Abortion law - should man partner be made accountable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter arvo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

arvo

Guest
There are some many discussion about law and abortion. If such law passes - should man partner (biological father) be made accountable under such law?
  • e.g. should he be punished if woman makes abortion?
  • e.g. should the special tax be deducted from man for the support of baby and women if women decides to give life to baby? Parental test can reliably detect the man partner from who the tax should be held.
Is there any any Church teaching regarding these world matters? I am not speaking about participation in sin etc. This question is just about Church teaching regarding the worldly matter - accountability of man under the law?
 
Last edited:
Before people have intimate relations, just make the parties sign a contract for medical payments, legal fees / custody plans / child support for any ensuing STIs and/or children.
Kind of like we used to have this contractual thing called “marriage” before people had intimate relations.
Now how colleges and universities have this big thing about “consent”, they could just add “have you signed the legal paperwork?”
 
Last edited:
arvo said:
…
This question is just about Church teaching regarding the worldly matter - accountability of man under the law?
Click to expand...
Catechism of the Catholic Church
1959 The natural law, the Creator’s very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.

2268 The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.69
Click to expand...
 
The father most certainly should be held accountable for the child, however, under present US law, he cannot prevent an abortion if the mother chooses it. Therefore he should not be punished. Sadly, it’s out of his hands.

As I said in another post this morning, the desire to separate sex from its natural consequences has had disastrous consequences for our entire society and social order. The desire to use contraceptives to defeat the natural purpose of sex has led even otherwise virtuous people to seek this out — let’s be real — to be able to have sex on demand, or at least to be able to have sex when the alternative would be unwanted abstinence, either for long periods of time, or in some cases, for many years. Virtually all Christians, aside from Catholics, have followed the lead of the Anglicans at Lambeth and said, like the serpent said to Eve about the fruit, “there’s nothing wrong with it”. Catholics, wanting an easier life — again, let’s be real — have said “I will disagree with this one teaching, and only this one teaching”. And the Church, as a practical matter, doesn’t utter a peep. That’s messed up.

No, it doesn’t “feel wrong”, at least not after you get past the initial discomfort and cognitive dissonance (assuming you experience that in the first place, some do, some don’t). No sin does. You commit the sin, see that the sky didn’t fall in, and reason that there’s nothing wrong with it after all. Happens all the time, with many, many species of sin.

And when contraception fails — and it does — or doesn’t get used “that one time”, or whatever, well, that’s what abortion is for. When couples get in this situation, they either come to terms with an “oops baby” and celebrate it, or they have an abortion, and nobody is ever told.
 
The father should definitely be held accountable for the welfare of the child.
atjar1 said:
No oops babies with a vasectomy. But then, a perfectly good 100% solution to a married couple who no longer want children, we are told we are in error and in mortal sin.
Click to expand...
If you think the thing keeping people from vasectomies is Church Teaching then you are gravely mistaken.
 
Last edited:
atjar1 said:
No oops babies with a vasectomy. But then, a perfectly good 100% solution to a married couple who no longer want children, we are told we are in error and in mortal sin.
Click to expand...
False, vasectomies do fail plenty. Also, the man and wife both promise to the Church that they will accept children lovingly from God. How does it help to get a vasectomy?
 
Last edited:
A man who has relations outside marriage is responsible for his actions. Perhaps she becomes pregnant or she loses marriageability, placing burdens on her family. Is a law needed to hold him accountable? That depends on the society. If the society is such that the two concerned extended families can arrange things best between themselves, then I think it is better that there is no law, since it might sometimes lead to a less optimal outcome, being a general law, and not specifically tailored the the needs of the parties. But if in general things would be smother with a law, then I think the law should intervene to facilitate the arrangements.

Will a reckless young man view whatever arrangements as “punishment”? Probably. Will a responsible young man? No.
 
I think it is easy to see a woman walk into an abortion clinic and hard to prove collusion between spouses. So in my locale, I doubt anyone would prosecute them both for abortion, if ever there were a law to prosecute abortion. The more likely party to be prosecuted would be the abortion provider, unless the woman is a surrogate mother under a contract.

