take away the rights of women in this country, be prepared for hell on earth.

I don't understand why the man has no rights. If the baby is born then everyone will say that it's his responsibility to take care of the child , too. So why doesn't he get s choice.

A father, uncle, brother. There are lots of scenarios in your position that I am not seeing you consider.

Because that is the reality a lot of the times. Married, committed relationships of two rational, and reasonable persons generally is not going to have the wife sneaking off for an abortion and would already be having the conversation with the husband.

So, just what is your point? I made mine. What about all the situation I named off where the woman's life is at risk or their is a control issue or she was raped, raped by a father, brother, uncle. What about all those women?

Then of course abortion should be an option for those women.

I am not a "pro-lifer". They are crazy. I Don't even like calling them pro-life because in reality they aren't really pro-life, they are anti-choice and pro-birth. Liberals are more pro-life than any of them because we actually care about what happens to the child after birth.

But I guess I am not all the way pro-choice in the way the definition is now. I am pro-choice with both individuals getting a say (if the scenario does not fit one of the scenarios you mentioned)

That doesn't mean I want all abortion clinics closed or want to take funds away from planned parenthood, etc...

Men are not having their bodies change for a lifetime. I would suggest in a situation where reason is to be had, and not the circumstance I spelled out, there will be a discussion and an agreeable resolution one way or another. But, other than hoping for the best of who we are, because the burden is exclusively on women, it leaves the decision to the woman.

Personally, I believe that there should be a conversation.

As law though, it has to be exclusively the woman's decision.

if the man wants to make a financial arrangement where he pays both the woman and the childs costs for life...then they can contractually agree to a surrogacy type agreement

the arrangement where the man pays the woman's expenses should continue even if the child does not survive...because the woman will still have physical, emotional, and financial implications of the pregnancy and the loss.

The minute he endures pregnancy and childbirth he gets an equal say.

But immediately after birth the baby is both of their responsibilities.

She cannot give the baby up for adoption without his consent. If he refuses and chooses to take custody and raise the child, she is liable for child support.

explained why in 1992. See Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

I just read it.

Funny how I disagree with what was upheld. But also disagree on what was struck down. Seems like the Justices were all over the place too besides Souter, Kennedy, and O'Conner.

I don't think there should be a 24hr waiting period, informed consent, or parental notification and think they create an undue burden which means I am to the left on that decision.

But I think there should be spousal awareness which means I am to the right on that decision.

What if she's in an abusive relationship and he beats or kills her upon being notified? What if the reason she had the abortion was to not be tied down to an abuser? Sorry, it's her body and her life, case closed.