[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Two responses: 1) agreed, write it into law. 2) The reason it has centered.on the women in this thread is that guys are absolutely eithout say in the matter of abortion. ONLY the women have a say in that–and, as the process of abortion centers around dismemberment or otherwise killing a human life (which, incidentally is the part that people who believe fetuses are persons have a huge issue with…the killing part), the result is that in a situation where the center of the controversy boils around killing something it will be quite natural to center discussion around that. THIS of course does not involve the man (legally speaking).
It has absolutely nothing to do with a woman being held MORE responsible than a guy in the minds of those talking, which is why I brought up thefact that I totally agree with your suggestion and as far as I am aware every single pro life person I know of at least absolutely agrees the man who would ditch his responsibility is a fucking scumbag. The fact that the discussion has thus far centered around the fetus inside the woman and the woman is a byproduct of the fact that the center of the controversy about killing a human life who happens to be inside a woman, not–I repeat NOT–the fact that a woman is more responsibls for the situation than thd guy. It takes two people to get into the situation in the first place.
In still other words, this is marginally equivalent to the ACA bill/laws constitutionality and clusterfuckedness being the center of the controversy pre-SCOTUS and having somebody say “well you spent 15 pages on this whether or not this is constitutional but not a word about uninsured people! I hate seeing people left uninsured so the last 15 pages have been bullshit”. Well, yes–I do hate that too. but the center of discussion is properly put on whether or not that law is allowable under the current form of gov’t not whether or not there are uninsured people we all agree need help. Just like the center of discussion is very properly “should it be legal and is it ethical to kill a human life in the womb”.
I hope you see what I have been saying. That is a very poor analogy but it was all I could think up on the spot. I like women too as a matter of fact, and I like protecting them as well as making sure deadbeat guys don’t leave them when they are most vulnerable. But as very important as that is, it ultimately has no bearing on whether the central tenet is ethical or not.
Again, I do totally agree with putting that into a law so guys can’t get out of it. and I’ll reiterate again that I believe the guy is JUST AS RESPONSIBLE as the girl in this situation.
EDIT: Let me put it this way. the question of “is it ethical to kill X” whether x is a fetus, a felon on death row, le whatever, is independent and must always be held independent of the practical considerations of HOW to enact a set of ethics. This goes for not just this topic but all other ethical issues, as well as governmental issues of constitutionality and proper governance. [/quote]
I see what you are saying, or at least I think so. I’d like to point out, that unless it is openly spelled out you never know what another person is thinking. You may well think you fight the same cause with someone just to find in the end that you didn’t. So what I’m saying is, that if you campaign to make abortion illegal and you succeed, there is no way the fight would continue with the same intensity to put women and men on par on this issue. Not even close. It just isn’t going to happen. Not in US, not in Finland or Sweden, not in any country on this planet.
The fight should be about parental responsibility from the beginning. Abortion would then be a corollary on the whole responsibility issue. E: (At the moment) abortion in itself is the issue and a successful total ban on abortions can only lead to increasing inequality. (That’s my opinion and I consider the outcome of the given scenario to be self-evident.) Now if you would succeed in making meaningful and working laws about parental responsibility, I don’t know exactly what would follow, a pretty conservative society I guess. Probably a better option to increasing inequality, anyhow.
Then there is the issue if a total ban is really the most effective way to diminish the amount of abortions. I have my doubts about that. If we come to the conclusion that killing human beings also in fetus stages is a crime, we may find ourselves in a situation where actual abortions are more numerous than before, but we have great principles.