Back to the 'invasive process' thing again. The woman has all of the risk up front, and it's not insubstantial risk either way she goes. Don't want to pay for 18 years? Don't bang her. Some mistakes have lifetime consequences.

So you just blew your whole argument out of the water, basically you went from arguing your point of view was fair to saying tough shit you have to deal with it for a lifetime. So now you are neither equal or fair, you just want to keep the status quo. We have given women the power to say this is not a lifetime mistake, but something you can end, don't see why this shouldn't be an option for men as well.

The woman's risk is very low with the procedure, much lower than actually going full term.

I wonder how long we can keep this going? LoL It's not like anyone is here or cares, its fun to read when bored in the middle of the day.

I said it before: Equitable.

The woman's health and future are at risk in the beginning. The man's finances are at risk for the future. And to top it off, as I also already stated, society's finances at at issue if the woman is left alone to raise the children, and can't do it alone.

I didn't blow anything out of the water. I'm remaining quite consistent in my argument.

I'm at lunch and frequently waiting for callbacks, so I've got time :lol:

I for one, love the new trend of 'virgins' having going anal to maintain their virginity. Seems to me like society is solving a lot of these problems on their own.

Never knew any "good Catholic girls" when you were growing up, did you? Not so new ;)

Interestingly enough, most of the Catholic girls I knew were good girls... actually, maybe all of them.

I don't see how anything about it is equitable.

In the man's case once an egg gets fertilized he has zero options, his fate is completely out of his hands. The woman from that point can 1) take Plan B/RU486 and terminate immediately at virtually no risk to the "mother" (since she isn't technically pregnant yet), 2) have a low risk outpatient abortion performed, 3) put the baby up for adoption, or 4) keep the baby. Giving one party multiple options with risks ranging from virtually none to very low while the other party has zero options sounds pretty inequitable to me.

Congrats:rockwoot: