Women's rights advocates have long struggled for motherhood to be a voluntary condition, and not one imposed by nature or culture. In places where women and girls have access to affordable and safe contraception and abortion services, and where there are programs to assist mothers in distress find foster or adoptive parents, voluntary motherhood is basically a reality. In many states, infant safe haven laws allow a birth mother to walk away from her newborn baby if she leaves it unharmed at a designated facility.
If a man accidentally conceives a child with a woman, and does not want to raise the child with her, what are his choices? Surprisingly, he has few options in the United States. He can urge her to seek an abortion, but ultimately that decision is hers to make. Should she decide to continue the pregnancy and raise the child, and should she or our government attempt to establish him as the legal father, he can be stuck with years of child support payments.
Why is it that woman has 100% control on how much responsibility she can demand from man when its both of their fault that shes pregnant?
Is this a religiously inspired law? Well so far religious people lost it, when woman had a right to have an abortion, but now they still have a great tool to make woman very comfortable if they want to have a child without a spouse, because rights of men is not as much as important as rights for woman why? because men doesn't have a womb.So fairness, justice, equality, doesn't matter when there is baby involved?
Tell me what you think. :-?
You sound fucking familiar.
In America, it is the woman's right to punish the man. I heard a lawyer on radio admit once, that when there is a divorce, the man just wants it over with. The woman on the other hand, wants to punish the man, even if she was the one at fault. Not scientific to be sure, but it seems the laws and the courts give the woman more rights than the man. And yes, I think it is religiously based.
Men, use a condom, a good condom each and every time. Or plan on buying the woman your depositing your sperm into a house.
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"In America, it is the woman's right to punish the man. I heard a lawyer on radio admit once, that when there is a divorce, the man just wants it over with. The woman on the other hand, wants to punish the man, even if she was the one at fault. Not scientific to be sure, but it seems the laws and the courts give the woman more rights than the man. And yes, I think it is religiously based.
Men, use a condom, a good condom each and every time. Or plan on buying the woman your depositing your sperm into a house.
Yes well not only in US by the way i read in the local newspaper how one night stand stole rich mans sperm to then demand insane amount of child support and how that child toke care of all of her financial problems she doesn't have to work doesn't need to worry
how are you going to prove that condom worked well and it has been stolen?
insane law if you ask me
Easiest way not to have this problem is some pornography, tissues, and your dominant hand. I may be made fun of, but no one can deny that this method is foolproof.
More seriously, I think it may stem from a slight overreaction to the treatment of women in the past. Until recently, all societies that weren't straight-up matriarchies treated women as property and little more.
(And there have never been a preponderance of matriarchies in the world.)
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Easiest way not to have this problem is some pornography, tissues, and your dominant hand. I may be made fun of, but no one can deny that this method is foolproof. 8-)
:rollin:
Why the hell is this in the "Introductions" forum?
Women are evil and are out to make men miserable. It's true.
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"In America, it is the woman's right to punish the man. I heard a lawyer on radio admit once, that when there is a divorce, the man just wants it over with. The woman on the other hand, wants to punish the man, even if she was the one at fault. Not scientific to be sure, but it seems the laws and the courts give the woman more rights than the man. And yes, I think it is religiously based.
Men, use a condom, a good condom each and every time. Or plan on buying the woman your depositing your sperm into a house.
Well, that was incredibly sexist.
Yeah, women are just looking to "punish" men when they want a divorce. Men are just hapless victims.
If you don't like current laws, fine. But don't give me that "women are vindictive bitches" shit.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Why is it that woman has 100% control on how much responsibility she can demand from man when its both of their fault that shes pregnant?
Because she gestates the baby, it's her body. That is biology. If you have a problem with it, blame God.
8-[
Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"In America, it is the woman's right to punish the man. I heard a lawyer on radio admit once, that when there is a divorce, the man just wants it over with. The woman on the other hand, wants to punish the man, even if she was the one at fault. Not scientific to be sure, but it seems the laws and the courts give the woman more rights than the man. And yes, I think it is religiously based.
Men, use a condom, a good condom each and every time. Or plan on buying the woman your depositing your sperm into a house.
*snfffffffffffffff* Ahhh, the lemony smell of misogyny. How refreshing.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Why is it that woman has 100% control on how much responsibility she can demand from man when its both of their fault that shes pregnant?
Because she gestates the baby, it's her body. That is biology. If you have a problem with it, blame God.
8-[
troll alert?
Woman and man both choose to have sex in case of accidental pregnancy need to be resolved from both parties
if man doesn't want to have a child he is forced by woman's choice to pay money out from his packet.
no one is taking away a rights of woman to do what ever they want with their body but this Law takes away right of man to say i don't want to have a child. fact that he cant say anything weather or not woman should get an abortion is very fair.
but think about this Logically if both of parties take action and something goes wrong its up to both parties to choice how to solve a problem not only ones. In this case its only choise is women where is a right of men?
so if woman has a right to have a child whether or not she has permission from father of a child
then man should have a right to give away their rights of fatherhood
AKA not be forced to pay child support when he gave away his rights of fatherhood
and please write normal comment this is forum for atheists don't say silly things like you should keep it in your pants or this is biology. really?
and read full post please
I think you are on wrong forum this is not lets be stupid because we never had other choice forum.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Women are evil and are out to make men miserable. It's true.
[youtube:fypqg604]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP-jJTqbwXI[/youtube:fypqg604]
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Why is it that woman has 100% control on how much responsibility she can demand from man when its both of their fault that shes pregnant?
Because she gestates the baby, it's her body. That is biology. If you have a problem with it, blame God.
8-[
troll alert?
Woman and man both choose to have sex in case of accidental pregnancy need to be resolved from both parties
if man doesn't want to have a child he is forced by woman's choice to pay money out from his packet.
no one is taking away a rights of woman to do what ever they want with their body but this Law takes away right of man to say i don't want to have a child. fact that he cant say anything weather or not woman should get an abortion is very fair.
but think about this Logically if both of parties take action and something goes wrong its up to both parties to choice how to solve a problem not only ones. In this case its only choice women where is a right of men?
so if woman has a right to have a child whether or not she has permission from father of a child
then man should have a right to give away their rights of fatherhood
AKA not be forced to pay child support when he gave away his rights of fatherhood
and please write normal comment this is forum for atheists don't say silly things like you should keep it in your pants or this is biology really?
I think you are on wrong forum this is not lets be stupid because we never had other choice forum.
Men are not innocent in this whole baby-making thing. They put their dicks in women and ejaculate knowing the consequences of their actions. Birth control does not always work. Shit happens. If you put your penis in a vagina, you'd better be prepared for any unexpected consequences that result from that action. If you're partially responsible for creating a new life, deal with it. And don't you dare tell me I'm being "silly" because I disagree with you, I have a perfectly valid argument. You can't just "give away" your fatherhood. You created a life. You had sex and you knew what could happen, but you did it anyway. Every time I have sex, I know there is a slim chance I could get pregnant. I accept that risk.
Hijiri Byakuren wrote in part:
QuoteEasiest way not to have this problem is some pornography, tissues, and your dominant hand. I may be made fun of, but no one can deny that this method is foolproof. 8-)
Where were you when I needed this advice twenty-five years ago? :(
Smartmarzipan wrote in part:
QuoteIf you don't like current laws, fine. But don't give me that "women are vindictive bitches" shit.
I never said "women are vindictive bitches." I just quoted what a lawyer said on the radio. But, now that you mention it... many women are vindictive bitches. Of course, many men are asshole dogs too.
As far as being a misogynist, well as I have stated before, I am a misanthropist. So, why wouldn't I be a misogynist?
I smell sock-puppetry.
8-[[/quote]
troll alert?
Woman and man both choose to have sex in case of accidental pregnancy need to be resolved from both parties
if man doesn't want to have a child he is forced by woman's choice to pay money out from his packet.
no one is taking away a rights of woman to do what ever they want with their body but this Law takes away right of man to say i don't want to have a child. fact that he cant say anything weather or not woman should get an abortion is very fair.
but think about this Logically if both of parties take action and something goes wrong its up to both parties to choice how to solve a problem not only ones. In this case its only choice women where is a right of men?
so if woman has a right to have a child whether or not she has permission from father of a child
then man should have a right to give away their rights of fatherhood
AKA not be forced to pay child support when he gave away his rights of fatherhood
and please write normal comment this is forum for atheists don't say silly things like you should keep it in your pants or this is biology really?
I think you are on wrong forum this is not lets be stupid because we never had other choice forum.[/quote]
Men are not innocent in this whole baby-making thing. They put their dicks in women and ejaculate knowing the consequences of their actions. Birth control does not always work. Shit happens. If you put your penis in a vagina, you'd better be prepared for any unexpected consequences that result from that action. If you're partially responsible for creating a new life, deal with it. And don't you dare tell me I'm being "silly" because I disagree with you, I have a perfectly valid argument. You can't just "give away" your fatherhood. You created a life. You had sex and you knew what could happen, but you did it anyway. Every time I have sex, I know there is a slim chance I could get pregnant. I accept that risk.[/quote]
so its okay for woman to force man to pay for child support?
because woman was raped by the man and its all his fault?
do you have any idea how silly your argument is?(and when it is silly its my choice whether or not ill point it out as one)
both of them make a choice both of them needs to deal with a problem
Case #1.Man i don't want to have a child
#2.Woman well i do so i am a king of the hills there for your rights doesn't exists
Not only man doesn't have a say whether or not child needs to be born which is fair but he doesn't have a say whether or not child will be raised out from his pocket
if you don`t see problem with that then you don't care about justice
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Why is it that woman has 100% control on how much responsibility she can demand from man when its both of their fault that shes pregnant?
Because she gestates the baby, it's her body. That is biology. If you have a problem with it, blame God.
8-[
troll alert?
:rollin: You must be new.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"so its okay for woman to force man to pay for child support?
because woman was raped by the man and its all his fault?
Wait. What? Are you...talking about rape?
Quotedo you have any idea how silly your argument is?(and when it is silly its my choice whether or not ill point it out as one)
both of them make a choice both of them needs to deal with a problem
Case #1.Man i don't want to have a child
And yet he had sex knowing full well that sex creates babies.
Quote#2.Woman well i do so i am a king of the hills there for your rights doesn't exists
Not only man doesn't have a say whether or not child needs to be born which is fair but he doesn't have a say whether or not child will be raised out from his pocket
if you don`t see problem with that then you don't care about justice
What you fail to see is that A MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHERE HE PUTS HIS DICK AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THOSE ACTIONS.
What you're advocating is a man getting a woman pregnant and running from any responsibility whatsoever.
I find this stance incredible considering most men's rights activists are always complaining that men have no rights over a child during custody battles. "Oh, the woman always has more rights over the kid! It should be recognized that I helped create that kid!" So which is it? Does a man have responsibility for creating a child or not?
Hypothetical situation: A woman gets pregnant and has a baby. Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her?
Maybe I missed that part where women are raping men and forcing them to become responsible fathers against their will.
Most, not all men I know would fuck a snake if you held its fangs open long enough so exactly where is the sympathy supposed to be because right now it's between shit and syphilis.
If you don't want to get eaten by the pigs stay out of the sty and.keep your pecker out of biting rang.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Easiest way not to have this problem is some pornography, tissues, and your dominant hand. I may be made fun of, but no one can deny that this method is foolproof. 8-)
It is only foolproof because using the other hand is much better.
Other than that, you are spot on.
Quote from: "Smartmarzipan"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"so its okay for woman to force man to pay for child support?
because woman was raped by the man and its all his fault?
Wait. What? Are you...talking about rape?
Quotedo you have any idea how silly your argument is?(and when it is silly its my choice whether or not ill point it out as one)
both of them make a choice both of them needs to deal with a problem
Case #1.Man i don't want to have a child
And yet he had sex knowing full well that sex creates babies.
Quote#2.Woman well i do so i am a king of the hills there for your rights doesn't exists
Not only man doesn't have a say whether or not child needs to be born which is fair but he doesn't have a say whether or not child will be raised out from his pocket
if you don`t see problem with that then you don't care about justice
What you fail to see is that A MAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHERE HE PUTS HIS DICK AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THOSE ACTIONS.
What you're advocating is a man getting a woman pregnant and running from any responsibility whatsoever.
I find this stance incredible considering most men's rights activists are always complaining that men have no rights over a child during custody battles. "Oh, the woman always has more rights over the kid! It should be recognized that I helped create that kid!" So which is it? Does a man have responsibility for creating a child or not?
Hypothetical situation: A woman gets pregnant and has a baby. Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her?
your arguments are getting sillier and sillier
Woman was one that choose to have sex and toke a risk of child birthing. whenever they haven't planned for her to get pregnant its called accidental pregnancy.
accidental pregnancy can be fixed two was see there are two choices choice
NUMBER 1.Woman gets abortion, and half of abortion bill will be going to man, because he is 50% responsible, if he want her to get abortion.IF HE WANT WOMAN TO GET AN ABORTION (in that case only)
NUMBER 2. Woman want to have that accidental child but man doesn't so>>>>> LISTEN TO THIS
5050 both parties choice
Woman chooses to have a child
Man chooses to not have a child + any responsibility with any child whats so ever
SEE? 5050 choice woman has right to have a child just as much man has right to not have any responsibility to child. If man raped woman then yes it was forced but and woman gets 100% rights.
Listen to this both of them made this choice of having sex and toke the risk
now both of them decide what amount of responsibility they want to take out from mistake
If man says no way i don't want to have a child is much more fair than woman saying no way you got to pay me because of my decision, and again you go on with this silly questions: Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her? really? how stupid can this questions get? No because she made a choice to have a child, that is her responsibility. revoke?? you can revoke and give away your child that doesn't means that father of a child must take it. If father of a child decides to not have a responsibility of child when he is not not married or wasn't planning to have a child, he should have a right of that
Second woman decides to make a child without help of father of a child its woman fault she should have an abortion and man can pay half of a bill of abortion if he want to if he doesn't that means man is some kind of mental person who doesn't want woman to get an abortion that means if woman will not have an abortion man is demanded to pay child support .Its Logical
woman can have an abortion but if man doesn't want a child, and wants to terminate bearing he doesn't have to pay any money
If man want child to be born then he must pay child support
this feminist crap is out of control we got viginas we need more power
its only fair
try to think about it without vigina for a second and you'll see that your position is unjust
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"your arguments are getting sillier and sillier
Woman was one that choose to have sex and toke a risk of child birthing whenever they haven't planned for her to get pregnant its called accidental pregnancy
accidental pregnancy can be fixed two was see there are two choices choice
NUMBER 1.Woman gets abortion and half of abortion bill will be going to man because he is 50% responsible if he want her to get abortion.IF HE WANT WOMAN TO GET AN ABORTION
NUMBER 2. Woman want to have that accidental child but man doesn't so>>>>> LISTEN TO THIS
5050 both parties choice
Woman chooses to have a child
Man chooses to not have a child + any responsibility with any child whats so ever
SEE? 5050 choice woman has right to have a child just as much man has right to not have any responsibility to child IF man raped woman then yes it was forced but
Listen to this both of them made this choice of having sex and take the risk
now both of them decide what amount of responsibility they want to take out from mistake
If man says no way i don't want to have a child is just as valid as woman saying no way you got to pay me because of my decision and again you go on with this silly questions: Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her? really? how stupid can this questions get? No because she made a choice to have a child that is her responsibility revoke?? you can revoke and give away your child that doesn't means that father of a child should take it. what a bloody hell are you talking about? If father of a child decides to not have a responsibility of child when he is not not married or wasn't planning to have a child he should have a right of that
Second woman decides to make a child without help of father of a child its woman fault she should have an abortion and man can pay half of a bill of abortion
Grammar -particularly paragraphs and periods- would assist immensely in making your posts understandable.
I wish I could get a woman pregnant. :shock: :cry: :( Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"I wish I could get a woman pregnant. :shock: :cry: :( Solitary
I wish I could get a man pregnant.
Actually, it's time for all men to do their part and get pregnant now.
Women have had it with this childbearing shit!
Quote from: "antediluvian"Quote from: "Solitary"I wish I could get a woman pregnant. :shock: :cry: :( Solitary
I wish I could get a man pregnant.
Actually, it's time for all men to do their part and get pregnant now.
Women have had it with this childbearing shit!
(//http://cdn.static.ovimg.com/episode/214817.jpg)
Quote from: "antediluvian"Quote from: "Solitary"I wish I could get a woman pregnant. :shock: :cry: :( Solitary
I wish I could get a man pregnant.
Actually, it's time for all men to do their part and get pregnant now.
Women have had it with this childbearing shit!
I voted against anyone getting me pregnant at least in this lifetïme. Next lifetime you can try, but not this one. Nothing personal. :)
Alex, far be it from me to suggest how you live your life, but taking responsibility for the whereabouts of your penis once it leaves the vicinity of your zipper is probably a good idea and bitching about it after the fact makes you seem like a whining bitch.
Yeah, I know..old fashioned ideas.'
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"Alex, far be it from me to suggest how you live your life, but taking responsibility for the whereabouts of your penis once it leaves the vicinity of your zipper is probably a good idea and bitching about it after the fact makes you seem like a whining bitch.
Yeah, I know..old fashioned ideas.'
ooww lets listen to genius he assumes that it happened in my life because that must be why i care about it mr.logic here))
he is asking for responsibility when he cant make an argument why should one be responsible of it
and he calls asking for justice whining. i am sorry aren't you late on your communist meeting party?
this people are just as mentally deranged as redneck creationists
wow i am shocked list don't come to atheist forums
you know just because you are an atheist it doesn't means that you have to look for other atheists
but when we have active group we base our position and defend them on reason and fact
you sir don't belong here
Quote from: "Smartmarzipan"I smell sock-puppetry.
I already said that.
I actually agree with Alex. It's ridiculous that in the case of an accidental pregnancy the woman gets to decide whether or not the man's going to be stuck with child support payments for the next 18 years.
It's ridiculous to say that the man should get any say in whether or not the woman has an abortion since it's her body, but it's equally ridiculous to say that the woman can force the man into paying her for the next 18 years, when he doesn't want anything to do with the child.
Of course, this kind of decision should have to be made at the start of a pregnancy and be very final. Once you both decide to have a baby, you're both stuck with it. But it's weird that in the case of an accidental pregnancy the woman gets a say in how she spends the next 18 years, but the man gets no choice at all.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"If a man accidentally conceives a child with a woman, and does not want to raise the child with her, what are his choices? Surprisingly, he has few options in the United States. He can urge her to seek an abortion, but ultimately that decision is hers to make. Should she decide to continue the pregnancy and raise the child, and should she or our government attempt to establish him as the legal father, he can be stuck with years of child support payments.
Don't tell 'em your name or give 'em a phone number. After sex, get out of there as fast as you can. :-D
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Tell me what you think. :-?
I think that if you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of sticking your cock in a woman, then you shouldn't be sticking your cock in women.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Tell me what you think. :-?
I think that if you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of sticking your cock in a woman, then you shouldn't be sticking your cock in women.
Sounds like a double standard when we fight real hard (and rightly so) for women to have the option of not having to deal with the consequences of having a man stick a cock in them.
Quote from: "Plu"Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Tell me what you think. :-?
I think that if you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of sticking your cock in a woman, then you shouldn't be sticking your cock in women.
Sounds like a double standard when we fight real hard (and rightly so) for women to have the option of not having to deal with the consequences of having a man stick a cock in them.
It would only be a double standard if both parties stood the same chance of getting pregnant.
Considering that both sides pretty much lose 18 years of their life, I'd say they are both equally likely to "get pregnant". Just because the kid grows inside the woman doesn't mean the guy won't be stuck with the kid for 18 years because of law, with no say whatsoever in the matter.
What's your solution then? At the moment there's no law requiring either party to look after the child if they don't really want to. If neither the mother nor the father wish to raise the child then they can always give the baby up for adoption.
Quote from: "Jason78"What's your solution then? At the moment there's no law requiring either party to look after the child if they don't really want to. If neither the mother nor the father wish to raise the child then they can always give the baby up for adoption.
What on earth are you talking about? :-k
My personal solution, imperfect but at least I think implementable, would be like so:
The female decides whether or not she wants to keep the child. The male gets no say, because it's not his body. If the female decides to keep the child, she is now responsible for it and required to care for it. Then the male decides whether or not he wants the responsibility. If he does, he is the legal father and required to care for and monitarily support the child. If he does not want the responsibility, he is irrevocably denied all rights to the child or mother, but does not need to support it in any way either.
There's still a few gaps in there (including "father wants the child but mother does not") but I see no reasonable and practical solutions for those at this time. But it should at least give each involved party a choice in how they want their own life to play out, without giving them the option to fuck over the other side in any way.
Quote from: "Plu"My personal solution, imperfect but at least I think implementable, would be like so:
The female decides whether or not she wants to keep the child. The male gets no say, because it's not his body. If the female decides to keep the child, she is now responsible for it and required to care for it. Then the male decides whether or not he wants the responsibility. If he does, he is the legal father and required to care for and monitarily support the child. If he does not want the responsibility, he is irrevocably denied all rights to the child or mother, but does not need to support it in any way either.
There's still a few gaps in there (including "father wants the child but mother does not") but I see no reasonable and practical solutions for those at this time. But it should at least give each involved party a choice in how they want their own life to play out, without giving them the option to fuck over the other side in any way.
I would start something like this woman who got accidentally pregnant shows legal documents to father of a child before its too late for abortion then man decides whether or not he is willing to support child or should he help to pay for medical bills for abortion and that is before woman decides whether or not she should have an abortion.
This way woman will know how much support she can give to her child and make her see that its better to not take chances on your children's happiness.
Yeah the chronological order in my post is only to show the decision tree. Obviously it would be best that both sides discuss things together before any decisions are made, but my description shows all possible paths that can be taken.
Oh for fucks sake. :rollin:
If you have something to say, you can just say it. If you have nothing to say, you can also make posts like that.
Both parents should do what's right for the child and go fuck themselves the moment they start to decide what's best for them above and beyond that position.
This applies to both men and women. I know, i'm an idealist.
Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"Both parents should do what's right for the child and go fuck themselves the moment they start to decide what's best for them above and beyond that position.
This applies to both men and women. I know, i'm an idealist.
I support the idea that parents have way too easy this days they are responsible for so much and law needs to punish them much better if they screw up raising a mentally healthy child.
But terrible thing about it is that some people choose to have a child even if they don't have any support for them.
its like well man isn't ready to be a father.
woman isn't ready to be a mother.
but woman will demand father to pay money so we have half ass work on how to raise child
for us to have a healthy children I think its better if we make people who choose to gamble on children's lives
to not get away with injustice and bully their way threw by well lord gave me a vegaina there for I need to have a special rights
so you see if you have read my first post; i think you would support this position.
Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"Both parents should do what's right for the child and go fuck themselves the moment they start to decide what's best for them above and beyond that position.
This applies to both men and women. I know, i'm an idealist.
Once there is an actual child, I'm fully on your side. When you decide to take responsibility for a child, you should keep fully to that responsibility.
My posts so far only refer to the time when there is not yet a child, and I hope everyone got that part. I'm not in favor of any parent walking out on a child after it's actually born. (Or beyond the legal abortion limit)
Quote from: "Plu"If you have something to say, you can just say it. If you have nothing to say, you can also make posts like that.
You are right. I think this person is unbelievable. That is what I have to say about that.
I agree that it should be a decision between the two parents in a perfect world, but ultimately it's up to the woman since it's her body. That is just biology, and the consequence of having sex.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"well lord gave me a vegaina there for I need to have a special rights
so you see if you have read my first post; i think you would support this position.
And Plu, this is a perfect example of why I think this guy is a misogynistic troll.
I hope so, anyway.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"your arguments are getting sillier and sillier
Woman was one that choose to have sex and toke a risk of child birthing whenever they haven't planned for her to get pregnant its called accidental pregnancy
accidental pregnancy can be fixed two was see there are two choices choice
NUMBER 1.Woman gets abortion and half of abortion bill will be going to man because he is 50% responsible if he want her to get abortion.IF HE WANT WOMAN TO GET AN ABORTION
NUMBER 2. Woman want to have that accidental child but man doesn't so>>>>> LISTEN TO THIS
5050 both parties choice
Woman chooses to have a child
Man chooses to not have a child + any responsibility with any child whats so ever
SEE? 5050 choice woman has right to have a child just as much man has right to not have any responsibility to child IF man raped woman then yes it was forced but
Listen to this both of them made this choice of having sex and take the risk
now both of them decide what amount of responsibility they want to take out from mistake
If man says no way i don't want to have a child is just as valid as woman saying no way you got to pay me because of my decision and again you go on with this silly questions: Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her? really? how stupid can this questions get? No because she made a choice to have a child that is her responsibility revoke?? you can revoke and give away your child that doesn't means that father of a child should take it. what a bloody hell are you talking about? If father of a child decides to not have a responsibility of child when he is not not married or wasn't planning to have a child he should have a right of that
Second woman decides to make a child without help of father of a child its woman fault she should have an abortion and man can pay half of a bill of abortion
Grammar -particularly paragraphs and periods- would assist immensely in making your posts understandable.
I can't make fucking heads or tails of this crap.
...but if we read his first post we will see the logic and agree that we are being irrational about this.
Because, you know, we have vaginas.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"well lord gave me a vegaina there for I need to have a special rights
so you see if you have read my first post; i think you would support this position.
And Plu, this is a perfect example of why I think this guy is a misogynistic troll.
I hope so, anyway.
Well if you think about things that i write rationally you wouldn't say well he is not been careful with his words there for he must be a bad guy because i have a sand in my vegina and too afraid of thinking for myself.
no one is been misogynistic stop been ridiculous.
I defend a right of woman to have a choice on her body
and i defend a right of man to have a right to not been exterminated for having penises
from people just like you sir.
People should agree what happens in case of pregnancy before they have sex. There should be infrastructure to make that legally binding in a fast (i.e. max 10 minutes) and reliable way. Times change after all.
Furthermore:
My wife, and most women I know, would have no trouble at all seducing a clueless (maybe homeschooled?) 18 year old kid into having sex with them.
It seems rather strange (and sexist) to suggest that the 18 year old male kid is just as responsible as the grown woman in such a case, especially considering the dismal state of sex education around the globe.
Exterminated for having penises? Um. What?
"Sir" refers to a man. Which I am not, by the way.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Plu"If you have something to say, you can just say it. If you have nothing to say, you can also make posts like that.
You are right. I think this person is unbelievable. That is what I have to say about that.
I agree that it should be a decision between the two parents in a perfect world, but ultimately it's up to the woman since it's her body. That is just biology, and the consequence of having sex.
I agree that it's up to the woman whether or not the child should be kept, but it should be up to the man whether he wants to support it, too. We should not give a woman the right to decide over a large portion of a man's life because of an accident they are
both responsible for.
(As for the rest of the guy, I also think he's acting in poor character, but that doesn't mean he can't occasionaly have a good argument.)
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"People should agree what happens in case of pregnancy before they have sex.
In a perfect world, sure.
People should also brush twice a day and take their vitamins.
But that is not reality. We can "should" all we want, but that isn't going to change the reality of biology.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Exterminated for having penises? Um. What?
"Sir" refers to a man. Which I am not, by the way.
yes if you read what i wrote man doesn't have a rights same as woman because they don't have a womb
there for only one with the womb says i can make you pay for my decision by the way i am not saying that woman isn't working when she has a child that is silly
but i am saying its needs to be equal both of them should have same rights
stop discriminating against man because they don't have veginas
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"Both parents should do what's right for the child and go fuck themselves the moment they start to decide what's best for them above and beyond that position.
This applies to both men and women. I know, i'm an idealist.
I support the idea that parents have way too easy this days they are responsible for so much and law needs to punish them much better if they screw up raising a mentally healthy child.
But terrible thing about it is that some people choose to have a child even if they don't have any support for them.
its like well man isn't ready to be a father.
woman isn't ready to be a mother.
but woman will demand father to pay money so we have half ass work on how to raise child
for us to have a healthy children I think its better if we make people who choose to gamble on children's lives
to not get away with injustice and bully their way threw by well lord game a vegaina there for I need to have a special rights
so you see if you have read my first post; i think you would support this position.
I read the OP, and I am an advocate of parents who are unable (or unwilling) to parent children effectively to be prevented from having them (such as those who just fire them out without actually caring about the children in question).
Having a child is not a right, it's a responsiblity.
But I would also argue that it's not a child's fault that their parents are no smarter than a mound of dirt on the bottom of my shoe. Everything should be done to ensure the child's welfare, not the parent's. And whilst they both may go hand in hand, there is a mantra (here in the UK at least) that a child is always better served being with their parents than not. This is simply not true, especially in cases where the mother or father (or both) are abusive, fuckless wonders (again, such as men and women who like to reproduce and not care about the children they're producing).
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Mermaid"Exterminated for having penises? Um. What?
"Sir" refers to a man. Which I am not, by the way.
yes if you read what i wrote man doesn't have a rights same as woman because they don't have a womb
there for only one with the womb says i can make you pay for my decision by the way i am not saying that woman isn't working when she has a child that is silly
but i am saying its needs to be equal both of them should have same rights
stop discriminating against man because they don't have veginas
I did read what you wrote. If English is not your first language, fine. But what you are writing does not make any sense and you are claiming that I don't know how to read? Are you obfuscating on purpose so you can tell us what we can't read?
I do not find that "silly" at all. I disagree with you. My reading and understanding what you are writing does not change that.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Bibliofagus"People should agree what happens in case of pregnancy before they have sex.
In a perfect world, sure.
People should also brush twice a day and take their vitamins.
But that is not reality. We can "should" all we want, but that isn't going to change the reality of biology.
Did you also read my idea about making the world a little more perfect? It was in the sentences just after what you quoted.
Your comment reminds me of the people that opposed the use of condoms back in the day. It would never ever work because not everybody would use them yanno?
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Mermaid"Exterminated for having penises? Um. What?
"Sir" refers to a man. Which I am not, by the way.
yes if you read what i wrote man doesn't have a rights same as woman because they don't have a womb
there for only one with the womb says i can make you pay for my decision by the way i am not saying that woman isn't working when she has a child that is silly
but i am saying its needs to be equal both of them should have same rights
stop discriminating against man because they don't have veginas
I did read what you wrote. If English is not your first language, fine. But what you are writing does not make any sense and you are claiming that I don't know how to read? Are you obfuscating on purpose so you can tell us what we can't read?
I do not find that "silly" at all. I disagree with you. My reading and understanding what you are writing does not change that.
well to tell you the truth English is my third language
But i am 98% sure that everything that i have wrote could be understood just fine
after all language is crated for getting information from one place to another even if i made one or two grammar errors it doesn't makes message different.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"But i am 98% shore that everything that i have wrote could be understood just fine
Very little of what you write is understandable, because you hardly use any grammar. Remember what I said earlier about paragraphs and periods? I meant it. Use them.
Basically what a lot of people are saying in this thread is what the pope says until this day: Only abstinence is 100% reliable and therefore the people who are not abstinent should be made to shoulder the consequences. Other viable solutions be damned & no matter the circumstances. Facilitating the prevention of the situation in the first place? Hell not one post is about that.
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Basically what a lot of people are saying in this thread is what the pope says until this day: Only abstinence is 100% reliable and therefore the people who are not abstinent should be made to shoulder the consequences.
So far that I'm aware I am the only one who has said that, and I was clearly joking.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Basically what a lot of people are saying in this thread is what the pope says until this day: Only abstinence is 100% reliable and therefore the people who are not abstinent should be made to shoulder the consequences.
So far that I'm aware I am the only one who has said that, and I was clearly joking.
Myeah I didn't see anyone posting this either.
Smarzi says it on page 2. APA on page 1 or 2. Jason on page 3.
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Smarzi says it on page 2. APA on page 1 or 2. Jason on page 3.
I see posts about taking responsibility for where you put your penis. I am literally the only one who has mentioned abstinence, and again, I was clearly joking.
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Smarzi says it on page 2. APA on page 1 or 2. Jason on page 3.
I see posts about taking responsibility for where you put your penis.
Agreed. My point is that the consequence of that, under current law & given the imperfectness of prevention, the only way for a guy around the risk of having a kid
he does not want is abstinence.
Or a shift in thinking of course. I remember when condoms were new. 'Negotiating' whether to to use them or not would take away all the fun in sex (didn't happen), it wouldn't work because not everybody would use them (nowadays we are pissed at the pope for condemning their use).
I say this because I did suggest something to make it better in this discussion, a point that has been ignored: Make it easy&fast to have a legally binding agreement on pregnancy before having sex.
Call them legal condoms if you want. They would work.
Alright I've had just about enough of this bullshit.
Alex my boy, I've got some news for you. LIfe ain't fair. Never has been, never will be.
I get what you're whining about. A women accidentally gets pregnant then she has the right to decide whether or not the man has to pay for the next 18 years and he gets no say in it. I get it, its not fair. But life ain't fair kiddo. And here's the thing. The man DOES have a say in whether or not he pays for the next 18 years. He has a couple of ways to have a say in it actually. The first way is by deciding not to stick his pecker into any woman unless he's willing to accept the risk that he might be on the hook for an unplanned pregnancy and have no say in it.
I mean this isn't bait and switch here. Its not a surprise. We're not changing the rules after the fact on you. You knew that life wasn't fair before you took your cock out of your pants. Therefore by willingly taking your cock out of your pants, you are by default agreeing to the unfair deal which exists. If you don't like the deal, keep your cock in your pants. Period.
That is the first way you have a say in this matter. There is also a second way. You can break the law, disappear and be a deadbeat. Trust me when I tell you that just because the law says the father has to pay, does not mean that all fathers pay. There are a ton of guys who do not and never will. Don't ask me how they get away with it because I have no idea. But I can assure that I have known quite a few single moms in my day who were legally entitled to child support and did not receive it. It happens all the time.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"well to tell you the truth English is my third language
But i am 98% sure that everything that i have wrote could be understood just fine
I am 100% sure your assumption is incorrect. Your writing is not at all easy to understand and there has been quite a bit of it that I could not follow at all. You might think that your writing is up to snuff but I assure that it is not. Not picking on you here, just stating a fact.
So lets review what we've learned in this thread.
1. Life isn't fair.
2. See #1
^^
See? Don't put in your 'pecker' if you don't want to run the risk of having a child you don't want. No matter the fact that only 1 in a 1000 fucks actually results in an accidental pregnancy.
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Smarzi says it on page 2. APA on page 1 or 2. Jason on page 3.
Well what else is there? After the sperm has left the mans body, there's not a great deal you can do.
1) You can't abdicate responsibility. It's still your DNA after all.
2) You can't terminate the pregnancy. It's not growing in you.
3) You can't offer to bring the baby to term yourself. Not yet anyway.
But this is just the way things are. There's no way for a man to control what happens to his sperm after its left his body and there's no way for him to interfere in the subsequent processes as he is no longer necessarily involved.
After that we get onto post-natal care rights. I understand that even less.
As I see it, the biggest issue is children.
I prefer puppies, if I'm honest. I find children quite ugly compared to adorable little puppies.
Quote from: "Johan"Alright I've had just about enough of this bullshit.
Alex my boy, I've got some news for you. LIfe ain't fair. Never has been, never will be.
I get what you're whining about. A women accidentally gets pregnant then she has the right to decide whether or not the man has to pay for the next 18 years and he gets no say in it. I get it, its not fair. But life ain't fair kiddo. And here's the thing. The man DOES have a say in whether or not he pays for the next 18 years. He has a couple of ways to have a say in it actually. The first way is by deciding not to stick his pecker into any woman unless he's willing to accept the risk that he might be on the hook for an unplanned pregnancy and have no say in it.
I mean this isn't bait and switch here. Its not a surprise. We're not changing the rules after the fact on you. You knew that life wasn't fair before you took your cock out of your pants. Therefore by willingly taking your cock out of your pants, you are by default agreeing to the unfair deal which exists. If you don't like the deal, keep your cock in your pants. Period.
That is the first way you have a say in this matter. There is also a second way. You can break the law, disappear and be a deadbeat. Trust me when I tell you that just because the law says the father has to pay, does not mean that all fathers pay. There are a ton of guys who do not and never will. Don't ask me how they get away with it because I have no idea. But I can assure that I have known quite a few single moms in my day who were legally entitled to child support and did not receive it. It happens all the time.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"well to tell you the truth English is my third language
But i am 98% sure that everything that i have wrote could be understood just fine
I am 100% sure your assumption is incorrect. Your writing is not at all easy to understand and there has been quite a bit of it that I could not follow at all. You might think that your writing is up to snuff but I assure that it is not. Not picking on you here, just stating a fact.
So lets review what we've learned in this thread.
1. Life isn't fair.
2. See #1
What a terrible thing to say!
Life isn't fair but lets don't do anything about it?
So why are you on atheist forum?
Religious people want to have god in your schools; well life is not fair
Nazis murdered 11.5 million jews; well life is not fair
Popes defended good 3% of catholic pedophiles; well life is not fair
lets just keep the flow going of unfairness. Because we cant really change a thing?
and as you see we did change a lot of things second we called it unfair,We manipulated system for better that is what humans do. Change things until we create world in which we don't need change i am talking transhumenism here :shock:
and i don't have this problem i don't even have that much sex life to have this problem/stop assuming that.
-I started this because: I hate when child doesn't have 100% support from both parents, and its parents fault to make a child in the world, in which he/she will not have a 100% chance of succeeding in life; list with things that we can control.
and i really feel sorry for you to think that we cant do anything about injustice. :-?
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Smarzi says it on page 2. APA on page 1 or 2. Jason on page 3.
Well what else is there? After the sperm has left the mans body, there's not a great deal you can do.
1) You can't abdicate responsibility. It's still your DNA after all.
2) You can't terminate the pregnancy. It's not growing in you.
3) You can't offer to bring the baby to term yourself. Not yet anyway.
But this is just the way things are. There's no way for a man to control what happens to his sperm after its left his body and there's no way for him to interfere in the subsequent processes as he is no longer necessarily involved.
I agree 100%. It is why I think circumstances should play a bigger role in legal disputes concerning this specific topic. And that there should be a way to easily administrate these cirumstances before having sex.
Quote from: "Jason78"After that we get onto post-natal care rights. I understand that even less.
It should not be as black and white as it is right now. It's like... you pay support, or you do not. There are no other flavours. In my country for instance there are people who pay child support for kids they are never allowed to see.
Right off the bat, there are extremely rare cases where a man has been ordered to pay child support after a woman has become impregnated using his sperm which she obtained by rape of fraud. I'd hope that there would be widespread support for changing that--just as the only obstacle for a woman impregnated after being raped receiving full child support should be the low wages of prisoners. However, this is really a side issue, almost a distraction from the vast majority of cases.
I think that conceptions/children should not be treated as a special case, but rather should be looked at like any other type of . . . damages--that's a terrible word to use here (and "Senator X thinks a pregnant woman is damaged goods" is one clear reason why such a change will not happen) but I don't know of a better word to use and still get my point across.
People who go in for surgery--which has an inherent risk--and die or are injured do not all receive the same level of compensation. If the surgeon was drunk or unqualified or the hospital did a crappy job, then I'd expect they'd be forced to pay out the wazoo. However, if they did everything correctly, but things just went bad, then I'd expect the payout to be greatly reduced; perhaps eliminated entirely.
By the same token, if a guy is out there throwing his sperm around with willful neglect as to the consequences, then I think he should bear a much larger responsibility (financially and morally/ethically) for impregnating someone then a guy who takes every effort to have safe, child free sex, but something just goes wrong (broken condom, ect).
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"What a terrible thing to say!
Life isn't fair but lets don't do anything about it?
How about life isn't fair. Which means that no matter what we do, there will always be situations in which life isn't fair. Change what we can. Change what needs to be changed. This is not something that needs to be changed IMO. If you don't want to end up paying child support for a kids you never wanted, keep your dick in your pants. That is the responsible thing to do. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.
So what you are proposing is in fact a law which would allow men to act in an irresponsible way with no legal ramifications. Do you really think that legalizing irresponsible behavior is something that will make the world a better place? Because I certainly do not.
QuoteSo why are you on atheist forum?
Because I'm an atheist.
QuoteReligious people want to have god in your schools; well life is not fair
Apples to oranges People can choose whether or not to practice their religion and they already have places to practice it if they choose to do so. Men cannot choose to gestate a fetus in their own body, only women can do that.
QuoteNazis murdered 11.5 million jews; well life is not fair
Nazis? Really? That's your argument? Pathetic.
QuotePopes defended good 3% of catholic pedophiles; well life is not fair
lets just keep the flow going of unfairness. Because we cant really change a thing?
We can change it. I just don't think we should.
Quoteand i don't have this problem i don't even have that much sex life to have this problem/stop assuming that.
Oh believe me, I already assumed you don't have much sex.
Quote-I started this because: I hate when child doesn't have 100% support from both parents, and its parents fault to make a child in the world, in which he/she will not have a 100% chance of succeeding in life; list with things that we can control.
So you think there should be a law which allows men to get out of paying support for an unplanned child because you hate it when a child doesn't have 100% support of both parents? That makes about as much sense as a screen door on a submarine. And with that, my troll gauge just pegged the needle.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"your arguments are getting sillier and sillier
Woman was one that choose to have sex and toke a risk of child birthing. whenever they haven't planned for her to get pregnant its called accidental pregnancy.
accidental pregnancy can be fixed two was see there are two choices choice
NUMBER 1.Woman gets abortion, and half of abortion bill will be going to man, because he is 50% responsible, if he want her to get abortion.IF HE WANT WOMAN TO GET AN ABORTION (in that case only)
NUMBER 2. Woman want to have that accidental child but man doesn't so>>>>> LISTEN TO THIS
5050 both parties choice
Woman chooses to have a child
Man chooses to not have a child + any responsibility with any child whats so ever
SEE? 5050 choice woman has right to have a child just as much man has right to not have any responsibility to child. If man raped woman then yes it was forced but and woman gets 100% rights.
Listen to this both of them made this choice of having sex and toke the risk
now both of them decide what amount of responsibility they want to take out from mistake
If man says no way i don't want to have a child is much more fair than woman saying no way you got to pay me because of my decision, and again you go on with this silly questions: Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her? really? how stupid can this questions get? No because she made a choice to have a child, that is her responsibility. revoke?? you can revoke and give away your child that doesn't means that father of a child must take it. If father of a child decides to not have a responsibility of child when he is not not married or wasn't planning to have a child, he should have a right of that
Second woman decides to make a child without help of father of a child its woman fault she should have an abortion and man can pay half of a bill of abortion if he want to if he doesn't that means man is some kind of mental person who doesn't want woman to get an abortion that means if woman will not have an abortion man is demanded to pay child support .Its Logical
woman can have an abortion but if man doesn't want a child, and wants to terminate bearing he doesn't have to pay any money
If man want child to be born then he must pay child support
this feminist crap is out of control we got viginas we need more power
its only fair
try to think about it without vigina for a second and you'll see that your position is unjust
(//http://i.imgur.com/3M6JEtj.png)
Quote from: "Agramon"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"your arguments are getting sillier and sillier
Woman was one that choose to have sex and toke a risk of child birthing. whenever they haven't planned for her to get pregnant its called accidental pregnancy.
accidental pregnancy can be fixed two was see there are two choices choice
NUMBER 1.Woman gets abortion, and half of abortion bill will be going to man, because he is 50% responsible, if he want her to get abortion.IF HE WANT WOMAN TO GET AN ABORTION (in that case only)
NUMBER 2. Woman want to have that accidental child but man doesn't so>>>>> LISTEN TO THIS
5050 both parties choice
Woman chooses to have a child
Man chooses to not have a child + any responsibility with any child whats so ever
SEE? 5050 choice woman has right to have a child just as much man has right to not have any responsibility to child. If man raped woman then yes it was forced but and woman gets 100% rights.
Listen to this both of them made this choice of having sex and toke the risk
now both of them decide what amount of responsibility they want to take out from mistake
If man says no way i don't want to have a child is much more fair than woman saying no way you got to pay me because of my decision, and again you go on with this silly questions: Says she wants to revoke her rights to motherhood and make the man raise the kid alone. Would you support her? really? how stupid can this questions get? No because she made a choice to have a child, that is her responsibility. revoke?? you can revoke and give away your child that doesn't means that father of a child must take it. If father of a child decides to not have a responsibility of child when he is not not married or wasn't planning to have a child, he should have a right of that
Second woman decides to make a child without help of father of a child its woman fault she should have an abortion and man can pay half of a bill of abortion if he want to if he doesn't that means man is some kind of mental person who doesn't want woman to get an abortion that means if woman will not have an abortion man is demanded to pay child support .Its Logical
woman can have an abortion but if man doesn't want a child, and wants to terminate bearing he doesn't have to pay any money
If man want child to be born then he must pay child support
this feminist crap is out of control we got viginas we need more power
its only fair
try to think about it without vigina for a second and you'll see that your position is unjust
[ Image (//http://i.imgur.com/3M6JEtj.png) ]
Genuine belly laughs. :rollin:
QuoteHow about life isn't fair. Which means that no matter what we do, there will always be situations in which life isn't fair. Change what we can. Change what needs to be changed. This is not something that needs to be changed IMO. If you don't want to end up paying child support for a kids you never wanted, keep your dick in your pants. That is the responsible thing to do. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.
How about "do it safely and you run less then 0.1% chance of any accidents (most of which comes from not knowing what you're doing), so the problem doesn't exist unless both people involved are fucking morons."
You seem to have a very old fashioned view of sexuality.
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteHow about life isn't fair. Which means that no matter what we do, there will always be situations in which life isn't fair. Change what we can. Change what needs to be changed. This is not something that needs to be changed IMO. If you don't want to end up paying child support for a kids you never wanted, keep your dick in your pants. That is the responsible thing to do. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.
How about "do it safely and you run less then 0.1% chance of any accidents (most of which comes from not knowing what you're doing), so the problem doesn't exist unless both people involved are fucking morons."
You seem to have a very old fashioned view of sexuality.
There is nothing old fashioned about my view. Doing it safely goes without saying. But no birth control is 100% effective therefore there is always some amount of risk. Therefore any time you have heterosexual intercourse you are assuming responsibility for the risk that you might end up with an unplanned pregnancy. If you are uncomfortable with that responsibility, the solution isn't to create a law which excuses you from having to assume the responsibility. The solution is never assume the responsibility in the first place.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Genuine belly laughs. :rollin:
:-D
Quote from: "Johan"Therefore any time you have heterosexual intercourse you are assuming responsibility for the risk that you might end up with an unplanned pregnancy.
In that case, perhaps instead of "abstinence only" the rule should be "not gay, no way."
Does the name JanSnyder mean anything to you?
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"Does the name JanSnyder mean anything to you?
Nope.
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"QuoteSo why are you on atheist forum?Because I'm an atheist.
No you see Atheists, are very unique group, its made of liberal democrats rationalists,intellectuals
so why is it that they call them self atheist, because action which they are going to take will be against religious position. When clown like you comes out and says: well i am retarded person i cant change anything this let me cry in the corner this is not a goth forum its atheists forum where our opinions, change and modify you do not belong here.
QuoteReligious people want to have god in your schools; well life is not fair. -Apples to oranges People can choose whether or not to practice their religion and they already have places to practice it if they choose to do so. -Men cannot choose to gestate a fetus in their own body, only women can do that.
Again you are acting like a clown i was talking about facts which has been called unfair and has been changed by people like us. Please stop trying to be cute its doesn't work as much as you think it does.
QuoteNazis murdered 11.5 million jews; well life is not fairNazis? Really? That's your argument? Pathetic.
argument is people care about unfairness even if its wasn't in their own country and that is how we went in world war 2 and got read of injustice.Again stop been a clown please.
QuotePopes defended good 3% of catholic pedophiles; well life is not fair
lets just keep the flow going of unfairness. Because we cant really change a thing?-We can change it. I just don't think we should.
So make your argument mr.clown and lets discuss this and again with this goth crap.
QuoteSo what you are proposing is in fact a law which would allow men to act in an irresponsible way with no legal ramifications. Do you really think that legalizing irresponsible behavior is something that will make the world a better place? Because I certainly do not.
No you are acting like a clown again :-o
1.Man doesn't have control on whether or not child will be born,Woman does=responsibility
2. Man has a right to defend himself against injustice.for exp:If you telling him that he needs to waste 18 years of his life because of someone else's decision.
3.If man say we are 50 50 guilty here and we need to solve this problem way that both of our decisions matter he is right don't you think?
that is why he can give away rights of child support before its too late for abortion, so woman will see that she isn't going to get any help and rational decision would be to abort a child when you are not ready.
You clown you are defending accidental mothers most irresponsible people on the planet Earth.
Quoteand i don't have this problem i don't even have that much sex life to have this problem/stop assuming that.Oh believe me, I already assumed you don't have much sex.
Well clown will clown and clown.
Quote-I started this because: I hate when child doesn't have 100% support from both parents, and its parents fault to make a child in the world, in which he/she will not have a 100% chance of succeeding in life; list with things that we can control.
So you think there should be a law which allows men to get out of paying support for an unplanned child because you hate it when a child doesn't have 100% support of both parents? That makes about as much sense as a screen door on a submarine. And with that, my troll gauge just pegged the needle.
1. Even if child is suffering is not man's fault
2. Having a child without two parent support develops psychological problems in children so its still fault of woman.
3.but before you start clowning around like a clown because you are one :lol:
You need to understand that its unfair that man is loosing 18 years of his life because of woman's decision even if that will destroy Earth its still unfair. So i think when people do sex its don't suppose to be well if something goes wrong sorry assholl give me your 18 years.
No its injustice its ridiculous.
any way please leave forum if only thing you are going to do is be clown there are clown forums
And i have already argued but only people who went against my argument failed to know argument at first place.So just read my older posts without been a clown :rollin:
QuoteGenuine belly laughs. :rollin:
well i guess when some people loose an argument, only thing they can do is run far and laugh at their opponent, even when i said that English was my Third Language.
Well done, you officially showed us that you have a sand in your vegina :lol:
:wink:
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"QuoteSo why are you on atheist forum?Because I'm an atheist.
No you see Atheists, are very unique group, its made of liberal democrats rationalists,intellectuals
so why is it that they call them self atheist, because action which they are going to take will be against religious position.
And here I thought atheists are people who don't believe god exists. But according to you a lack of belief in god has nothing to do with it. Well its a good thing you're here to set us all straight on what athiests are.
QuoteWhen clown like you comes out and says: well i am retarded person i cant change anything this let me cry in the corner this is not a goth forum its atheists forum where our opinions, change and modify you do not belong here.
1. This comment is an insult and completely uncalled for. I have not called you any names, I have not insulted your intelligence. I expect the same respect in return. If you can't manage that, then perhaps this isn't the forum for you. Which brings us to #2.
2. Maybe you should hang around for at least a week before you go deciding who belongs here and who doesn't M'Kay?
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"QuoteSo why are you on atheist forum?Because I'm an atheist.
No you see Atheists, are very unique group, its made of liberal democrats rationalists,intellectuals
so why is it that they call them self atheist, because action which they are going to take will be against religious position.
And here I thought atheists are people who don't believe god exists. But according to you a lack of belief in god has nothing to do with it. Well its a good thing you're here to set us all straight on what atheists are.
QuoteWhen clown like you comes out and says: well i am retarded person i cant change anything this let me cry in the corner this is not a goth forum its atheists forum where our opinions, change and modify you do not belong here.
1. This comment is an insult and completely uncalled for. I have not called you any names, I have not insulted your intelligence. I expect the same respect in return. If you can't manage that, then perhaps this isn't the forum for you. Which brings us to #2.
2. Maybe you should hang around for at least a week before you go deciding who belongs here and who doesn't M'Kay?
Well point which you failed to understand Mr.clown is that Forums for atheists isn't because of in Texas you cant find friends and you want some company
but its because to discuss different political stance and point out when it's discriminates against people.
Someone who says doesn't matter we cant change a thing is not belong here
let me give you advice; buy a cat and pat it that has always cheers me up :)
you don't get my respect when you do not respect me enough to read my OP and other posts but just jumping like a lunatic and insulting me .Until you make your argument for us to analyze it and discuss it your point of view will be just as important as your new cats. :rollin:
waiting for your position. 8-)
Six pages talking with a spod who doesn't get any but is paranoid over having to pay child support anyway.
Quote from: "the_antithesis"Six pages talking with a spod who doesn't get any but is paranoid over having to pay child support anyway.
I believe someone told you; When you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all
I am sick and tired of clowns not knowing what is it that they are talking about
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "the_antithesis"Six pages talking with a spod who doesn't get any but is paranoid over having to pay child support anyway.
I believe someone told you; When you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all
I am sick and tired of clowns not knowing what is it that they are talking about
I am sick and tired of reading posts without one single fucking period in them.
[youtube:ca9zmwqm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY[/youtube:ca9zmwqm]
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Well point which you failed to understand Mr.clown is that Forums for atheists isn't because of in Texas you cant find friends and you want some company
but its because to discuss different political stance and point out when it's discriminates against people.
Nope. It's to discuss things of interest to atheists, within the bounds of the rules of the particular forum.
QuoteSomeone who says doesn't matter we cant change a thing is not belong here
Unless the people who run the forum decide that he does belong here.
Quoteyou don't get my respect when you do not respect me enough to read my OP and other posts but just jumping like a lunatic and insulting me
Oh, there's your mistake right there. You think that you deserve some kind of respect, a priori. Here, you EARN respect. You can also LOSE respect. And you're doing a lot more of the latter than the former.
QuoteUntil you make your argument for [s:1r9cbb3q]us[/s:1r9cbb3q] me to analyze it and discuss it your point of view will be just as important to me as your new cats.
FIFY
(I'm not getting involved in the original argument, just in your way of conducting it.)
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "the_antithesis"Six pages talking with a spod who doesn't get any but is paranoid over having to pay child support anyway.
I believe someone told you; When you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all
I am sick and tired of clowns not knowing what is it that they are talking about
You're always free to never come back here again, if you don't like the way this forum runs.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "the_antithesis"Six pages talking with a spod who doesn't get any but is paranoid over having to pay child support anyway.
I believe someone told you; When you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all
I am sick and tired of clowns not knowing what is it that they are talking about
You're always free to never come back here again, if you don't like the way this forum runs.
I am sorry do you have a mental problems? :-k
The original poster remains mostly incoherent, but I do agree with some of what Plu has stated earlier in the thread. There is a strange double standard, men need to take responsibility for the outcome of sex, but women can have an abortion? It IS a double standard in society that women can opt out of all responsibility (asside from risky medical complications; nothing is ever equal is it?), but men get no option to opt out. The stuff on here about men taking responsibility for making a baby....if you applied that to the woman, it would all be pro-life anti-abortion arguments. But none of you that I am aware of have that stance, so I find it odd.
I in no way think a man should have any say over the pregnancy of a woman, no matter his involvement of getting to that state. However, I do think there should be ways for men to opt out of parental rights and responsibilities...their version of choosing abortion, I guess.
Just ideas here, but something like after a woman finds out she is pregnant, she must inform the father (and he can choose to be tested if he denies it), and he would have a limited amount of time to decide if he wants to be "have the kid" or not, just like the woman does. If he opts out, he looses all rights to that child for all time.
there would always be issues and details to hammer out, such as if the woman could not locate the man in time, but I'm not suggesting a fix for every problem, just thinking we should indeed recognize this inequality, and make attempts to rectify it.
Everything else the OP has said is insulting, incorrect and crazy, so mostly, I'm just agreeing with Plu on this.
Quote from: "Aroura33"I in no way think a man should have any say over the pregnancy of a woman, no matter his involvement of getting to that state. However, I do think there should be ways for men to opt out of parental rights and responsibilities...their version of choosing abortion, I guess.
If I recall correctly, some states have begun using what's known as a "paper abortion" that pretty much does exactly this.
Quote from: "Aroura33"The original poster remains mostly incoherent, but I do agree with some of what Plu has stated earlier in the thread. There is a strange double standard, men need to take responsibility for the outcome of sex, but women can have an abortion? It IS a double standard in society that women can opt out of all responsibility (asside from risky medical complications; nothing is ever equal is it?), but men get no option to opt out. The stuff on here about men taking responsibility for making a baby....if you applied that to the woman, it would all be pro-life anti-abortion arguments. But none of you that I am aware of have that stance, so I find it odd.
I in no way think a man should have any say over the pregnancy of a woman, no matter his involvement of getting to that state. However, I do think there should be ways for men to opt out of parental rights and responsibilities...their version of choosing abortion, I guess.
Just ideas here, but something like after a woman finds out she is pregnant, she must inform the father (and he can choose to be tested if he denies it), and he would have a limited amount of time to decide if he wants to be "have the kid" or not, just like the woman does. If he opts out, he looses all rights to that child for all time.
there would always be issues and details to hammer out, such as if the woman could not locate the man in time, but I'm not suggesting a fix for every problem, just thinking we should indeed recognize this inequality, and make attempts to rectify it.
Everything else the OP has said is insulting, incorrect and crazy, so mostly, I'm just agreeing with Plu on this.
Well you are entitled of your opinion and you can spray unjust criticism all over the forum
But that doesn't mean that you have pointed out list one post which is offensive or crazy
it might be in bad grammar, but offensive?
and please if you are offended by word vegina then build an ark,seal on five oceans and wait until humans die out 8-[
I am open to idea to debate this threw skype
If we would have list 3 person against the motion, and 2 person for the motion, then we could work this out, cant we now?
please post, if you are willing to debate this over skype and what is your position
I am pro the motion and i am willing to debate.
if we have enough people we should exchange skype ids and then,see where will that get us 8-)
QuoteThe original poster remains mostly incoherent, but I do agree with some of what Plu has stated earlier in the thread. There is a strange double standard, men need to take responsibility for the outcome of sex, but women can have an abortion? It IS a double standard in society that women can opt out of all responsibility (asside from risky medical complications; nothing is ever equal is it?), but men get no option to opt out. The stuff on here about men taking responsibility for making a baby....if you applied that to the woman, it would all be pro-life anti-abortion arguments. But none of you that I am aware of have that stance, so I find it odd.
Thanks Aurora. This was pretty much what I was going to post as well.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"Quote from: "Colanth"You're always free to never come back here again, if you don't like the way this forum runs.
I am sorry do you have a mental problems? :-k
Insulting the moderators. That always works out well.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"I am open to idea to debate this threw skype
If we would have list 3 person against the motion, and 2 person for the motion, then we could work this out, cant we now?
please post, if you are willing to debate this over skype and what is your position
I am pro the motion and i am willing to debate.
if we have enough people we should exchange skype ids and then,see where will that get us 8-)
Oh yes, please sign me up. I'd love nothing more than to skype with you! It'd be fun. You seem like such an open-minded, rational person.
take it for what it's worth it is West Virginia but
http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/con ... l?nav=5061 (http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/content.detail/id/547710/Vienna-man-chooses-jail-over-alimony.html?nav=5061)
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"I am open to idea to debate this threw skype
If we would have list 3 person against the motion, and 2 person for the motion, then we could work this out, cant we now?
please post, if you are willing to debate this over skype and what is your position
I am pro the motion and i am willing to debate.
if we have enough people we should exchange skype ids and then,see where will that get us 8-)
Oh yes, please sign me up. I'd love nothing more than to skype with you! It'd be fun. You seem like such an open-minded, rational person.
I dont get it you are an idiot who said man shouldn't have rights, when you cant make argument against it
but i am not open-minded?
I am wasting my time on this clowns
Idiots like you, only work on what ever standard is
second you hear words which you have been brainwashed to see it as not okay
you are not checking what is a rest of an argument.
like here
QuoteYou are right. I think this person is unbelievable. That is what I have to say about that.
I agree that it should be a decision between the two parents in a perfect world, but ultimately it's up to the woman since it's her body. That is just biology, and the consequence of having sex.
you are the clown who wrote that and you have a nerve to call me ignorant?I am telling you last time you have a sand in your vegina. Instead of acting like a clown here, you better get That checked.
Quote from: "surly74"take it for what it's worth it is West Virginia but
http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/con ... l?nav=5061 (http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/content.detail/id/547710/Vienna-man-chooses-jail-over-alimony.html?nav=5061)
surly they are talking about ex-wife
we are talking about accidental pregnancy
Quote from: "surly74"take it for what it's worth it is West Virginia but
http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/con ... l?nav=5061 (http://www.newsandsentinel.com/page/content.detail/id/547710/Vienna-man-chooses-jail-over-alimony.html?nav=5061)
LOL West Virginia or not, I got a laugh out of that one. Well no, not exactly. I suppose West Virginia has a lot to do with it being funny.
Alex: did you actually read the article?
QuoteKeefe alleges two years after he divorced his ex-wife, he discovered he was not the father of the couple's youngest son.
"Just before our divorce was finalized I was told I should have a DNA test performed. I was told there was zero-percent chance I was his biological father," he stated on the video. Caroline Keefe, Sean's wife, provided The News and Sentinel copies of the test results.
Under West Virginia laws, Sean Keefe is financially bound to support the child. The man who fathered the child bears no responsibility.
