intercourse medications to prevent / terminate fertilization, respectively (since the mid-1960s), and arm implants, etc. Along with the feminism wave and "Sexual Revolution" of the 60s came these common and medically & socially accepted means of preventing the unwanted pregnancies that were the primary cause of "back alley" abortions.
Planned Parenthood, the entity, was (as I understand it) originally established to assist women in utilizing these means of preventing pregnancy.
There is today no scarcity of methods for preventing conception. Myself, I have no problem with termination of a pregnancy because of a medically-recognized, diagnosed, potentially fatal, health condition of mother or baby.
However, given the prevalence & ready availability of all those other birth control methods, I do object to someone (man, woman, "birthing person") using abortion as their preferred method of birth control..., for convenience. ...because they couldn't be bothered to take responsibility for preventing fertilization and implantation of the embryo.
I daresay that one might find, if one asked, that there may be a majority view that early termination by abortion is acceptable; but that later, post heartbeat onset, etc., is not.
Unfortunately, the politics of the day seem to mandate an "all or nothing" view of the issue. Compromise, notwithstanding that that's exactly what "politics" is supposed to be, is an outdated concept.
Splooge stooges days are numbered.
We can call it social distancing.
But, I suppose the PP bitches want us out of our daughters lives as well.
That ship sailed long ago. In many states, they do not need, nor will they consider, parental consent for their interactions with a minor girl. But a school nurse cannot give that same girl a Tylenol without a signed parental authorization.
- Krumhorn
Well said ColoComment. I agree with you.
Tina Trent said...
Milo: men are required to pay. But the mother has to file a (very simple) form, paternity confirmed through DNA, and then child support is determined. Many if not most women who do not do this are expecting Uncle Sam to have deeper pockets than the father. They aren't wrong: see rational choice theory. The fathers in the underclass take every bit as much advantage of the system, living with their child's mother in rent we subsidize, eating food we subsidize, using utilities we subsidize. Often they move between women they have impregnated. Once, we caught these welfare frauds (remember the movie Julia?). Now we don't dare. We need to change policies to encourage aboveboard marriage and employment for young fathers.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan noted this in 1965.
I worked in the prison system for a while. All the stories about how inmates are there because they have low or no self esteem, etc, are all BS. They're there because they broke the law... which has nothing to do with this discussion, but the following does.
Had on inmate assistant assigned to me, meaning he carried my tools and other heavy things so I didn't have to lug them around, who was close to me in age. About 50 at the time. Talking to him, he had spent about half his adult life in jail. And- had 10 children by 10 different women. TEN! By TEN different women. No wife among any of them. When he wasn't in jail worked as a day laborer or did migrant work- all for cash. Didn't contribute anything to any of his baby mamas (a term I detest...). Nope, all of them were on welfare. And all had more than 1 child. Jail was basically 3 hots and a cot for him, not too much different than his life outside. And - he was a great father! He told me so himself. 3 of his male children were, at the time, in jail on their own bids. He had several grandchildren from his unmarried female children. All living on welfare. My money and yours.
It's a lifestyle because we subsidize it. Neither birth control nor abortion is an issue to them. Both are issues to the worker class and above. Welfare is an issue to them and the worker class. They want it to continue. We want it to stop. People with incomes that allow them never to actually interact with the welfare class are all for generous welfare payments to help out those poor unfortunate souls.
My own father - who I am estranged from for many reasons - paid for my niece to abort her child. That is, he paid for his grandaughter to abort his great-grandchild. And this was no medical emergency, or difficult situation. It was a mid-term abortion, done solely to free the mother from an inconvenience.
(Why not pay for the child to be born, and
then given over for adoption?)
I'm happy to tell the NYT my opinion on that abortion, and the man who paid blood money for it.
Here is a thought. Not in any way saying I agree with it. Just a random thought - perhaps also viz-a-viz firearms.
If you are not using your uterus in a socially responsible way, perhaps you should not be allowed to have one.
Asked and Answered
Of the majority of Americans support legalized abortion, won’t the states begin to reflect that reality. I’m guessing the majority don’t support unfettered abortion, however. They support abortion access in the first trimester and after that, abortions in cases danger to the health of the mother. Schumer and Pelosi could have passed that law. They chose not to consider it. They want the wedge issue.
Team Joementia can expand the "migrant" distribution network into an Abortibus network.
Overturning Roe has answered the most puzzling question asked at a nomination hearing to the Supreme Court
It could mean losing access to womanhood 🤯
Follow the money. As long as there is money to be made with abortions, abortions will occur. Sadly, not all clinics spend that money on things that will improve the safety of the mother (If there is one Gosnell clinic, there are more) but most media does not want to touch that issue.
"What's a "woman"?"
While I do not know the answer, I've heard tell that on occasion they roar.
"In the meantime...there are other issues facing most of American and in every poll, abortion is simply not the most important topic for most people- men and women."
It will be.
"...(for the record, neither is 'climate change'.)"
It will be.
“We went from men can get pregnant – pride month – to men should have no say in pregnancy, really fast.”
"(remember the movie Julia?)"
Under the Obama Administration it evolved into "The Life of Julia", which for some reason, has disappeared from the Internet.
"Unfortunately, the politics of the day seem to mandate an "all or nothing" view of the issue."
That's pretty much how all wars work. It's a homo sapiens thing.
I really have trouble with the autonomy over my own body argument. Are the people who say this just being deliberately obtuse by ignoring the other individual involved? Or are so many people really so ignorant that they think it is just a clump of cells at 12 weeks and beyond? And if they want an explicit right to kill a prenatal human being, are they really so stupid that they don’t know about amendments to the constitution?
“We went from men can get pregnant – pride month – to men should have no say in pregnancy, really fast.”
-- Men shouldn't have an opinion on abortion.
-- Men can get pregnant.
Very confusing...
Blogger Robert Cook said...
"In the meantime...there are other issues facing most of American and in every poll, abortion is simply not the most important topic for most people- men and women."
It will be.
"...(for the record, neither is 'climate change'.)"
It will be.
But not to normal people. The political left, like you, need hysteria to distract from reality.
I haven't read all the comments but hopefully someone brought this up:
Dobbs doesn't address whether abortion is a good or bad thing, as a moral or as a practical matter. It doesn't address whether it is a positive or negative for women, or a positive or negative for men
It just says there isn't a right to abortion defined in the Constitution. This argument, that boy, are men sure going to regret this, is a non sequitur. Whether we regret it or not, it still isn't in the Constitution. Our regret doesn't make it appear. If we regret really really hard, it won't appear faster.
If you want abortion to be a right defined in the Constitution, then amend the Constitution. The Constitution itself tells you how. Until then, any expressions of joy or regret are beside the point
When does equal protection begin? We know that equal protection of our liberties come in stages
We don’t get all our liberty the second we’re born. We get some of our speech rights under the age of 18 but we don’t get the right to own a firearm until 18 and sometimes 21. We get to vote at 18 but it used to be 21.
But we do get the right to our life the second we’re born. If someone kills us after we’re born, that’s a crime and our right to our life has been violated. The moment we’re born, our brains aren’t formed enough to know we’re alive. We don’t consciously aware of our existence yet the law protects our life. We also can’t provide for ourselves the second we’re born. That doesn’t come for many many years. For our infancy, we’re completely dependent on others to survive.
So when does that right to our own life begin. Does it begin only after we’re fully birthed? Or, does it begin at some point before then? (Or, should it begin at some point after birth once we’re conscious).
We talk about women who lost rights. What about the unborn children to at least gained the right to have their life debated by a state legislature? Is there any room for that discussion?
It would be an interesting argument, if we had not been hammered for decades that men are not allowed to have an opinion on abortion. Of course, many of the people making these arguments are men, who then discuss their opinion on abortion because it is a woman approved opinion or some other such nonsense, as if all woman have the same opinion on all things. The next day they cannot define what a "woman" is.
To summarize the current situation, Roe v. Wade ended the discussion of abortion. The pro-abortion side "won" via judicial decree. Now that Roe is gone, now they want to have a discussion. Well, those that do not want to murder the justices or overthrow the government.
Sounds desperate.
Tina Trent said:
"And that man didn't sic his mother on his girlfriend. It is quite normal to talk to your parent and among the parents of the child. I wonder if you would feel differently if it was an ethnic name? And if so, why? Why do we celebrate "coming out" as gay or this or that and offer support groups to parents and make all schoolchildren contemplate having sex but leave this one subject of having the child taboo -- and you know we do. Why is it fine to discuss anal sex with teens but not choosing life?"
My take is that both activities are geared toward population control, and neither about reproductive choice, nor about diversity. So very progressive.
"No doubt I am a mean person, but if you don't want a kid, why the f*ck are you f*cking without birth control?"
People who use birth control do get pregnant. There is no surefire, guaranteed-every-time birth control method, (other than abstaining from sex). Consider, as well, the young girls living at home, having sex without their parents knowing about it, with little or no knowledge or means of obtaining of birth control.
"Men really need to consider what losing access to safe and legal abortion means for them."
Well, for the scumbag horndogs, it means they may not be able to get away with as much
See my heart bleed for them
For the decent human beings, it means they now may have to be more ready to take responsibility for the results of their actions.
Not sure why this is a bad thing, either
Sydney said...
I really have trouble with the autonomy over my own body argument.
So do I. Since if we actually had autonomy over our own bodies, there could be no law against suicide, and no government regulation of most drugs, including all painkillers (antibiotics could be regulated because their misuse harms others. But that's about it)
But Roe has always been nothing other than a fraud
On a completely different subject:
Law schools are REALLY lucky this ruling came out after their lectures were over for the school year.
I can't wait to see what happens with the "triggered youth" in Law Schools have to deal with Dobbs and Bruen next semester
I believe I can one up Gospace above......I was doing volunteer work driving people to medical appointments. One lady said she was tired from holding a birthday party for her son with 19 kids from 16 women. the kids got along but the mothers didn't.
People who use birth control do get pregnant. There is no surefire, guaranteed-every-time birth control method, (other than abstaining from sex). Consider, as well, the young girls living at home, having sex without their parents knowing about it, with little or no knowledge or means of obtaining of birth control.
No, birth control isn't 100% effective. Which is why, prior to the Sexual Revolution, thank you "Feminists" who seemed to act a lot as if they had penises, having sex with multiple or indeed any partners without commitment was roundly discouraged. Also why girls were taught to guard their "virtue" - their sexuality - no matter what terms it was couched in. Because sex can have consequences. For gosh sakes, humans aren't particularly good at reproducing - isn't it like an only 60% chance or so that two humans, NOT using contraception, will achieve a pregnancy within a year? The point has always been that it CAN happen, so don't do the deed unless you're prepared for that.
It kept me a virgin all through high school, because I was one of those young girls living at home with no access to birth control, and I didn't want to bear - in any sense - the consequences of sex.
There is a mismatch: young marriage is way out of fashion, and that causes a big problem. Young people of course want very fervently to have sex (generally the boys and young men more than the girls and young women, let's be realistic, no thanks to the "Feminists" of the Sexual Revolution), and if commitment to both the other person and the consequences is off the table, what do we do about that? This is why, much as I abhor abortion now in my middle age, I'm not an abortion absolutist.
But no, we live in the post-Sexual Revolution era, in which women and girls are supposed to be as out-of-control horndogs as the boys whose behavior they used to be able to affect positively through their commitment to their own "virtue." And now we've got nothing.
Gerda Sprinchorn said...
Can Congress pass a law guaranteeing access to abortion nationally? The Senate just tried to pass such a law and it failed by one vote (Manchin's vote). Why is passing such a law not the primary focus of the pro-choice movement? (Yes, there is the filibuster, but it can be waived and has been waived repeatedly recently.)
