To think men shouldn’t be allowed to express pro-life opinions?

It depends. Expressing sadness to his friend, of course he should.

Emotionally manipulating the women, of course he shouldn’t. Doesn’t sound like he did if he was supporting her right to choose.

Plenty of men are ‘feminists’ until it goes from giving them woke cookies to actually affecting their lives.

And that is why I believe abortion should be legal, because of the harm of illegal abortion. I don't think you can conclude that higher abortion rates when abortion is illegal is due to abortion being illegal. That may be a correlation but you would need much more evidence to decide on the (doubtless multi-factorial) causation..

But by making this point you are avoiding what I was actually talking about. Which was perhaps deliberate.

Where does it end though? Would you want the father having no right to an opinion after birth too?

I think they should be allowed to express pro-life opinions. I don’t think they should be allowed to manifest those opinions into law.

Men say all sorts of things and I barely listen to any of them. They have proved themselves to not be up to the job of being decent members of society. En masse, of course. Individually some are basically fine, most of the time but rarely all of the time.

What I don't want is men having unequal power, and in the case of power over women's bodies, minds, actions, they should have precisely zero.

And what saddens me is the women who merrily go along with it all. I know at a societal level it has benefited women in the short term to agree with men to gain protection, but long term there is no benefit and it is detrimental to women on a societal level.

My friend is pro choice but was he allowed to be sad when his ex decided she wanted an abortion? He supported her right to choose but it crushed him.

If you like evidence, the very clear evidence is that countries with free, legal abortions, have fewer of them. Places like Nicaragua, where it is illegal in all cases, have many more. They are just unsafe, expensive and illegal.

Another way you can tell it's about hating women, not preventing harm.

And if they were pro-life, they would also be the world's strongest advocates for consent, men paying CS, men abstaining if they don't want to both parent and pay, they would be fervent supporters of child protection (not just when the perps are brown).

They aren't. They just hate women.

@wavymavy ,

That is a fantastic post and you put it far better than I ever could.

We seem to have passed the time of intelligent respectful debate and be determined to sling slogans at one another.

If you look back 100 years ago, people would have viewed all kinds of human life as unimportant that we now view as sacrosanct. Thankfully people discussed these and opinions changed.

The reality is that if you ask women and men up to what point in pregnancy abortion should be legal, women on average would put a shorter limit on it than men.

Nah they should be allowed to express an opinion and we are are allowed to tell them their opinion is wrong

Everyone is allowed an opinion in a free speech society. It's a very dangerous path to go down to suggest otherwise.

Men shouldn't have "blanket control" over women's bodies in that way. But i do believe individual fathers should have a say in what happens with their offspring..

I’m shocked that the voting is around 50%. Freedom of speech is incredibly important.

I prefer not to live a dystopia where anyone is unable to express their opinion about anything, however unpopular. Unfortunately, it feels the West already may be headed that way.

Anyone can have an opinion on anything. Do you think women who can’t have children shouldn’t have an opinion on it? What about people who decided they didn’t want children, what about women who have had no children and had a hysterectomy?

The problem isn’t that stupid, ugly, nasty men want to be able to force women and girls to give birth, even in cases of incest, rape, life-threading risk. The issue is that they have a great deal of power. The wanting to is one thing, the being able to is quite another.

And let’s not call it ‘pro-life’. If that was the case they’d be funding maternity, contraception, housing, food, education, adoption and fostering, anti-DV, anti-SA. No, they are pro-forced birth.

Its not a continuation of a woman's body though. Its not an organ.

Its a separate human life supported by the Mother's body.

I do believe abortion should be legal but I find myself hanging onto that view by a thread when I read this thread.

Abortion seems to me a very clear example of a really difficult moral dilemma, especially as pregnancy progresses, with very good and strong arguments on both sides. Whatever side you come down on, a human life is harmed, whether it is the embryo/ foetus/ baby (depending on development and your choice of language), or harm to the Mother.

Hearing people on this thread basically denying that, by presenting it as a black and white, easy moral decision is really quite disturbing. That seems to be to display a lack of integrity and intellectual honesty.

I really value fact based, evidence based debate and I don't see it in the tone of this thread. If I am perfectly honest, the arguments used in this thread are rather reminding me of the type used by trans activists, who give sole consideration to men and deny any harm is caused to women by it.

@JHound ,

‘I consider the foetus to be human. I think that’s irrelevant. The woman’s rights over her own womb should be sacrosanct.’

But then you are saying that someone has the right to take the life of another human being as the rights over her own womb are sacrosanct. It is a view but it’s not obvious or non debatable.

‘The disease comparison makes no sense. For starters we don’t prevent people with diseases from wondering through society.’

We absolutely do with serious communicable diseases.

• The 1984 Act allows for magistrates to issue orders requiring individuals who are infected or suspected of being infected with a disease posing a significant risk to human health to undergo medical examination, be moved to a hospital or other suitable establishment, and be isolated or quarantined.
• Criminal Offenses:
• The Act also creates criminal offenses for individuals who fail to comply with isolation orders, abscond from isolation, or obstruct public health officials.

Exactly this. People should be allowed to express their opinions. One key advantage of them doing so is that then we know who the idiots are and we can challenge their ill-informed arguments.

No good can come of suppressing anyone's right to free speech.

Whilst the "baby" is a foetus it is a continuation of the women's body, and she has a right to bodily autonomy. Arguably the father might have a right to know about her decision to end a pregnancy involving his genetic offspring so that he can end any sexual relationship with her so that there is no risk of it happening again, but beyond that, her body, her choice.

Of course they should be allowed opinions.

Agree. I want those men where I can see them.

I don't mind anyone pro-life having an opinion, male or female.

Obviously their opinion means absolutely bollock-all and is just a waste of their breath giving it, but they are still entitled to it.

Good one !! At first sentence I was like eh ? Then I was like great point ! 100% agree.

I consider the foetus to be human. I think that’s irrelevant. The woman’s rights over her own womb should be sacrosanct.

I view born children as human but would still be opposed to their parent being forced to be their organ donor.

The disease comparison makes no sense. For starters we don’t prevent people with diseases from wondering through society.