via zeit.de 05/07/15
Fox News has been given a bad rap for their unique way of reporting however they’ve done something extra interesting. Their Resident MD: Dr. Keith Ablow has declared that men should be able to veto women’s abortions. There’s no question about it, Ablow was purly focused on publicity. Women and men both have different perceptions on what is right and wrong when it comes to abortions. This all stemmed from a fight between Sofia Vergara and her ex fiance over her frozen embryos.
Loeb believes that he has every right to bring her embryos to term. This is after they are no longer together. Even though this specific issue is about embryos that have not been implanted, he has still applied the idea of them being a child. That is the age old question. When does an embryo start being a human being? Ablow declared that men should be allowed to veto a woman’s abortion if the man is willing to care for the child after it is born. When a man doesn’t want a baby but a woman does, she is allowed to continue to have the baby, however when roles are reversed, shouldn’t a man be given his rights as well? The only problem with this particular case is that during the embryo freezing, both of them signed a contract saying that they both must give consent to bing any of the embryos to term via in vitro fertilization (IVF).
Women have forever argued that abortions are their right because they are the ones giving birth not the man. Many men feel like their rights are being taken away because it’s their child as well not just hers. There are many things about the process of abortion that have pro-abortion individuals squirm but that doesn’t stop them from telling people that women shoudl have the right to have an abortion at her own discretion. There were four women present when Ablow stated his thoughts about abortion being a 2 person decision and none of them said anything against him. There are people that are irritated that Ablow used this time to talk about abortion being a two person decision since the embryos have not been activated in anybody’s body. There is no pregnant woman hence no abortion happening.
Taking a deeper look at what leads to abortions, some people believe that regardless of danger or likelihood of the baby living, children should always be carried to full term. This also has zero focus on the mother and her chances of surviving childbirth. There are some couples that believe that regardless of whether the mother can live through childbirth, they will still carry the baby to full term and give birth because the child has not had the opportunity to live a life and to choose the mother over the child is almost like saying her life is worth more. Other couples would rather abort and try again.
via keithablow.com 05/07/15
Another situation that often comes up is when a person is raped and they get pregnant because of the rape. There is a variety of opinions about whether rape is a justification for giving up a child. Why couldn’t the mother simply give birth and adopt out their baby? Whether somebody believes in a zero tolerance abortion policy or if they believe somebody should be allowed to utilize abortion as form of birth control there is one thing both of them agree on. Abortion and giving birth are both very serious life decisions. It doesn’t matter what end of the spectrum anybody is on, children are still children and they are still the future of this world.
Asking yourself whether adoption, abortion, or keeping a child when being pregnant is hard enough, politicians should not dictate who or what should be a driving force behind anybody’s decision. It doesn’t matter if the politician is for or against the very thought held precious. Perhaps this is something that each couple should discuss before having sex, “If we were to oops get pregnant, what do we agree?” While it may seem like a mood-killer, if it does kill the mood no actions should have taken place because nobody was ready to think about the consequences.
I must say, I did not read this. I was getting ready to, and I saw FoxNews and was like, “Goddamnit!” I’ll gear up and load it into google translate and listen to it. Just… Foxnews dealing with anything is not good at all.
OK… I listened to it. This argument… I can kill both sides in simple stipulation. “Take religion out of it.” This abortion this is all about religion and that’s why it’s a stupid argument. Abortion should not be a right, privilege, or entitlement. It needs to be an obligation-option. If you want one, GET ONE. If you don’t, DON’T. Mayhap my terms are crude and misunderstood, therefore reading context is important. Abortions need to only be left up to those directly involved. The woman, and the dude that did her. If SHE wants to terminate and ANY stage, that is NOT up to her alone. This is his situation, too. Respect is key here. They BOTH need to talk about it. If HE wants it, and SHE doesn’t, then she can have it, and relinquish the child to him. Maybe later on, she will think about it and regret ever wanting to terminate the pregnancy. However, when a man is with a woman, even for a moment, and in any time later finds out she was pregnant, he’s crushed. Often times, guys talk about not wanting kids, but if they knew they have a 10yo spud out there, they’d be joyous. Men like kids a lot. They do have a maternal instinct. To find out you could have had a child that was 2, 5, 10, 15, or older, but was terminated without at least a talk is devastating. Resentment will ensue. So, RESPECT THE OTHER PERSON AND TALK THINGS OUT. If god wanted babies to make it, he would not have created sars, zika, and all other crap that kills kids just before birth, during birth, or before they turn 10. Take religion out. It’s poisoned our judgments long enough.
Thank you for reading.