Debate: Abortion: What About a Man's Choice?
Side: Men Have No Say

Let's go through this point by point:"While it may be true there are no physical sacrifices, there are numerous psychological and financial sacrifices that a man makes."All of those sacrifices are carried by women, plus the danger and pain of child-birth. In most cases where only one parent is raising the child it is usually the woman, not the man. "Having a child isn't easy for anyone. Not for the woman or the man. Then there's the adjustment of having a kid, and let's not forget the fact that the man may have mental problems (like bi-polar) which might make him unable to properly raise a kid.Then there's the financial. If a woman has a child and the man leaves her, she can get child support from that man. What if the man is supporting his wife and can barely make it as it is. Having a kid will only amplify that and cause him to possibly work 80 hour weeks for years."There is a huge amount of B.S. in that, especially the last sentence. Child support is proportional to the man's income; if a man makes minimum wage that will be factored into the child support payments affixed by the judge. The whole "80 hour weeks for years" thing is something wholly made up by you, I have no idea why you decided to make stuff up but I would suggest making it a little less obvious next time. In fact, it is usually women who have to work extra hours on top of taking care of the kids because of father who skip out on their parental responsibilities. Anyways, this whole argument seems to lean towards the man not wanting the child but the woman wanting it. Are you telling me you think men should be able to force women to have abortions? No matter how unstable the man is; I don't think he should be able to force a woman to have an abortion simply because he implanted his sperm in her. He will have to pay child support if she decides to keep it; it was his choice to have sex with a woman unprotected. However, men frequently dodge child support successfully (my own biological father did just that. He owes child support to my mother, the mother of my half-brother and who knows who else. He hasn't paid a cent in a decade). "Of course there are other things as well. for instance, if the man is of faith, he may not want his future child to die. because the baby was made 50% from the man, shouldn't he at least have a say in what happens?"Let's see, so because this "religious man" impregnated a woman who doesn't share his values this "religious man" gets to decide for the woman whether the child is to be born or not? Let's not even get started the irony of this occurring between two people not even married; but if they are married (which seems rather unlikely if they both share radically different religious views) it still doesn't give the man the right to take control over the woman's body. The man has no say, he shouldn't have a say, and if his values are so different from the woman or girl he got pregnant he should look for another one. What you and those on your side don't seem to recognize is that you cannot have two people having an equal say in a particular matter to begin with. There are only two outcomes in any decision-making process two people engage in: a total consensus or an equal split. A vote of 0 to 2 or 1 to 1. What you want is two people having an equal vote but, if there is dissent, the man gets to be the tie-breaker. Essentially, this gives the man the say and the woman no say at all. I don't understand why you don't see this; it is only one or the other, or the courts which get to decide. But in any case in which your policy gets implemented the woman is the one who gets her voice silences and her body taken away from her. It's ridiculous, it really is.