"Any child born under your marriage is your responsibility," Caroline Keefe said.
"Sean is not trying to get out of paying child support, but he feels that a man has a right to get out of paying child support if he is not his child's father."
if you are going to have an accidental pregancy guys, do it in West Virginia and make sure it's a married woman.
Quoteif you are going to have an accidental pregancy guys, do it in West Virginia and make sure it's a married woman.
This law actually also exists in the Netherlands. It usually makes sense, but it can make from some problematic situations, like the above.
On the other hand, it mentions nowhere how old the child is. I've been of the mind that the father and mother are the people who raise the child, not the ones who provided the egg and sperm that made him. If this child was a few years of age when this happened, this guy is the father, and the other guy is not.
Quote from: "Plu"Quoteif you are going to have an accidental pregancy guys, do it in West Virginia and make sure it's a married woman.
This law actually also exists in the Netherlands. It usually makes sense, but it can make from some problematic situations, like the above.
On the other hand, it mentions nowhere how old the child is. I've been of the mind that the father and mother are the people who raise the child, not the ones who provided the egg and sperm that made him. If this child was a few years of age when this happened, this guy is the father, and the other guy is not.
For me it's that the biological father's responisbility is wiped and the husband is on the hook. I'm almost in this situation but I wasn't married when the baby was born.
Quote"The only thing I can say, these folks were married when this child was born. That means he's the legal father," Rusen said.
It's actually a better situation than the other way around. The guy who has said he will be responsible for the child is held to his responsibility, while the guy who accidentally got someone pregnant and then said he didn't want to be responsible for it, is not.
One of these two men signed a legal contract saying "I will be responsible for the children my wife gives birth to". The other did not. The former is held responsible for what he signed; the latter is not.
As much as it sucks for this guy; from a viewpoint of rights and responsibilities, I'd say this is correct.
I'm not so sure about that it's better...other than giving guys another reason not to get married.
but this statement is in stark contrast to what's being talked about here. (not your points).
QuoteOne of these two men signed a legal contract saying "I will be responsible for the children my wife gives birth to". The other did not. The former is held responsible for what he signed; the latter is not.
There seems to be an implied contract if neither is married, at least what I'm reading here. If the woman isn't married then the guy is on the hook. If she's not married then another guy is on the hook?
What if hubby didn't want anymore kids?
Right now there is indeed some sort of weird implied contract, where if you get someone pregnant you're fucked unless she's married. The implied contract should go, leaving you in the situation where you get to decide whether you want to be the father of the child, or not. If you do, you're stuck with it. If you don't, you don't get any rights to it.
Marriage for a man includes saying "I'm taking responsibility all the kids my wife produces, regardless of who made them."
If you don't want that... don't sign that contract. You can probably get a custom contract signed with that part left out, but it'd mean pregnancy tests and legal hassle every time your wife gives birth, as you can no longer just assume that the child belongs to the father.
As for hubby not wanting anymore kids, that he'll have to discuss with his wife. But if she does get pregnant, he should be kept to his claimed responsibility. Or change the contract and get rid of that clause, I guess.
You don't have to be a genius to realize that you can avoid this situation. Don't put your giz in her. It's quite simple. If you do want a kid, then make sure that SHE wants one with YOU. The baby is 100% hers until it is born Where's the ban squad, time to lose this weirdo.
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"You don't have to be a genius to realize that you can avoid this situation. Don't put your giz in her. It's quite simple. If you do want a kid, then make sure that SHE wants one with YOU. The baby is 100% hers until it is born Where's the ban squad, time to lose this weirdo.
You have glossed over a large number of actually valid and backed arguments on why "just don't have sex" is a silly double standard, though. Alex might be a mysogynist ass, but you're not showing yourself in a reasonable light, either.
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"You don't have to be a genius to realize that you can avoid this situation. Don't put your giz in her. It's quite simple. If you do want a kid, then make sure that SHE wants one with YOU. The baby is 100% hers until it is born Where's the ban squad, time to lose this weirdo.
yep, lets ban someone because you don't agree.
Quote from: "Alex Shouwls"I believe someone told you; When you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all
So, why are you still talking?
Alex, please tone down direct insults. This is an interesting subject and I'd like to make a comment regarding the article that was posted. Holy crap that guy is a hero.
For those that didn't read it...
1. Dude is married to a slut that cheated on him
2. Dude rages and says "fuck that we are getting a divorce"
3. Dudes lawyers say "bro, check that kids DNA"
4. Maury says "you are NOT the father!"
5. The slut takes him to court and demands child support AND alimony ($1,300 CS and $1,800 Alimony)
6. Dude says "I'll pay the CS, but fuck your alimony!"
7. Court disagrees and threatens him with jail time
So he decides to go to jail and refuses to pay the alimony, but is still paying the child support.
Fuck yes, fuck that slut and her alimony
Quote from: "Plu"You have glossed over a large number of actually valid and backed arguments on why "just don't have sex" is a silly double standard, though. Alex might be a mysogynist ass, but you're not showing yourself in a reasonable light, either.
and again idiot who only functions on majority vote
even tho never explained what was it about my statements mysogynistick?
How on earth can someone like you be born in religious place and became atheist?
when you yourself dont really think by yourself, but function on majority vote
you were okay with my statements before you heard that some woman had a sand in her vegina after that you decided that you had a wrong position so you better distance yourself from the guy who started this
what a clown everyone here is like bloody retarded
I think i can find people with better arguments on creationist forums..
because i am looking for arguments and dont care about bunch of butthurt clowns who couldn't look pass over words vegina and womb
You are new atheists? really you are the next big hope? dont make me :rollin:
any way i am not wasting more time on you clowns.
Live long and stupid sense that is what you have chosen for your life =D>
QuoteHow on earth can someone like you be born in religious place and became atheist?
I wasn't born in a religious place.
Just when I thought it was impossible to overuse "sand in your vagina."
I believe I have the solution to this thorny issue:
(//http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa439/pato1516/junior.jpg)
I am not saying ban him bc I don't agree with him expletive, I'm saying ban him bc he has been here two days and look at the shit he is starting. Remember this was in the introductions until mod moved it. He reminds me eerily of JanSnyder.
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"I am not saying ban him bc I don't agree with him expletive, I'm saying ban him bc he has been here two days and look at the shit he is starting. Remember this was in the introductions until mod moved it. He reminds eerily of JanSnyder.
And second of all, I am not exatly trying to win any awards with my opinions. In his original intro he never mentioned "marriage". That came up somewhere else in this circus. If the woman can sleep at night knowing that she is charging an innocent man for a child produced from whoring around, may she burn in hell.
he's called me an idiot several times. But whatever.
I don't think I am even close to being an idiot. I may have sand in my vegina but I am no idiot.
My point exactly mermaid. He is serving no good purpose here. Maybe I'm just a dumbass, but could someone elaborate on sand in vagina?
Judging from his responses, he's only here to troll, not to make a point.
So alex, when you look in the mirror do you see a troll looking back at you? If anyone has any pictures, please post.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Judging from his responses, he's only here to troll, not to make a point.
I'm no troll sniffing expert, but this guy smells more like genuine misogynist-moron than troll to me. The part where I sais his posts were insulting, and his response was:
QuoteBut that doesn't mean that you have pointed out list one post which is offensive or crazy
it might be in bad grammar, but offensive?
and please if you are offended by word vegina then build an ark,seal on five oceans and wait until humans die out 8-[
reads more as dumb as rocks than troll to me. he is mistranslating offensive and insulting, as if they meant the same thing, which is more stupid than troll. (also, his unique spelling of vagina is worth many lols!) I guess he could be playing the stupid troll? I don't know, lol.
It's too bad too. Although we've had similar topics, I do think it is one that has not recently been talked about here, and would be an interesting discussion if OP wasn't stinking the thread up.
Also, I've had sand in my vagina before...not fun! Worst part of playing at the beach!
Not sure what that has to do with this thread though..... :rollin:
If you kids are going to play with your poop, you're going to get shit on your fingers.
Well staff, that's why your here :). To clean up our messes. :) and we love you for it.
Quote from: "aitm"If you kids are going to play with your poop, you're going to get shit on your fingers.
*sniffs fingers*
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"I am not saying ban him bc I don't agree with him expletive, I'm saying ban him bc he has been here two days and look at the shit he is starting. Remember this was in the introductions until mod moved it. He reminds me eerily of JanSnyder.
your first post about banning didn't say anything about these reasons. you looked like you wanted him banned because of his stances. be more clear next time when crying to the mods.
Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"My point exactly mermaid. He is serving no good purpose here. Maybe I'm just a dumbass, but could someone elaborate on sand in vagina?
so if he left would this be a good topic to continue? Plu made some interesting points which most have ignored.
Quote from: "Aroura33"Quote from: "Mermaid"Also, I've had sand in my vagina before...not fun! Worst part of playing at the beach!
This does not sound pleasant. And the reason I won't have sex on the beach without some serious vigilance. Ow. Ow. Ow. Ow. Ow.
That being said, this is actually an interesting topic that does bear discussion. Too bad that jerkwad is constantly steamrolling over people's discussions. It makes me reluctant to participate in a rational discussion about it.
Quote from: "surly74"Quote from: "fingerscrossed2013"My point exactly mermaid. He is serving no good purpose here. Maybe I'm just a dumbass, but could someone elaborate on sand in vagina?
so if he left would this be a good topic to continue? Plu made some interesting points which most have ignored.
I think so, yes.
Someone get this guy some cheese.
This is indeed a complicated issue with lots of nuance. Abortion has been a game changer in the traditional balance between the sexes and proper provisions for children.
Let's go back to the days before abortion. Well, there's no such thing so let's go back to the days before safe and legal abortion.
If an accidental pregnancy occurred, often the man would be forced to marry the woman. It would be the famous "shotgun wedding" because illegitimacy was still frowned on in those days. But that's a side issue.
The issue is that she will carry to term, then he should pay child support. So far nobody disagree on this point. This is in the olden days, not today.
Now add a second issue. She could choose to adopt the kid out. Now she is no longer responsible for the kid, and he is also no longer responsible for the kid. He can hope she adopts the kid out. She still has to go through the whole ordeal of pregnancy, so he should help with that. But that's not the issue of the adoption because it is already getting tricky.
First, does he get any say in adopting the kid out? It is partly his after all. I've read cases where biological dads discover (a few years later) that there was a kid that was adopted out and they tried to gain legal and physical custody of their own child. The biological mother neglected to tell the biological father about the kid. Sometimes the bio dad wins, sometimes the bio dad loses. Now that we've added the adoption option we now have to deal with the rights of the man, whether we like it or not.
Often when the subjects of child support and abortion are mixed in the same thread, there are people who refuse to discuss the issue of men having any rights. But we're not up to abortion yet, only adoption. So does the man have any rights when the man wants the child and the woman wants to adopt it out? What about if she fails to tell him about the child?
Ok, the issue has become more thorny. Now the issue can become very complicated. Abortion removes the eventual kid from the discussion in a way that adoption doesn't.
In the military I was taught that responsibility for a decision should be equal to power to make the decision. If the colonel makes a stupid decision that screws everything up, it isn't the private who gets blamed. Well, not really but that's the theory. Also if a colonel makes a brilliant decision that makes everything better, it isn't the private who gets the credit. That is both reality and theory. Despite some kinks in implementation it is a good theory.
With abortion, that decision is 100% hers. Yes, he participated in every step before that, but she has the last decision and 100% of the decision making power for that last decision. By military principles she therefore should have 100% responsibility for that decision. That is what makes abortion such a game changer.
Given her full authority for the final decision (although he had some authority on the decisions leading up to the final decision), what amount of responsibility should each party have?
Oh, and the man in West Virginia should pay what he owes, but sue the bio father for the child support the legal father is paying.
does the man in WV have a leg to stand on for suing the biological father based on what the law says?
he's paid and is paying CS for the kid but refuses to play alimony to his ex wife. for that I agree with him.
Ok here's my problem with all of this. First lets establish the premise and then we'll look at the proposed solution. The premise here is that its unfair that men have no legal rights when it comes to deciding whether or not to abort a pregnancy and can therefore end up having to pay child support for a child which they never wanted and would have opted to abort had they been given the choice.
And the proposed solution to the lack of equal rights is to allow men to opt out of their responsibility via a so called paper abortion. In this scenario the man essentially says that if the woman chooses to have the baby, she does so against his will and on her own and he is therefore no longer responsible for paying any child support nor would he have any legal rights to the child.
The problem I have with this solution is that it does not solve the problem in question i.e. the lack of equal rights between both parties. It does not give the man rights equal to the woman. All that it does is give the man a legal means to be a deadbeat dad.
Now if we decide that we think its a good thing to legalize being a deadbeat, so be it. I don't agree for reasons I'll go into below, but so be it. But only if we call it what it is, legalizing deadbeats. Don't say it grants men the same rights as women because it doesn't do that. Not even close. Women still make the choice. Men still have no say in it. There are no equal rights here. None. There is only a loophole which allows deadbeat dads to be deadbeat dads.
But now lets look a few other realities of the situation. Child support is not an automatic thing in most states as far I know. When a woman has a child out of wedlock, the state does not automatically step in and demand the know the name of the father so they may find him and shake him down for child support. In order to get child support, the mother of the child must ask for it. A paternity test will likely be required as well as few visits to the court.
Now we've already discussed how birth control is never 100% effective. But we've also discussed how when used properly, the chances of an unplanned pregnancy are incredibly small. So we're already dealing with a small number here. And of that small number, some of them are going to be aborted at the mutual decision of both partners. Because regardless of whether the law says the man has a right or not, lots of women will grant the man a say anyway.
But of course that's not all cases. And some women who find themselves in the already small group will indeed decide to have the kid even the guy doesn't want it. Of those, it is very likely that not all will end up going to court for child support. The law of averages says that some of those women will have personal ethics which cause them to be of the opinion that if it was they alone are making the choice to have the kid, they alone will take all responsibility for the kid regardless of what the law says.
But again, that's not going to be all cases. So of that small percentage where birth control is used properly and fails, and where the woman decides to have the kid against the wishes of the man, there will inevitably be a few who women who will also say fuck ethics, he stuck his dick in me so I'm going to make him pay. So what we are talking about here is making a law which would apply to a very small percentage of men. That percentage being those men who used birth control, had it fail, and then realized they were sleeping with someone whom they did not well enough to know that she would go after them for child support even if they did not want the baby carried to term. And any way you slice it, that is irresponsible behavior on the part of the man. If he doesn't want a kid and sticks his dick in someone without birth control, that's irresponsible. And if he doesn't want a kid and he sticks his dick in someone whom he doesn't know well enough to predict what she will do should she get pregnant, then that too is irresponsible. You have these discussions with each other before the clothes come off or the clothes don't come off. That is what responsible adults do.
And once again my question is why are we even talking about legalizing irresponsible behavior? The solution to irresponsible behavior is not to make it legal. That is the way I see this issue. We're talking about legalizing stupid and nothing more as far as I'm concerned.
Quote from: "Johan"Ok here's my problem with all of this. First lets establish the premise and then we'll look at the proposed solution. The premise here is that its unfair that men have no legal rights when it comes to deciding whether or not to abort a pregnancy and can therefore end up having to pay child support for a child which they never wanted and would have opted to abort had they been given the choice.
And the proposed solution to the lack of equal rights is to allow men to opt out of their responsibility via a so called paper abortion. In this scenario the man essentially says that if the woman chooses to have the baby, she does so against his will and on her own and he is therefore no longer responsible for paying any child support nor would he have any legal rights to the child.
The problem I have with this solution is that it does not solve the problem in question i.e. the lack of equal rights between both parties. It does not give the man rights equal to the woman. All that it does is give the man a legal means to be a deadbeat dad.
Now if we decide that we think its a good thing to legalize being a deadbeat, so be it. I don't agree for reasons I'll go into below, but so be it. But only if we call it what it is, legalizing deadbeats. Don't say it grants men the same rights as women because it doesn't do that. Not even close. Women still make the choice. Men still have no say in it. There are no equal rights here. None. There is only a loophole which allows deadbeat dads to be deadbeat dads.
But now lets look a few other realities of the situation. Child support is not an automatic thing in most states as far I know. When a woman has a child out of wedlock, the state does not automatically step in and demand the know the name of the father so they may find him and shake him down for child support. In order to get child support, the mother of the child must ask for it. A paternity test will likely be required as well as few visits to the court.
Now we've already discussed how birth control is never 100% effective. But we've also discussed how when used properly, the chances of an unplanned pregnancy are incredibly small. So we're already dealing with a small number here. And of that small number, some of them are going to be aborted at the mutual decision of both partners. Because regardless of whether the law says the man has a right or not, lots of women will grant the man a say anyway.
But of course that's not all cases. And some women who find themselves in the already small group will indeed decide to have the kid even the guy doesn't want it. Of those, it is very likely that not all will end up going to court for child support. The law of averages says that some of those women will have personal ethics which cause them to be of the opinion that if it was they alone are making the choice to have the kid, they alone will take all responsibility for the kid regardless of what the law says.
But again, that's not going to be all cases. So of that small percentage where birth control is used properly and fails, and where the woman decides to have the kid against the wishes of the man, there will inevitably be a few who women who will also say fuck ethics, he stuck his dick in me so I'm going to make him pay. So what we are talking about here is making a law which would apply to a very small percentage of men. That percentage being those men who used birth control, had it fail, and then realized they were sleeping with someone whom they did not well enough to know that she would go after them for child support even if they did not want the baby carried to term. And any way you slice it, that is irresponsible behavior on the part of the man. If he doesn't want a kid and sticks his dick in someone without birth control, that's irresponsible. And if he doesn't want a kid and he sticks his dick in someone whom he doesn't know well enough to predict what she will do should she get pregnant, then that too is irresponsible. You have these discussions with each other before the clothes come off or the clothes don't come off. That is what responsible adults do.
And once again my question is why are we even talking about legalizing irresponsible behavior? The solution to irresponsible behavior is not to make it legal. That is the way I see this issue. We're talking about legalizing stupid and nothing more as far as I'm concerned.
The exact same thing can, and HAS and for that matter still IS being said about womens rights and abortion. Only instead of legalizing something as trivial as beaing a "deadbeat", they say we are legalizing murder. And surely, we are legalizing irresponsible behavior, because easy abortions just means woman will use it AS birth control, and start sleeping around more promiscuislt, right?
No, it is not legalizing irresponsible behavior, unless you agree it goes both ways, and that abortions are also legalizing irresponsible behaviotr, aka having sex and not accepting the consequences.
You cannot say it is a womans body and her life and her choice, and then say the exact opposite about men without sounding hypocritical. Yes, it is not his body, but the life and choice part should still apply.
I am a woman, and sadly I also disagree with your educated guesses on the number of unmarried women who sue for child support. Most, like you, assume a man who will not pay for his child is a deadbeat, his choice does not matter, and ETHICALLY the right thing to do is make him pay. Even most men, as can be seen on this forum, think men, ethically, should pay for any offspring they produce, and have no moral ground to stand on if they disagree.
Quote from: "Aroura33"The exact same thing can, and HAS and for that matter still IS being said about womens rights and abortion. Only instead of legalizing something as trivial as beaing a "deadbeat", they say we are legalizing murder. And surely, we are legalizing irresponsible behavior, because easy abortions just means woman will use it AS birth control, and start sleeping around more promiscuislt, right?
No, it is not legalizing irresponsible behavior, unless you agree it goes both ways, and that abortions are also legalizing irresponsible behaviotr, aka having sex and not accepting the consequences.
This is an excellent point. You're absolutely correct that legalizing abortion is also legalizing irresponsible behavior. but here's the difference. We tried making abortion illegal and abortions didn't stop. Instead women went underground to get them and as a result many were seriously injured or died. So in a nutshell if being a deadbeat dad significantly increased the risk that men would end up seriously injured or dead then I would say you have a valid argument. But to my knowledge being a deadbeat dad does no such thing, therefore I see no reason to legalize it.
Forgive me for having an oppinion here but men....here's a kleenex. And some cheese. Good gracious I have been looking at this way to much. Bk to real life for a bit now
Who gives a fk about hypothetical. Seriously. I'm drunk and going to bed now. Only after I visit the drunk section of the forum. ;)
I'm fully agreeing with Aurora.
Also Johan, by calling this "legalizing deadbeats", you are simply trying to poison the discussion. It makes me not even want to discuss the subject with you and I consider it rather rude.
You are also completely glossing over the fact that it takes two people to have unsafe sex.
so....women don't have any responsibility? Is that what you are saying?
QuoteAnd any way you slice it, that is irresponsible behavior on the part of the man. If he doesn't want a kid and sticks his dick in someone without birth control, that's irresponsible. And if he doesn't want a kid and he sticks his dick in someone whom he doesn't know well enough to predict what she will do should she get pregnant, then that too is irresponsible.
Where is the cry of irresponsibility on the part of the woman?
You don't want to legalize irresponsible behaviour on the man but it already exists for women...it's call child support.
Quote from: "Plu"You are also completely glossing over the fact that it takes two people to have unsafe sex.
Are we talking about unsafe sex here? If we are then I agree that it takes two do that. I thought the premise we were discussing revolved around the fact that guy could EVERYTHING right, have a trusting partner, practice safe sex and do it properly, discuss both partners feelings on the subject and know what each partner would want BEFORE having sex and then STILL end up having to pay child support for a kid he never wanted and because of that, we need a law god dammit. I thought the argument was that guys have it bad because they could do everything right and still get screwed simply because they're guys and don't have the same options available as women do.
If that's the argument, I say that it is indeed a bit of a double standard but its also not really that big of a problem and its certainly not a big enough problem to need its own law.
However if the argument is actually just that men should get the same options as women and it doesn't matter how irresponsible either party is, then my opinion is we don't need more laws to legalize irresponsible behavior. Yep abortion does that already for the girls. But like I said, when we get rid of abortion, girls get dead. That alone in my mind justifies abortion. So my question is do guys get dead if we force them to pay child support against their will? If the answer is no then I don't believe we need a law to protect guys from having to pay child support. Double standard? Sure. Fair? Nope. That's life and life ain't always fair or equal.
The bottom line is this. How wide spread is the problem really? How many guys do everything right as I've outlined above and still end up having to pay child support every year? Less than 10,000? Less than 1000? And how many of those guys have the rest of their lives totally ruined because there isn't a law to protect them? Wouldn't our time and effort be better spent focusing on laws that might protect far more people from far worse things?
QuoteThe bottom line is this. How wide spread is the problem really? How many guys do everything right as I've outlined above and still end up having to pay child support every year? Less than 10,000? Less than 1000? And how many of those guys have the rest of their lives totally ruined because there isn't a law to protect them? Wouldn't our time and effort be better spent focusing on laws that might protect far more people from far worse things?
If the answer is "more than 0" I would say that is reason enough to at least establish there is a problem, and ideally it should be fixed. I can accept "It's wrong but I'm not going to do anything about it", but "It's wrong, but so what" is a bullshit position imho. At the very least be willing to say you think it's wrong and should be changed, even if you don't care to put it into action.
(It's not like I'm going to take action myself since I don't even live in the country, but that doesn't change that it's wrong the way it goes now.)
Quote from: "Johan"The bottom line is this. How wide spread is the problem really? How many guys do everything right as I've outlined above and still end up having to pay child support every year? Less than 10,000? Less than 1000? And how many of those guys have the rest of their lives totally ruined because there isn't a law to protect them? Wouldn't our time and effort be better spent focusing on laws that might protect far more people from far worse things?
Okay, you're going in kind of a scary direction here, so here's a little food for thought:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibEJoNyDDgw&t=0m13s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibEJoNyDDgw&t=0m13s)
As atheists, we are an extremely small minority. We shouldn't overlook things that are wrong just because the group that is affected is composed of a small number of people!
Quote from: "Plu"If the answer is "more than 0" I would say that is reason enough to at least establish there is a problem, and ideally it should be fixed. I can accept "It's wrong but I'm not going to do anything about it", but "It's wrong, but so what" is a bullshit position imho. At the very least be willing to say you think it's wrong and should be changed, even if you don't care to put it into action.
Yeah I don't know that I think its so wrong. I guess it just comes down to that. The reason women have the option of abortion available is because women die is it isn't available. Having to pay child support doesn't compare to death. The difference between the two is like night and day. We need a law for one and we simply don't need a law for the other imo. That's just how I feel about it.
I understand that some of you don't agree. That's fine. My opinion is what it is and I've heard nothing so far which compels me to change it. Treat your dick like a loaded gun and be responsible about where you point it and what you do with it and this issue becomes a non-issue in 99.9999% of cases. We don't need a law to help the 0.0001 percenters and or allow the other 99 to leave their character and personal responsibility at home every time they get a little horny. That's just how I feel about it.
I think your 0.0001% might be tad... no probably way off.
Quote from: "wolf39us"I think your 0.0001% might be tad... no probably way off.
So are you saying that you personally know or know of a large percentage of men who ended up having to pay child support after they had sex with someone while using birth control properly AND who had discussed their feelings about not wanting kids nor wanting to pay child support prior to having sex AND who had known the woman they were having sex with long enough and well enough to be able to reasonably trust her when she said she was on board with it? Because that is 0.0001% that I'm talking about.
No, but as an engineering major (I like math)... Numbers like 0.0001% make me want to see the data!
Throwing out a random percentage is not going to be convincing. You must take into consideration all accidental pregnancies, and then fathers that want an abortion. Some will be performed, others will not. To say that of the fathers seeking abortions, only 0.0001% of them include women who refuse to allow the abortion AND seek child support is a little optimistic.
Even if that was the case, it should not be said that just because a rather small number of people are affected, that we should pay no mind! There is clearly a double standard, one that probably has no real solution.
I see it this way though... A girl gets pregnant and she has a right to an abortion. She has a way to "opt-out" of responsibility because its her body and I support this right. I also believe that if a woman goes against the will of the father, then she should do so by her own will and thus be fully responsible.
These are my own opinions and I have thought about what I would do if I knocked a chick up... My conclusions were not including anything legal and all end in me in jail or dead so... I got myself snipped and holy crap does that make me feel better! :-)
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "Aroura33"The exact same thing can, and HAS and for that matter still IS being said about womens rights and abortion. Only instead of legalizing something as trivial as beaing a "deadbeat", they say we are legalizing murder. And surely, we are legalizing irresponsible behavior, because easy abortions just means woman will use it AS birth control, and start sleeping around more promiscuislt, right?
No, it is not legalizing irresponsible behavior, unless you agree it goes both ways, and that abortions are also legalizing irresponsible behaviotr, aka having sex and not accepting the consequences.
This is an excellent point. You're absolutely correct that legalizing abortion is also legalizing irresponsible behavior. but here's the difference. We tried making abortion illegal and abortions didn't stop. Instead women went underground to get them and as a result many were seriously injured or died. So in a nutshell if being a deadbeat dad significantly increased the risk that men would end up seriously injured or dead then I would say you have a valid argument. But to my knowledge being a deadbeat dad does no such thing, therefore I see no reason to legalize it.
Do you really only support abortion because women will get them no matter what, including at risk to their life? Do you really think abortions are irresponsible behavior? I don't. I think in many cases, they are the extremely responsible thing to do.
I support abortion because I think people have a right to "family panning", to decide if a child is the right thing for them. If not, then they probably should not be having a kid, they will likely not be the best parent if they don't want the child! And our system is already overflowing with unadoptable unwanted kids that "responsible" people gave up for adoption instead of aborting. Also, because birth control isn't 100%, and because not everyone is perfect and sometimes even good people get into the heat of the moment and do the deed sans birth control. It's hormones, we are human, we make mistakes.
Ultimately, my argument is that men deserve the same (or as similar as we can make it) rights as women. Not every man who wants nothing to do with a child he conceived is irresponsible. Just like some women decide to abort because they know they would be a crappy parent at that time in their life, men should be able to decide that for the same reason...which is RESPONSIBLE. If you are not ready to be a dad, forcing someone to do it...well we see the results all the time. Dads who often do more harm than good being in a child's life. Parents who resent their kids. And if all you are is a paycheck, it is pretty easy to build resentment. They should be able to decide NOT to be that bad dad. Maybe more women would make the RESPONSILE choice not to have 5 babies by 4 different men (and yes, I mean abort them or give them up) if they knew that money from the sperm donor wasn't going to be basically automatic.
Quote from: "Johan"Quote from: "wolf39us"I think your 0.0001% might be tad... no probably way off.
So are you saying that you personally know or know of a large percentage of men who ended up having to pay child support after they had sex with someone while using birth control properly AND who had discussed their feelings about not wanting kids nor wanting to pay child support prior to having sex AND who had known the woman they were having sex with long enough and well enough to be able to reasonably trust her when she said she was on board with it? Because that is 0.0001% that I'm talking about.
What about the men (and women) who don't share your views on sex? Just because you think it's irresponsible to have random safe sex with people doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees, but you are basically opposing laws to protect them based on your personal opinion of sexuality.
I don't discuss beforehand what must be done in case of an accidental death before I drive a friend to the supermarket anymore than I feel a need to discuss what to do in the case of an accidental pregnancy. The odds of either happening are far low enough to be willing to ignore that section until it becomes relevant. Otherwise, life becomes unbearable. Nobody does that. Except you feel it should be done on the topic of sex, which is probably a cultural thing.
There is no reason to let the extremely low chance of accidental pregnancy prevent you from doing what feels good (and is totally responsible) anymore than there is a reason to discuss with the parents of a friend's child how you will handle the death of their child before you cross the road with them.
Quote from: "Johan"So are you saying that you personally know or know of a large percentage of men who ended up having to pay child support after they had sex with someone while using birth control properly AND who had discussed their feelings about not wanting kids nor wanting to pay child support prior to having sex AND who had known the woman they were having sex with long enough and well enough to be able to reasonably trust her when she said she was on board with it? Because that is 0.0001% that I'm talking about.
here is a guy who donated his sperm to a couple and the state got in the middle. he didn't even get to have sex with either woman.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12 ... pport?lite (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/30/16254404-kansas-demands-that-sperm-donor-pay-child-support?lite)
Granted it's only one and not 100's so I guess this poor chap doesn't matter to you. When ever I see something like this I think what it must be like if I was going through it. Gives me warm fuzzies that people just brush it off because there are so few.
women have rights, men have responsibilities.
Quote from: "surly74"men have responsibilities.
Isn't that what being a man is all about?
I was under the impression we were trying to make the sexes equal? Sentences like the above seem to suggest the opposite.
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "surly74"men have responsibilities.
Isn't that what being a man is all about?
apparently on this board it is.
So, what happens when a woman gets pregnant and the man wants the child, but the woman doesn't?
He's SOL naturally
Quote from: "Jmpty"So, what happens when a woman gets pregnant and the man wants the child, but the woman doesn't?
If he doesn't have the uterus, it's not his call.
Until we find a way to easily to transfer the child to the guy so he can carry it, yeah that's just tough luck.
Quote from: "surly74"does the man in WV have a leg to stand on for suing the biological father based on what the law says?
he's paid and is paying CS for the kid but refuses to play alimony to his ex wife. for that I agree with him.
Precedents have to start somewhere. It's not his bio kid but he's paying the support, he should be able to get the bio dad to pay him what he's paying his ex.
I've also heard of alienation of affection lawsuits, that might also apply to cover the alimony.
Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Jmpty"So, what happens when a woman gets pregnant and the man wants the child, but the woman doesn't?
If he doesn't have the uterus, it's not his call.
If he is held responsible at an equal level to the mother for the child, shouldn't he have equal say?
Yeah, that's why we're opposed to the guy having an equal level of responsibility to the mother. ;)
Quote from: "Jmpty"Quote from: "Mermaid"Quote from: "Jmpty"So, what happens when a woman gets pregnant and the man wants the child, but the woman doesn't?
If he doesn't have the uterus, it's not his call.
If he is held responsible at an equal level to the mother for the child, shouldn't he have equal say?
No. Cause he doesn't carry the baby.
If he is held responsible at an equal level to the mother for the child, shouldn't he have equal say?[/quote]
No. Cause he doesn't carry the baby.[/quote]
Could you explain the logic behind this statement. The woman can choose to make a man responsible for a child, but a man has no say either way?
Quote from: "Jmpty"If he is held responsible at an equal level to the mother for the child, shouldn't he have equal say?
Quote from: "Mermaid"No. Cause he doesn't carry the baby.
Quote from: "Jmpty"Could you explain the logic behind this statement. The woman can choose to make a man responsible for a child, but a man has no say either way?
I did not say that.
Look. It takes two people to make a baby. One of them has the uterus.
If the woman doesn't want the baby, the decision is ultimately up to her. Nobody should ever be able to force a woman to bear a pregnancy she does not want. It SHOULD be a decision between the two parents, but in the end, it's her body.
That being said, I think that if a woman wants the baby and a man does not, he SHOULD have some say in that. If I were single and got pregnant, I would probably not be able to have an abortion, and if he didn't want any involvement with the baby, I would not fight it.
But it's not a perfect world and not everyone thinks like me. It is a slippery slope to make it legally OK for a man to leave his pregnant partner in the dust if she does not want an abortion. Since the responsibility of rearing that child will very very likely fall on her, it's her decision. That is just life as I see it.
QuoteIt is a slippery slope to make it legally OK for a man to leave his pregnant partner in the dust if she does not want an abortion.
What's so slippery about it?
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteIt is a slippery slope to make it legally OK for a man to leave his pregnant partner in the dust if she does not want an abortion.
What's so slippery about it?
Deadbeat Dads are already a huge problem in the US, (can't comment about other countries). If there is precedent to allow Dads to opt out before the baby is born, I would think it would be much more acceptable for them to change their minds and opt out later on.
I don't think we disagree on this topic, Plu.
What makes someone a 'deadbeat dad'? I need some context in order to see whether it's a problem here as well.
Quote from: "Plu"What makes someone a 'deadbeat dad'? I need some context in order to see whether it's a problem here as well.
A parent who skips out on their kids financially. Someone who refuses to pay child support to the custodial parent despite court order.
I'm not really sure how to respond to this. You seem to be having a problem with people breaking current law. That should not be hindrance to making that law better or more fair, it should be a call to enforce that law better.
No amount of changing or not changing laws will ever change the problem if that law isn't being properly enforced. These two things don't seem related at all.
I mean, as far as I can see, changing the law as we're talking here will reduce the number of 'deadbeat dads' by no longer making them criminals for not wanting a responsibility that's thrust upon them.
Quote from: "Plu"I'm not really sure how to respond to this. You seem to be having a problem with people breaking current law. That should not be hindrance to making that law better or more fair, it should be a call to enforce that law better.
No amount of changing or not changing laws will ever change the problem if that law isn't being properly enforced. These two things don't seem related at all.
I mean, as far as I can see, changing the law as we're talking here will reduce the number of 'deadbeat dads' by no longer making them criminals for not wanting a responsibility that's thrust upon them.
You are right, Plu, I am muddying the waters here. There is a distinction between law and what is right.
I should not speak about law because that isn't my thing. I can only speak about what I think is right. I don't always express myself in words so well.
Germane to the topic at hand, what I think is right: If a woman gets pregnant and does not want the baby but the father does, it's her choice ultimately. If he woman wants the baby but the father does not, she should not expect him to financially support it. If he agrees to financially support it, he should continue to do so until the kid is of age. That is my opinion.
Yeah in that case you are correct, we agree on how things should be :)
Quote from: "Plu"Yeah in that case you are correct, we agree on how things should be :)
Like I said, I don't always take the time to say things the way I mean to right off the bat. Sorry to make you extract it from me.
Incidentally, it always makes me bristle when the word "should" appears in discussions like this. A disinterested party stating what others "should" do is, well, just icky.
Glad you're willing to explain your stance. And yeah, saying how things "should be" is kinda icky. Unfortunately I'm not even a US resident, so there's little more I can do than say how I feel things ought to go in this situation.
This situation is too vague. I mean it really depends. What if it is a married couple, and the dad cheated on the mom and as a revenge, she will have an abortion (haven't seen a case like that, but anything is possible). What if it is a case in which the mom has some medical condition that could threaten her life and so she wants to abort but "daddy" doesn't see it that way and he wants her to have the baby. It really is complicated. Ultimately, I always vote that the person bearing the child (the mother) should have more saying in the issue, but that's just me
Quote from: "nanivzla"This situation is too vague. I mean it really depends. What if it is a married couple, and the dad cheated on the mom and as a revenge, she will have an abortion (haven't seen a case like that, but anything is possible). What if it is a case in which the mom has some medical condition that could threaten her life and so she wants to abort but "daddy" doesn't see it that way and he wants her to have the baby. It really is complicated. Ultimately, I always vote that the person bearing the child (the mother) should have more saying in the issue, but that's just me
Holy necro-post, Batman!