Should Males Make Decisions on Abortion?

There is a pro-choice abortion argument that states men should not make decisions or laws on abortion since they are male. Since only females are anatomically designed to carry and give birth to a child they are the only ones who may have a valid say on abortion. Pregnancy and abortion will never physically affect a man the way it they do a woman so men should be silent.

There are several angles in which to frame this argument. Some, like recently retired libertarian radio talk show host Neal Boortz, even blamed President Obama’s recent victory on the position taken by certain Republican males.

The Republicans lost any hope of regaining control in the Senate the minute that Republican men decided to open their traps and make idiodic [sic] comments about something that will never, ever affect them: abortion.  Todd Akin (Missouri), Richard Mourdock (Indiana) and John Koster (Washington) … these MEN – and I want to emphasize their gender here – can take great pride for the role they played in handing g  [sic] Obama a victory yesterday. 1

Boortz has made this pro-choice argument several times on the radio. But is that a reasonable argument? Is that the way most people make decisions or the way laws are made?

My answer is no that this is not a reasonable nor logical argument. A quote I recently came across by Ronald Reagan illustrates the absurdity of the argument in question. Reagan’s brilliant retort was:

I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.

If men should not make decisions on abortion then neither should women because they have not experienced death from an abortion. An abortion affects an unborn baby in a much different way than it affects the mother – he/she dies.

Society would be chaotic if only those directly affected by certain moral acts were allowed to make decisions laws about such acts. Never been a thief or been robbed? Quiet! Never cheated on or been cheated on? Sit down! Never been an elected official who passed laws? Ssshhh!

And on and on….

Now, we could stick with the reasoning of Boortz and others and argue that until the mother of an unborn child experiences death by abortion she has no right to decide to abort her baby; neither does the doctor.

For what it’s worth…


P.S. Of course, a baby isn’t really part of a woman’s body anyway.

  1. Neal Boortz. Thanks, Too, To The Abortocentrists. (emphasis added)
Let's connect!

tagged as , in apologetics,Christianity,Culture,morality

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Christiane February 5, 2013 at 5:32 pm

I think Akin and Mourdock’s comments may or may not be representative of conservative male thinking;
but I KNOW that they don’t represent the thinking of my conservative Christian female acquaintances.

2 Robert Vaughn February 5, 2013 at 8:41 pm

Excluding males from making decisions on abortions is preposterous on its face. If their were no males there would be no pregnancies and no abortions.

3 Daniel Spratlin April 13, 2013 at 10:28 am

I’ve called Boortz out on his refusal to even discuss abortion for years. He’s a coward who has just given up on using any reasoning abilities (that he holds so high) on this issue. Fortunately, he’s retired now so he won’t be able to spread his ignorance quite as much.

However, being male or female is irrelevant on this issue. If a person advocating such a position was consistent then they should also be working towards having Roe v. Wade overturned as it was 9 men who made that decision. But, of course, this would be detrimental to their position so they choose to remain inconsistent.


Previous post:

Next post: