Roe v. Wade to be overturned?

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religio...dy/christians/christian/views-about-abortion/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religio...ligious-tradition/hindu/views-about-abortion/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religio...ious-tradition/buddhist/views-about-abortion/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religio...igious-tradition/jewish/views-about-abortion/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/views-about-abortion/

 

I think the discussion is following your first sentence. You said 'Christian bashing". If you left that part out, it could be an interesting debate on the topic without the religious part always getting in the way.

 

It is, until she’s the one who is pregnant. It’s not like each of them are pregnant with one of two portions.

Also, let’s not confuse having a say with demand. Certainly, a loving couple should discuss having children and if the woman becomes pregnant, the man does have a right to his opinion. But only his opinion as the woman is the one who is pregnant.

Because there’s a lot of anti-abortionists who think “the man having a say” means that the man should be able to force the woman to carry the pregnancy to term. What they forget is that if that was allowed, the “man having a say” could also mean that he forces her to have an abortion if he wishes.

 

And we wonder why men are absent in so many families. Somehow, this has become some sort of exalted view.

 

Your writing is indeed fine, if not flawless, and we know what you meant. But when it’s convenient, or he thinks it helps his argument, the good Doc waves his academic dick and goes to the syntax card. Or pulls the Greg Brady exact-words card. Imagine taking a class from this guy. Talks down to literally everyone. Hey, doc, maybe visit the psych department at your fine institution. There’s probably someone there who can help iron out your need to do that.

 

OMG, it really hasn't. This is a canard. Chances are if a woman experiences an unintended pregnancy, she's not in the best relationship or a permanent relationship or a serious relationship. Does that mean the man involved should not have a say? Of course not. But I have known women in this situation and they have the baby and then the man just decides he really didn't want to be a father after all. That happens every day in this country and it's not because of the women, it is because of the men. So of course the woman who is pregnant has a higher stake than a man who may or may not vanish in a week.
It is hard to raise a child in a committed relationship. I'm sure it is much more difficult to raise it when you don't even really have a relationship with the man who provided the sperm.
Abortion is never a statistic, it is always a human story.

 

We do?

 

Do you ever wonder why there's such a "may or may not vanish in a week" crisis? (And there is.) Is there a specific, very recent, "men are prone-to-vanish little shits who don't want to be fathers" virus that wormed into American men in the last 60 years?

 

kaboom

 

Actually, I think that skews the issue to a point. I think this happened a lot before, the people didn't talk about it or kept it quiet, or shipped the women off to have their babies with Aunt Mabel in east b******. And the other prong I would say is that yeah, men have reacted to the growing equality of women in a truly s*** manner. So there's that.

 

This country has more single-parent households than any other country, three times more than the previous generation, and around 80 percent of those are mother-only.