What's the male equivalent of having an abortion?

[DetlefK]

Or to be more precise: Which state/action is comparable to interfering with a woman's decision whether or not to have an abortion?

I like babies and stuff, but let's look at it from the biological side:
A fetus is a diploid life-form, partially genetic related to the diploid organism that nurtures it. Once it is born, it can evolve into a conscious human being.

Why aren't women having babies all the time? Because there are 3 questions that have to be answered, BEFORE a baby is born:
1. Is the mother (or an equivalent replacement) capable of physically caring for the baby?
2. Is the mother capable of handling the emotional pressure the baby will put on her? (e.g. if mother is a minor)
3. Is the mother capable of handling the emotional pressure the baby will indirectly cause? (e.g. in cases of rape, incest)

In my opinion, if one of those questions is answered with Yes, then the mother has a right to consider abortion. Now imagine a total stranger reserving the right to ignore those facts about her, claiming a blanket moral authority.

Let's put it again in biological terms: Person A reserves for itself the right to decide in which manner person B will handle its genetic heritage.

So what's the equivalent to that situation, if the gender-roles are interchanged?

If it is legal to regulate by law what a female may and may not do with her eggs and her uterus, then it is certainly legal to regulate what a male is allowed to do with his sperm, his penis and his testicles. Right?

* If it's immoral to destroy the potential life of a fetus, what about the potential life inherent in a sperm?
* Let's make a law that forces males to look at baby-pictures of their children, before they decide to have a vasectomy.
* Let's outlaw masturbation and coitus interruptus, so all that potential life won't be spoiled.
* Let's make a law, which regulates which kinds of penis pumps and penis implants are morally acceptable.
* Let a parliament decide, whether medication for erectile dysfunctions is morally acceptable.
* Consider a female stealing a males semen and impregnating herself. If she leaves him right afterwards and her pregnancy has no economic or social consequences for him, is that morally acceptable?



If it is morally acceptable for males to make laws governing the female body, isn't it equally morally justified for females to make laws governing the male body?

[Ian David]

1. Condoms kill the tiny babies that live in our sperm. n/t

[AnneD]

2. I think...

Removing a kidney stone might be egualivent-at least that is what they keep whining to me.

It is not that women have them so much as when it comes to raising them.....they are buy themselves. Many guys are clueless as to what it takes. Thus if a woman cannot raise it and cannot find someone to care for it, then it should be their choice and no one elses. Until men step up to the plate, they are njust sperm donors..no offense guys.

[truebrit71]

3. There isn't...I suppose the closest would be a vasectomy..??

But even that really isn't a fair comparison.

As a man let me tell you that it is NOT alright for a bunch of (predominantly) men to tell women what they can and cannot do with their own reproductive system..

If men got pregnant, freedom of choice would be in the Bill of Rights...

[damntexdem]

4. And if the mother answers "no" to any or all of the questions, she has the right to choose abortion.

She has that right whether or not she is willing to answer your three questions.

[buddysmellgood]

5. Losing the couch.

[MatthewStLouis]

6. I like your question because it brings one to the conclusion that...

there really is no equivalence. Only a woman has the power to make that choice. It not only takes an egg and sperm to produce life, but a uterus as well. An egg and sperm together without a womb does not a person make. In my opinion, abortion is entirely a woman's choice. It's her uterus to do with what she wants.

In answer to your last question, my opinion is: it is not morally acceptable for males to make laws governing the female body.

[EC]

7. Push even further

make them save every condom ever used, safe-guarding the fluid inside it. Maybe require some sort of storage.

[provis99]

8. is it morally justified for adults to make laws governing children?

This is the stupidest post I've seen all day.

[DetlefK]

9. So you would be okay if the Congress decided what you can do or can't do with your penis?

[provis99]

10. the penis is already regulated.

For example, San Francisco is banning circumcision. Rape laws exist. You cannot expose your penis in public.

Have anything else stupid to say?

[DetlefK]

11. Your arguments are two-edged

1. Circumcision is a medical practice that invites infections and other complications. Its unneeded use is the problem.
2. It is also illegal for a woman to rape a man.
3. It is also illegal for a woman to show off her vagina in public.

Is there a law, whether or not a man can get a vasectomy?
Is there a law that regulates the financing of hospitals/doctors that provide vasectomies?
Are there laws that deny a married man the right to decide how and when he can have kids with his wife?

And the social question: Are men treated as if they can't be trusted to make the right decisions with their sexual organs?

[He loved Big Brother]

12. Women are not children.

The comparison is the stupidest post I've seen all day.