From "Feminist Philosophers": Male Veto For Abortion in Ohio?

Yeah, because we all know that just because the father doesn't walk around for nine months only to painfully give birth, he doesn't have the right to decide whether or not he wants to keep the child. That is utterly pathetic. Why don't we make a petition to stop their petition? That'd be funny.

Once again, feminist try to marginalize the role, responsibility, and rights of the father.

I don't like this idea and I will tell you why.

Ok, here is where I see a major problem. Women who want abortions (but the father does not) will simply file a police reporting claiming that he raped her.

If there is one thing we all know it's that women DO lie about rape for a variety of reasons....we don't need to give them another reason.

There are really only 2 workable solutions to this current father hating injustice:

1) Ban abortion. Make women responsible for having sex (just like men)
2) Provide men a financial opt-out

Of course, I am open to people telling me why this HB287 is good?

I agree with Garak, this house bill 287 has several problems in it. So-called legal loop-holes. Nothing is perfect, but laws can be corrected later on...

On the other side, I am happy to see finally some political opposition against feminists claiming unlimited rights for pregnant women regarding the unborn child including abortion and adoption without considering father's rights.

This is a house bill, which is really not friendly to the feminist ideology of controlling the man.

So when's the bill coming that gives a man the right to force a woman to have an abortion?

MRAs do not need such a bill. We do not want to force women into abortion.

This bill is different and makes sense.
This is a bill, which might force some women to carry out the child under some certain circumstances, especially if the father wants to have this child. It's a bill against abortion.

Fathers rights regarding the unborn child have to be considered, and up to now this is not the case.

However, what I think, this bill is far off to be acceptable and needs major correction in its context. Too many open questions.

I am not with you here. I have witnessed a birth just a month ago. If someone does not want this amont of pain I can understand that and noone has the right to force this uppon others. It is sad that the biological father has no say at all, I agree but what will come next? Police forcing her not to smoke and drink alcohol during pregnancy? Force a healthy lifestyle on them? That won´t work.

Pain can be compensated by money...

1 -
You should consider also the pain, if a cheated man has to work many hours solely to pay child support over decades and he is not even the biological father or the mother is using this money for smoking and alcohol and drugs and not for the child - often after divorce even impossible for him to see the child, no rights about how his money is used for the child and finally, if unable to pay, he might find himself in prison.

2 -
If a woman does not want to become pregnant, she has a choice not to become pregnant. Her choice.
If she has no sex, she will not become pregnant,
she might use various medication to avoid pregnancy,
she might control the days of possibility to become pregnant or not between the mensual bleedings,
she might have a responsible partner using condom and so on.

As GARAK said, if you give a choice to the woman regarding abortion ... you have to give also a choice to the man to opt out of any financial obligations in return.
Next? What should be done by your opinion, to consider the biological father?

According to you, he should have no rights over the unborn child...

What will be his choice? Good question...

But this is the legal situation in a feminist society only, like USA, UK, Sweden etc...it's not everywhere like that.

-------------------

Here in Japan, this is easy - Japan is not feminist.

There is legal abortion and the woman decides.

However in Japanese law, child-support does not exist.

Money for the children? Yes or no? He decides and nobody can force him to pay anything...

Does this fit you better?

Yes. A man shouldn´t be forced into paying child support. We should also support the male pile. So a man does not have children if he doesn´t want to. Those are far better alternatives.

One thing I´d like to add. When a male can decide that she is not allowed to have an abortion. She can still have an abortion on her own terms

...and this would be the best solution.

You see, children are far better off with a mother and a father and if the mother has to negotiate DIRECTLY with the father for support, chances are the mother won't engage in PAS and the father will be more available in the childs life. Not to mention the lowered chances of divorce/seperation in the first place (state mandated child support encourages divorce).

State mandated child support is just a way to cut the father out of the picture but still take his money causing a great deal of resentment and robbing the child of a father.

Oh and Feckless, I am tired of hearing about the pain and inconvenience of pregnancy and childbirth. We men are told "keep it in your pants" and so why would I not respond in kind to the poor poor women? Pregnancy and childbirth are biological traits (blame God, not men) that have allowed women special treatment all throughout history and I would say that the benefits have outweighed the pain.

Having said that, I have no interest in forcing a woman to carry BUT if women continue to fight against men having any choice (financial opt-out) in the matter, I might start leaning in that direction sooner or later. All we are looking for is equality but if women continue to be selfish in that regard...well....