Having children is basic to marriage, yes. Not sure what exactly you are asking with that.
 
atjar1 said:
Yes the decision whether or not to have children is the sole preview of husband and wife
Click to expand...
They should probably be in consultation with their pastor, who has experience in couples counseling, and would be able to mediate their wishes and express the needs of the Church and community.
 
I think governments have proven themselves to be willing to intervene by force or incentive in decisions about procreation. I doubt that will end. But in a free, well-functioning society, it should be the married couple who decide to have relations or not, and the state shouldn’t sterilize them.
 
27lw said:
Before people have intimate relations, just make the parties sign a contract for medical payments, legal fees / custody plans / child support for any ensuing STIs and/or children.
Kind of like we used to have this contractual thing called “marriage” before people had intimate relations.
Now how colleges and universities have this big thing about “consent”, they could just add “have you signed the legal paperwork?”
Click to expand...
A lot of sex outside of marriage is at least somewhat spontaneous and it goes without saying that spontaneity and signing paperwork don’t go together.

This would never work, at least not on a large scale.
 
As noted elsewhere here, vasectomies do fail, but even if they do not, it is a mortally sinful means to a desired end, and that is never allowed.

We can never do evil to achieve our goals. That is “the end justifies the means” and is an unacceptable moral principle. The Church’s teachings are what they are, and something being a “perfectly good [sic] 100% solution” is beside the point. Morality is based upon unchanging truths, not expediency or desired outcomes.
 
Last edited:
atjar1 said:
Yes the decision whether or not to have children is the sole preview of husband and wife
Click to expand...
The end, if it is to prevet conception where there is grave reason to do so - is fine. The church is not against you doing so.

But there are other means to that end. Natural family planning (which is very sophisticated and generally reliable these days) is one.

Your attitude is rather like saying "look, we need money to put food on our table, and yes we could perfectly well go out and work for it, but I’ll go out and rob a bank instead. It’s for a good cause, so its morally OK, right?’
 
Fathers have no legal standing to protect the life of the child, force the mother to carry the child, keep the child or adopt the child out …no part in the decision. Should the mother decide to keep the child though the father has to provide support. The father can loose his licenses necessary for his employment should he decide not to pay, his wages can be garnished and his tax returns taken …he already is compelled to provide support …unless the mother chooses to not name the father …and the state does not compel her to do so nor do they verify that with a paternity case …which they should do before providing support through social services.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think a blanket law that would punish the man would lead to a lot of injustices. What if he didn’t know she was pregnant or tried to stop her and she did it anyway? What if she lied about being on birth control or poked holes in the condoms? It is not unheard of for women to try to get pregnant to trap a man into staying with her.
 
atjar1 said:
Vasectomy is 100% reliable. I have a daughter. We don’t want any more children. My and my wife’s choice. Choice made by married people, not by the church
Click to expand...
There are only three 100% effective methods of birth control: removal of both ovaries, removal of both testicles, or 100% abstinence. Everything else has a failure rate including vasectomy. I had a newspaper article from probably 30 years ago that talked about a couple who decided not to have any more children. Husband had a vasectomy. Wife got pregnant. After the pregnancy, she had a tubal ligation. After the tubal, they got pregnant again.

Nothing is 100% but the three I mentioned above.

Pax
 
Well the man has a responsibility. Proper investigation should be conducted if an abortion takes place to see if the man influences the woman or is helping seek an abortion. If she keeps the child I think child support must be increased to at least 25% of the man’s paycheck.
 
atjar1 said:
Vasectomy is 100% reliable. I have a daughter. We don’t want any more children. My and my wife’s choice. Choice made by married people, not by the church
Click to expand...
If a man and woman walked into a priest’s office to declare that they were engaged, and that they did not want children, the priest would bid them good-day and close the door behind them.

A couple cannot be married unless they will welcome children into their family. The number of children is not prescribed, the manner of welcoming is not necessarily through procreation, but there must be a place for children in a marriage, because marriage is for (1) the sanctification of the spouses and (2) the raising of children in the Catholic faith.
 
Failure rates are more slim than most contraception. Even more than an iud which has only like a .03 or .01 failure rate. It’s very rare for it to fail
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top