The argument against abortion everyone is missing

wouldn't it be ultimately less painful for the female if she never got pregnant 

Abortions are painful for those that endure them.

The idea that women should not have sex until they're ready to have a child is the most misogynist thing I could ever hear anyone say. Especially when they don't hold men to the same standard.

 Any man that doesn't like the idea of a woman having an abortion or doesn't like the idea of having to pay for a child cuz they don't want to be a parent should get a reversible vasectomy.

People always tell the women not to put out that's the solution like somehow that's even reasonable like somehow it's who are all these men going to have sex with if it's okay for them to have sex and not women.

And the religious right needs to stay out of that conversation because they're the ones that don't want the conversation or the side effects.

Men and women bear the responsibility for pregnancy equally but as we see here, men seldom acknowledge their equal burden of responsibility.

The fact that women share the overwhelmingly disproportionate burden of responsibility for the consequences of decisions that of a right

that women get to be the primary stakeholder in all decisions made about pregnancy

and so requires an explicit protection from government intervention into those decisions that men enjoy by default.

Feminist want women to have the same freedoms the men do.

Men are free to have sex

men are free to fight parental responsibility or even not engage in it and just basically say take my money.

As a feminist

I believe women have the right to have sex when they want to

The idea that women should not have sex until they're ready to have a child is the most misogynist thing I could ever hear anyone say.

Especially when they don't hold men to the same standard.

The best thing to do when it comes to abortion is mind your own goddamn business.

If a woman finds out she's pregnant she can discuss it with a doctor or someone at a clinic or whatever she chooses to do.

Any man that doesn't like the idea of a woman having an abortion

or doesn't like the idea of having to pay for a child cuz they don't want to be a parent should get a reversible vasectomy.

Cuz after decades of discussing abortion we still don't say anything about the other party which is the man

it's time we start telling men you don't like abortion get a vasectomy if you don't like the idea of being a father get a vasectomy.

People always tell the women not to put out that's the solution like somehow that's even reasonable

like somehow it's who are all these men going to have sex with if it's okay for them to have sex and not women

It's asinine and it's time we start telling all parties you don't want abortion around everybody start getting protected. Don't want to be a parent or pay child support start protecting yourself.

And the religious right needs to stay out of that conversation because they're the ones that don't want the conversation or the side effects.

We all require an explicit protection from government intervention. And it's not a contest over proportionality or even equality. A prospective pregnant female is an individual human being who first and foremost bears a right to herself. This is maintained for all individuals. I'm not going to argue some platitude that the zygote/embryo/fetus isn't human, or even, isn't a "life." I acknowledge that zygotes/embryos/fetuses are human beings. My response is: so what? The alleged "right to life" does not grant any individual to coerce the service of another. Zygotes/embryos/fetuses require their mother's womb for development--no doubt. But that need does not supersede their mother's prerogative.

Perhaps a simpler resolution is to relieve him of coerced financial responsibility.

What about married women who want abortions? They'd be painful too right?

Does that mean feminists should be against sex?

Also it seems to me that the logical statement is more 'I have the right to premarital sex, even though there is the risk of adverse consequences'

If an act carries consequences that may harm you and only you, then why shouldn't you be allowed to make an informed decision to take that act? 

Men and women bear the responsibility for pregnancy equally but as we see here, men seldom acknowledge their equal burden of responsibility.

T-dog views the statement "I have the right to premarital sex and get an abortion from it" as something women say when almost all  men would state the former as true but then  too many men go silent when the consequences  are named.

The fact that women share the overwhelmingly disproportionate burden of responsibility for the consequences of decisions that of a right should burden men in like proportion means that women get to be the primary stakeholder in all decisions made about pregnancy and so requires an explicit protection from government intervention into those decisions that men enjoy by default.

If they knew they were going to get abortions from their sex, they shouldn't have gotten pregnant and therefore shouldn't have had sex(this applies to the men even more).

If they don't want kids, then yes.

You have the right to sex without the desire to conceive.  This doesn't mean you should do it.

My argument isn't a good argument to ban abortion.  But it is a reason as to why females wouldn't want one.

But they don't know they're going to get abortions do they?

 but your opinion doesn't seem a good reason for people to assert what others should or shouldn't do.

Why? Why should sex be restricted only to those that want children?

People seem to enjoy sex enough to risk those consequences and frankly good luck to them.

The question becomes is it a good reason for women who don't want children not to have sex?

-->@oromagi

Men and women bear the responsibility for pregnancy equally but as we see here, men seldom acknowledge their equal burden of responsibility.

That's a problem.  If a female gets an abortion, the male should be punished and if he doesn't want pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex.

T-dog views the statement "I have the right to premarital sex and get an abortion from it" as something women say when almost all  men would state the former as true but then  too many men go silent when the consequences  are named.

You shouldn't have sex unless you want a kid or have a vasectomy and if you get an abortion, the guy should be punished for impregnating you and being responsible for the kid's death.

The fact that women share the overwhelmingly disproportionate burden of responsibility for the consequences of decisions that of a right should burden men in like proportion means that women get to be the primary stakeholder in all decisions made about pregnancy and so requires an explicit protection from government intervention into those decisions that men enjoy by default.

Men who don't take care of their kids are deadbeats that have to pay $135,000 of child support over 18 years.  The Surrogacy rate is about $25,000 per pregnancy.  So deadbeats sacrifice more for their kids than females that are forced to carry the kid to term.  Granted, the sacrifice is justified because being deadbeats are among the lowest of the low.

The State Legislature in Louisiana advanced a proposal this week that would classify abortion as homicide, going further than anti-abortion measures in other states by making it possible for prosecutors to bring criminal cases against women who end a pregnancy.

None of these Republicans are even considering punishment for the fathers of unwanted pregnancies.  Ultimately, the Republican position is not anti-sex, just anti-women.

Well, gay sex is fine- that never produces unwanted children and is way more fun.  The Republican party should require all extra-marital sex to be gay sex.

I agree although $625/month is a small price for many fathers of unwanted children to pay

 I think they should also be required to either reside with their children

They know it's a possibility.

Their opinion is they might get pregnant, and they would just not have sex on that basis.

I don't support mandating this, but if your a male that doesn't want kids and aren't vasectomized, you shouldn't have sex because you might get the girl pregnant and then either a kid is going to be killed and the female endures a lot of pain from the abortion, or she births the kid and endures even more pain.

Either option is painful for the female, so she shouldn't have sex unless she wants a kid.  In addition, the male shouldn't pressure her to have sex because if she gets pregnant, she will endure pain either from the abortion or from childbirth.

It's why people get very painful abortions which they shouldn't get because they shouldn't become pregnant unless they want a kid.

Yes, and it is even better when the male does not pressure the female into having sex.

I think they should also be required to either reside with their children as a parent or pay the parents who do reside with their children an additional child minders fee set at minimum wage, at least.

I know it's possible I'll get run over when I cross the road, doesn't mean I won't cross the road. That something bad may happen isn't necessarily a good reason not to do it.

I know it's possible I'll get run over when I cross the road, doesn't mean I won't cross the road.

I would say the evidence suggeats that isn't their opinion.

As for the rest, if the parties are two consenting adults aware of the possible consequences and willing to take them, I fail to see the issue.

This is why people should be encouraged to learn the risks and practice safe sex (contraceptives aren't perfect, but they're a good measure if used properly)

if it's two consenting adults who are aware of the possible risks and still want to do it, I fail to see an issue for either party.

 If a woman is willing to risk the pain of abortions for the sake of having sex, why should anyone nay say them? If they're aware of the risks and preferably of the precautions they can take to minimise those risks why should anyone be against them having sex? This doesn't seem to be an argument against abortion so much as an argument for abstinence and frankly a fairly weak one at that.

No where before this post did either of us mention men pressuring women into sex. That is not part of my argument at all. I don't think it's ever correct for anyone to pressure others into having sex.

Risk vs reward, if the woman knows pain is possible, but feels the reward is worth that pain, then obviously the pain isn't a good reason for her to not do it.

what is your coherent moral theory supporting this claim ?

What coherent moral theory would deny that a man's first obligation is to his children?

You cross the road in sidewalks if you can to reduce your odds of getting hit.  The odds of you getting hit from crossing the road once is significantly less than the odds of a female getting pregnant from straight sex once if she uses birth control (note birth control produces bad side effects so I wouldn't expect a female to use birth control).

It's their opinion.  Abortions are painful.

Their opinion is they might get pregnant, and they would just not have sex on that basis.

The pain from abortion isn't a good enough reason to ban it, but you really shouldn't get an abortion if your a female because of it's pain

No sex is 100% safe and abstinence is.  I'm not even blaming women.  It's men's fault women are pregnant, so men should stop pressuring women to have sex.

I wouldn't ban their sex, but I would strongly discourage it since it's just a few minutes of pleasure and once the kid is born, the female is vomiting for hours after the abortion.

It's their right to want to be in pain from abortion; but it's also your right to refuse to be vaccinated and suffer from covid.  If you exercise that right, I think it's kinda dumb.

Men pressure women into having sex unfortunately, and it's how consent is obtained.  Women aren't that horny.

The thing is, I don't think they do.  Otherwise if a female was pro Roe V Wade and didn't believe in fetal personhood, she would be having dozens of abortions since she wouldn't want the side effects from birth control and would want to have sex.

-->@oromagi

What coherent moral theory would deny that a man's first obligation is to his children?

the same moral theory that allows a woman to choose whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term

it's the moral theory of voluntarism (anti-coercion) and self-ownership