Manchin voted against that bill due to be allowing abortions' up until birth, which was a huge expansion of abortion rights over the previous set up. Given the decision, I don't see how congress has the power to legalize abortion nationally. Well, if the 10th amendment isn't truly dead, anyway. The decision held that there isn't an unenumerated right to abortion. That would seem to leave that decision to the states.
Article 10: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
"Men really need to consider what losing access to safe and legal abortion means for them."
Safe sex only? The horror!
"Men really need to consider what losing access to safe and legal abortion means for them."
Safe sex only? The horror!
I don't really understand why deciding to abort a child 'electively', for the purposes of 'controlling' your life, is a medical decision.
Michael K., responding to Robert Cook, writes: "But not to normal people. The political left, like you, need hysteria to distract from reality."
One would think that, with their junk economics and magical thinking, State-cultists such as Cook would already have more than enough to distract them from reality.
Cook: "Consider, as well, the young girls living at home, having sex without their parents knowing about it, with little or no knowledge or means of obtaining of birth control."
I'm an old guy and we had sex education beginning in junior high. Has any high school boy been prevented from buying a condom?
If you think enabling kids younger than that to have sex is a good idea, you are a proper progressive who ought always to practice birth control.
and I remember thinking to myself: ‘Why did I think I had a right to have an opinion on this subject?’”
What an idiot.
In the state of Oregon, the biological father is on the hook for child support until the child graduates college.
I'm interested at what the motivation was to write this article. It could just be to look at all sides of the issue and to start looking at what men experience with abortion, since abortion discussions usually focus on what women experience. Though I suspect there has been a sense that a lot the support for abortion from men has been, oh what's that new hip word everyone likes to use, performative. Making a post on social media is easy and free and it can score you good-boy points. Plus you don't need to actually care about the issue, just generically be supportive. But now that abortion is firmly in the political sphere with the overturning of Roe and Casey, abortion rights supporters will need more than performative support. The problem is that the rhetoric for the last 30 plus years has been something closer to "Men shouldn't even have an opinion on abortion. It is a woman only thing." That is one of the dangers of group identity politics, when everyone is categorized into groups and each group has it's own group needs and political goals, one is more likely to find that people don't care as much when something happens outside their group. You reap what you sow.
I've seen reports that, at gestation age of twelve to fifteen weeks, the child resists the instruments.
I'm on the side of the kid with defensive wounds on his hands.
Not the side of the person who feels the resistance and goes ahead anyway.
Let the NYT publish this one:
I have a most loving and beautiful daughter and granddaughter that I almost never had because of a trip to an abortion clinic. Best thing their mother/grandmother ever did was walk out of that clinic still pregnant. I hate to think about all that I would have missed out on if she'd gone through with it. Abortion is a terrible thing. Grow a pair and become a real man by becoming a loving and involved father. Killing a totally innocent baby because it will cramp your lifestyle is just pure evil.
Men really need to .....
Why are so many people so quick to tell others what to do?
Cook: "Consider, as well, the young girls living at home, having sex without their parents knowing about it, with little or no knowledge or means of obtaining of birth control."
Well, since I consider them having sex to be a bad thing, I'm very happy they're now facing more pressure not to do it
Abortion = patriarchy.
"Well, since I consider them having sex to be a bad thing, I'm very happy they're now facing more pressure not to do it."
I guess you aren't aware that teens are impulsive and tend to have less than acute awareness of the consequences of their actions.
