Biology 101

Askmen.com has a vile article that gives men male human beings tips on how to get their partners to abort their offspring. "Love tip 300" feels their pain, knowing that children can put "tremendous strain" on a relationship. While all of it is beyond bad, consider the bizarre notion about parenthood:

If you’ve followed all of these steps and your woman decides to have the baby anyway, this does not mean you’re required to get married or move in together. You’ll probably want to provide for your child regardless, but if you’ve been clear about your intentions from the start, you are not obligated to contribute beyond what your conscience and the law expects of you. This was her decision, not yours, and the bulk of the responsibility is now hers.

Staggaring in myopic indulgence, breathtakingly wrong in its irresponsibility. Sexual intimacy produces babies -- clear and simple. The man male who chooses to become intimate with any woman under 50 engages in behaviour which creates more persons. The one who says it was "her decision" or "the responsibility is now hers" is not capable of the generosity on which stable, healthy relationships are built.

It also gives us another view of "choice," which often involves such coercion -- and even this final step of blackmail. Boyfriend or baby: you can't have them both (and for those who choose abortion, they usually end up with neither. Some choice.)

Yes, centuries ago, women were put away or rejected for not producing male heirs -- which biology now shows to be the domain of the male progenitor. Why modern men should blame women for pregnancy after intimacy is baffling, except that modern education is capable of creating just as many neanderthals. Yes [sigh], the responsibility is hers -- because she chose to be intimate with a selfish clod. Pursuit of abstinence weeds them out, and spares children from death and fatherlessness.

Brings to mind an image American Thinker posted under "What a real man looks like."

Comments

[John]

The attitude expressed on this website is abhorrent, but understandable in our day. After all, if women have a "choice" to kill the fruit of a union between a man and a woman, with or without the man's consent, why shouldn't men also have a "choice" whether or not to be a father? This is only being consistent with the twisted logic of our day.

[John]

One other thought that might be helpful:

I don't think you do well to deny men their title as men by calling them simply males, indistinguishable from animals. In spite of any actions that men commit that may be deplorable, they still remain men as God created them. If you disagree with this, then please also regard myself among the mere animals, for even though I have never directly assisted in an abortion, I have done many things which should render me unworthy of the dignity of being called a man.

[gsk]

It was in the spirit of the picture, John, but you're quite right. Few of us live up to our dignity as temples of the Holy Spirit. I'll leave both the wording and your justified chastisement.

[Renee]

Didn't President Obama say "Fatherhood doesn't end at conception?"

[Enbrethiliel]

+JMJ+

Is anyone else reminded of the picture of a yet-unborn Samuel Armas' hand reaching out of the womb and grabbing the surgeon's finger?

[warren]

Any man who would walk away from the mother of his children as if he owes her nothing, because he "was clear" that it was "just sex", is lying to himself and that woman.

This is the culture of death in clear relief. It only takes a bit of thinking about it for the least catholic person in the world to realize it. Unless you're comitted to lying to yourself and other people, sex can, and does, bring you a baby, and can do that, any time you have sex. So Catholics are being real, and the non-real-men out there are dodging it. Uh. Oops. Uh. Have an abortion. Mkay?

Big help, big fella.

Warren