From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Male Choice, How?
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 04:50:34 GMT
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

In article <1574@ozz.oasis.icl.co.uk> dvp@oasis.icl.co.uk (Dave Parry) writes:
>karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>> 
>> I think the best way to do this is to require >both< parties to sign the
>> same form.  That way the man knows at the time its signed that the woman
>> won't abort the fetus, and the woman knows the man can't legally run off.
>> 
>> That is, there is mutual assent.  
>> 
>> I like it.  
>
>The only problem is Karl is that, as has been pointed out here a
>number of times, it is a woman's right to change her mind and abort
>or not as she pleases. It is not a man's right to support or not as he
>pleases. 

Dave, can you state a reason here for this which is not sexist in its
wording and effect?

The fact is, that the woman's right to change her mind is grounded in the
idea that it is her body which is paramount.  Yet this is really an argument
over the use of one's bodily resources, is it not?  If you distill this
down you find that it is sexist.  Why?  Here's a short analysis:

1)	A woman can choose not to have her eggs grow to be a baby.  She can
	make this choice >at any time up to birth<, based on the right to
	decide what is done with her bodily resources.  This is true 
	>even if she does not keep her zipper up<.

2)	A man, however, cannot choose to have his sperm not turn into a
	baby, except by keeping his zipper up.  That is, he cannot choose,
	at the same time as a woman can, what should become of his sperm.
	He can >attempt< to choose by using barrier contraceptives --
	however, should they fail, or even be deliberately sabotaged by his
	partner, he is liable for the resulting child >at her whim<.

Note that there is both an egg and a sperm involved in creating a zygote.

Now, it is unreasonable for a man to demand that a woman get an abortion.
That I will grant you.  However, it is not unreasonable for a man to expect
that >with the choice to bear the child comes the responsibility for same<
absent an agreement to the contrary.

>I can't believe that if an agreement was signed (whereby the
>man would not be obligated to support a child he did not want) and the
>women decided to keep it and go to court for support, that the judge
>would rule in the man's favour. I'm also sure that her legal council
>would have a (probably successful) go at ruling the agreement
>unconstitutional. One way or another, they'll make you pay.

Unconstitutional?  Why?

I would think that a challenge to the current system of "my body, my choice
to impoverish you" could be mounted on the grounds of denial of equal 
protection under the law -- a strong principle in our Constitution.

>As some have said earlier, the only sure way is to get the snip.   

As some have said, the only sure way for a woman is to get her tubes tied.
Why should she be able to choose abortion?  If she does not want kids then
she should keep her zipper up or make damn sure she cannot get pregnant!

>> Which I believe this change would do.  Only a foolish woman would have a
>> child which she could not afford if she could not bill the man for half the
>> cost -- and men would have no reason to "run off" on their kids, as they
>> wouldn't be responsible for them unless they wanted them in the first place.
>
>A 'sensible' woman would not make love to someone without making damn
>sure she was 'protected', irrespective of who's responsibility
>contraception 'should' be.

So then abortion is unnecessary (rendering moot the argument over whether it
is "right" or "wrong") since women would make love only if she was protected
adaquately?

What's the double-standard here?

>> I fully support holding people to their agreements in this area; the key is
>> consent.
>
>Dave

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
Newsgroups: talk.abortion