I’m old enough to remember how things were in the pre-Roe era. Both young men (boys) and young women (girls) were intellectually aware that an unexpected pregnancy could have disastrous consequences, but the heat of passion (lust) can overwhelm prudence. I was “unlucky” enough that I didn’t have to face a pregnancy decision (I mean “unlucky” in the sense of “Did you get lucky last night?” “No”). But a friend, a girl I had known since grade school, had to deal with an unintended and unmarried pregnancy. She probably could have forced the father of the child to marry her, but she made the sound judgment that he wasn’t more likely to be a responsible husband and father than he was a responsible boyfriend and father. In those days there were enough undesired pregnancies that there was an infrastructure to deal with them. There were homes for unmarried mothers and services to place the children for adoption. One consequence of Roe is that those institutions have been undermined, because in the US we’ve aborted all the potentially adoptable infants so couples that want to adopt have to search foreign countries. Perhaps that will change now. My friend’s unintended child was adopted by a family that wanted a baby they couldn’t produce, and my friend married a different young man, they had some children, and so far as I know they had/have a happy life.
Everyone's a biologist all of a sudden.
The language surrounding this is pretty fucked up.
First of all:
Birth control applies only to post conception. Once conception takes place "birth control" is infanticide. I see no way around the fact that life begins at conception. Any other definition of when life begins is just dancing angels on a pinhead.
Pre conception it is pregnancy prevention. Birth never enters the picture if conception doesn't take place. It isn't "birth control".
"Personal choice" when used to mean my choice is bullshit. Terminating a pregnancy means ending a life created by a male and a female. XX+XY. (Cloning would be the only exception, but that's not what we are talking about.) Our choice is the proper terminology whether social constructs or abrogation by one of the parties involved exists or not.
All that being said I have no problem with abortion (infanticide). I would prefer it happen as early as possible. Humans construct all sorts of social mores to make their lives easier.
Naturally or unnaturally everyone dies at some point. Life in the personal is priceless, but in the aggregate is cheap.
Just quit using improper terminology to make yourself feel better.
What people ACTUALLY think about abortion, according to Gallup over the decades.
First Trimester Legal Illegal Depends No Opinion
2018 May 1-10 60 34 4 1
2012 Dec 27-30 61 31 6 3
2011 Jun 9-12 62 35 2 1
2003 Jan 10-12 66 29 3 2
2000 Mar 30-Apr 2 65 31 2 2
1996 July 25-26 64 30 4 2
Second Trimester
2018 May 1-10 28 65 4 2
2012 Dec 27-30 27 64 5 4
2011 Jun 9-12 24 71 3 2
2003 Jan 10-12 25 68 4 3
2000 Mar 30-Apr 2 24 69 4 3
1996 July 25-26 26 65 7 2
Third Trimester
2018 May 1-10 13 81 4 2
2012 Dec 27-30 14 80 4 2
2011 Jun 9-12 10 86 2 1
2003 Jan 10-12 10 84 4 2
2000 Mar 30-Apr 2& 8 86 4 3
1996 July 25-26 13 82 3 2
A recent AP poll got statistically identical results. 2/3rds in favor, first trimester; 1/3rd in favor, second trimester. 1/5th in favor, third trimester.
Fascinating that so many people are getting so worked up, when first trimester is almost all abortions.
It's just sad. These people seem sad, even the ones who say they're relieved--maybe especially them.
I feel sorry for all of them. Saying goodbye to your unborn child because of someone else's voluntary decision is heartbreaking. Being an adult and having a heart hardened enough to do that is sad, too.
In all of human history this kind of loss was something we couldn't avoid, something we had to take as a part of life. Doing it voluntarily, now, just seems so backwards, so gratuitous.
Even if you don't believe human life is sacred it doesn't seem like you have to therefore believe it's expendable.
Just sad.
Robert Cook said...
Me: "Well, since I consider them having sex to be a bad thing, I'm very happy they're now facing more pressure not to do it."
I guess you aren't aware that teens are impulsive and tend to have less than acute awareness of the consequences of their actions.
That's an argument for keeping them away from sex (see STDs). It's NOT an argument for encouraging their impulsiveness by saying "hey, don't worry! If you screw up, we've got you covered!"
Also, just in case you missed it, there's a lot more scumbag users over the age of 19 than under it.
"We have to protect this large pool of scumbags because of this small pool of idiots" is really not the winning argument you seem to think it is
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा