mens rights

texaschickeee · Seductively Sassy

mens rights

zap · texaschickeee translator

Well...you shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

In no way do I condone irresponsibility...and I don't agree with abortion in most all cases either. But if the guy is on the hook to pay for everything...why should he not have a say in what happens??

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

These people act that it is wrong to ask a man to pay for a child he made. He will lose. Maybe 25 years in the future he might win. Right now there are still too many bible thimping jesus freaks around to let something like this win. But, it is seeing the light of day, which probably wouldn't have happened 25 years ago.

My opinion is simple. Wrap the evil doer up. I am sorry men. If I had an organ on my body that spat out baby making love juice I would have to muzzle it. Have it removed or something. I think they are nasty and only deal with it cause my husband has one. lmao.

zap · texaschickeee translator

So what does that have to do with ANYthing?

If the laws are so screwed up and skewed to one side (as they are)...why shouldn't it be challenged and changed?

Why should the woman who is a EQUAL PARTY IN MAKING THE BABY....have all the rights and yet no responsibilities to the father? It is after all his child too.

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

It has everything to do with it. He's in this situation cause he's irresponsible. He knocked her up(yes I know she was part of it too). Now she can have it, abort it, or give it up for adoption. Abortion is very painfull I hear and can have long term affects and cause complications with future pregnancy's. Adoption is great, but who wants to carry a child for 10 months just to give it away? I think having it is the best thing and the daddy should have to share some of the cost. But if he was making that big of a deal about it I would tell him to go to hell.

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

It has everything to do with it. He's in this situation cause he's irresponsible. He knocked her up(yes I know she was part of it too).

so how is HER part of this any LESS IRRESPONSIBLE?

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

zap wrote:

Badmofo wrote:
It has everything to do with it. He's in this situation cause he's irresponsible. He knocked her up(yes I know she was part of it too).

so how is HER part of this any LESS IRRESPONSIBLE?

I didn't give any degrees of responsibility. They are equal. How the fuck did you get that out of that? She's taking her responsibility. She is the prime desicion maker cause it is her body. How would you like it if you were pregnant and really wanted a baby and I told you you had to abort it? And yes I know you are male.

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

zap wrote: Badmofo wrote: It has everything to do with it. He's in this situation cause he's irresponsible. He knocked her up(yes I know she was part of it too). so how is HER part of this any LESS IRRESPONSIBLE? I didn't give any degrees of responsibility. They are equal. How the fuck did you get that out of that? She's taking her responsibility. She is the prime desicion maker cause it is her body. How would you like it if you were pregnant and really wanted a baby and I told you you had to abort it? And yes I know you are male.

My opinion is simple. Wrap the evil doer up. I am sorry men. If I had an organ on my body that spat out baby making love juice I would have to muzzle it. Have it removed or something. I think they are nasty and only deal with it cause my husband has one.

This is where I got the fact that you are placing all the responsibility of a pregnancy on the male.

If SHE wants to be the 'prime decision maker' why should he have to pay for HER decision?

The reverse is ALSO TRUE....why should she be able to decide to abort a pregnancy without his participation

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

Because once again it is her body. We didn't choose to be the childbearing half of the equation but that's how it is. We give men say so over our bod(ies) and we are doomed.

-- Edited by Badmofo at 10:08, 2006-03-10

-- Edited by Buttercup at 10:16, 2006-03-10

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

Because once again it is her body. We didn't choose to be the childbearing half of the equation but that's how it is. We give men say so over our that guys and we are doomed.

We didn't choose not to be. So what does that have to do with it. A female is absolutely just as responsible as the guy is.

Or don't you believe that "no" means no?

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

well I couldn't edit it should have said "say so over our bod(ies)"

-- Edited by Buttercup at 10:17, 2006-03-10

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

Ok why when I type that guys' does it come up "that guys"

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

Ok mods it's hard to have a debate when words pop up as other words.

Unfortunately at the moment there is a filter on the word bod(ie), and it will always appear as "that guy," due to a previous controversy. I'll see if we can get that changed. Until then, use my spelling example or another of your choice to express your thoughts. Thanks - Buttercup

-- Edited by Buttercup at 10:20, 2006-03-10

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

So what are you saying Zap? That cause you got the penis and I have a vagina you can tell me what to do with my body? Just cause you knock me up? That is ridiculous and that is what I think they are trying to accomplish by talking about any kind of court case. I think the lines are too thinly drawn and it would have to be a case to case babsis which is just too difficult too manage for our government.

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

So what are you saying Zap?

I am saying that women are EQUALLY responsible.

While most every one agrees that a guy should take his responsibility and support his kids....he should also have equal rights in that regard.

That cause you got the penis and I have a vagina you can tell me what to do with my body?

No. I am saying that you made the decision to be a 'co-conspiritor' if you will....when you did NOT SAY NO. Therefore if pregnancy results....you should not have any more rights than the guy does. And if you insist on doing so "because it is YOUR body" (yet how you justify that in the light that it is all the guy's fault you got pregnant I don't know) why should he have to pay for YOUR decisions?

Just cause you knock me up?

Where were you when you got pregnant? Did YOU forget how to say NO?

That is ridiculous and that is what I think they are trying to accomplish by talking about any kind of court case.

Of course it is rediculous. But the ridiculous part is that no matter what the guy does....he has no say...and still has to pay for everything as if it were ALL his doing. This is absolutely absurd.

What they are trying to accomplish is to point out the idiocy of the current state of the issue.

I think the lines are too thinly drawn and it would have to be a case to case babsis which is just too difficult too manage for our government.

I dunno....seems like you are pretty happy with the way they have botched it up thus far to get it to the point that it is in now. (where gals have all the say, blame everything on the guys, and make them pay for everything too, then if they don't...have them put in jail so nothing gets accomplished)

-- Edited by zap at 10:32, 2006-03-10

Date: Mar 10, 2006

I see several seperate issues, that have a common link.

Everyone has heard of the extenuating circumstances of rape, incest... and in this whole debate, I am under the impression that we were talking about couples that engaged in concentual intercourse which resulted in pregnancy. Somebody correct me if I missed something here??? PREGNANCY CAN BE AVOIDED

(1) fertilization of an egg by a sperm. If that doesnt happen none of this is an issue. It takes 2 people to do this... individual responsibility of each person to make sure that their half of the fertility issue/equation is a zero. Sometimes chemicals, pills, tied tubes, condoms fail. shit happens and sometimes through no fault of anyone. But if BOTH parties are making sure that their boy is covered and not relying on the other person, if one method fails the other is in place to prevent fertilization.

Guys, BADMOFO was right on the muzzle that baby. Steralize or wear your rain coat. ABsolutely bottom line that is YOUR responsibility to make sure those sperm dont make a successful trip. It's not the recipient of your sperm's responsibility... it is your responsibility. If you dont want babies.. bills...and the RESPONSIBILITIES that go with it... control your body and what it produces. what did Barny Fiffe say??? "Nip it... nip it... nip it in the bud."

Gals... same lecture I gave the guys.... steralize or birth control (make sure your eggs arent released, &/or any that are released are infertile, &/or, make sure any contact sperm die.)

(2) Rights of a women regarding her body is fundamentaly greater than the rights of an unborn child.

in the choice between mother and baby... one or the other will die... they always save the mother. I'm sure what it is, but there must be a reasoning to this.... I have an extremely hard time concidering babies as disposable.. and that must be a hell of a choice to have to make?????? is it because the mother was there first? that the loss of a baby is less than the loss of an established mother? Is it because of the "rights of a women and her body"? I'm at a loss on this one???.

Are pregnancies concidered a "condition" of the women, rather than being concidered as a human being with rights as well? Because the baby is a part of her during pregnancy, does she have "ownership" of what is growing inside of her and of her ????

"Rights of a women regarding her body is fundamentaly greater than the rights of an unborn child" Right or wrong this is current reality. Women are the only ones that can birth children, there is no other way of shifting this . she has 2 choices.. birth or death of the fertilized egg. [if there were any way for guys to sit in the hot seat of pregnancy and delivery,.and have the experience, depleation, pain, long term effects, health issues, lothe hormonal rollercoaster of pregnancy and all the side effects of that... loss of income, loss of employment, additional financial burden and cost.... if there were a way to shift the fertilized egg into the guy this might be a completely different conversation with other options.]

In some cases the "Rights of a women regarding her body is fundamentaly greater than the rights of an unborn child" is extremely justified, in othercases it is a tool to abuse and inflict damage on other people, and in yet other cases it is just a cop-out rather than accepting responsibility for irresponsable and selfish behave.

My reasons may be different than zap's and I am not speaking for him, but I agree with zap on no abortion as a general rule.

(3) the responsibility to not be a burden to society, by BOTH mother and father of any child.

BAck to being responsible for your actions. You created a baby, it is up to you to be responsible and PROVIDE for the care, wellbeing, health, of that baby. Part of it is monitary, part of it is nurturing. A child is NOT something to have a power struggle over... put the welfare of the baby FIRST. (Be adult...put the welfare of the child BEFOR your own???)

If you are big enough to play with the big dogs and participate in sex, you are big enough to be held completely accountable and responsible for all of the outcomes of your actions. GAls, don't whine about having to go through pregnancy and delivery because you didnt have your bases covered... weither or not HE did... you are still responsible for making sure YOUR bases are covered. It's your body.. Prevention helps protect it. Guys.. don't whine about having to financially support your kid. weither or not SHE did... you are still responsible for making sure YOUR bases are covered...it's seed, it's your wallet..Prevention helps protect them.

Financial responsibility. Men and women are not equal in the receivership of wages, even when they do the same quality work. Court ordered financial worksheets take into account the ability of each person, other kids that are being provided for, the financial gain of each person. THere have been massive steps in the positive direction to make this division of child responsibilities more equitable to the resources or each person.

In today's society, often women still get paid less for doing the same job with the same quality as men. That was based on the fundamental society preface that MEN were the financial providers of the "family" while women were the nurturers. THat may just take time to fix. Until the women get paid equally for the same work and quality, then guys should be held accountable for a greater portion of the childsupprt and medical coverage necessary for the child.

If you are the biological parent of a child, you have the responsibility to make sure you are taking care of that child or providing the means by which the child can be provided for. OH and by the way..... the amount of child support $ ordered isn't even a fraction of cost of what the active parent invests on a daily basis. That fact is frequently misunderstood and overlooked.

(4) rights of both &/or either/or father and mother to declare they want to be involved in their child's life. The mother can give up her baby after birth, and give up her involvement in the baby's life. So can the biological father.

That is not the same #3 and is frequently confused with #3.

I just got off a really long shift... if my thoughts aren't all quite cohesive, I appologize. ANd any one want to disagree with me on anything... hey go for it. BAcking up your position with reasoning helps others understand why you are taking the stand you are.. and might change opinions in your direction. That is what debating is all about.

Have at it group... catch ya in a few days.

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

zap wrote:

I dunno....seems like you are pretty happy with the way they have botched it up thus far to get it to the point that it is in now. (where gals have all the say, blame everything on the guys, and make them pay for everything too, then if they don't...have them put in jail so nothing gets accomplished)-- Edited by zap at 10:32, 2006-03-10

Ok well first off Zap, I have 2 kids, One I don't get child support for and have never went after him to get it. He said he didn't want to deal with a child so I left and have raised him all alone. And I have zero complaints. Yes in a perfect world everyone would sit and work out their differences, but we know better. It's just like I said, " I think it would have to be on a case to case babsis and our government can't handle that." So you go messin with stuff and it gets all screwed up. Leave it alone. Walk around sticking you dick into everything that "doesn't say no" and you are asking for trouble. So in my eyes don't cry when you get it. Put up and shut up.

KatScratch · Bad kitty....in the best possible way

Some how I just knew this would end up a thread here..... And since it is and it opens a variety of "topics"....I will add my thoughts....

In my opinion: A woman has the right to make decisions about her body. I DO NOT think abortion should be allowed as a form of birth control though. There are woman out there that "oops" and run out and get an abortion.....I don't agree with that. But there are rape/molestation cases and I believe that they should be allowed to abort those babies rather than carry the "reminder" of the incident for 9 months and put it up for adoption. What child would want to know they were born of a violent act or incest or molestation??? Talk about mind fuckin some one! And unless that woman was raped/molested, she is 1/2 the reason she is pregnant. If she decides to keep the baby and not tell the boyfriend, then I DO NOT believe he should be able to be held "responsible" for that child in any way at any time of that child's life. She can't just change her mind after the kid is 4 or 5 years old and then go back and pop him for back support, etc. That is bullshit on her part and should not be allowed!

But if she decides to tell the boyfriend (and after paternity testing proves it is his) then I believe he should be "responsible" for the child. But part of that responsibilty is being involved (ie decisions) with the child, not just financial aid. Child support has gotten way out of control in the amount it deems "necessary" to care for a child. There are guys out there paying hundreds of dollars a week in support to a woman that makes the same or more money than they do! That is bullshit! I have kids and it doesn't take hundreds of dollars a week to care for them. I know women collecting thousands in support a month that don't even work, they "make" enough off of support to just sit on their asses and take, take, take! That shows me there is a problem with the system!

There are also women out there that tell the boyfriend and don't want the boyfriends "help". They would rather just do it on their own. Which works for some guys, but there are a few that want to be involved anyway and have a hard time getting any "rights". They have to file paternity suits (which are designed for women and not geared toward the man filing) and it makes it difficult for them and the system really doesn't know how to help these men without "fucking them over" in one way or another! Seen it happen.....the courts are clueless as to how to help a man get visitation, etc. when the woman doesn't file first??? Do I think this case mentioned in the thread will get anywhere? No, but it will spark controversey and maybe later changes....But this is just my opinion....

zap · texaschickeee translator

SCARECROW.......

For the most part...I agree with you. (not completely in all the details...but primarily I agree with your point of view)

btw....I don't know where you work...but EVERYwhere I've EVER worked...gals that did the same job were paid as much if not more. <shrug>

-- Edited by zap at 11:55, 2006-03-10

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

Ok well first off Zap, I have 2 kids, One I don't get child support for and have never went after him to get it. He said he didn't want to deal with a child so I left and have raised him all alone. And I have zero complaints. Yes in a perfect world everyone would sit and work out their differences, but we know better.

I wholeheartedly commend you for being the responsible one of the two. I think you made the right choice for your child.

Since you have made an honest personal expression of viewpoint...I will give you one of my own. I have been on the hook for support legally...for a child that was not my own. Yet I had no rights what so ever...even though I raised him (custodial parent) til he was 3 years old...without support from his mother. When she won the paternaty...although I was still liable legally for support...I was never allowed to see him again.

It's just like I said, " I think it would have to be on a case to case babsis and our government can't handle that." So you go messin with stuff and it gets all screwed up. Leave it alone.

We disagree here. Whether you like or dislike our government...this particular situation is messed up now and should be fixed so that it is at least more equatable for BOTH parties.

Walk around sticking you dick into everything that "doesn't say no" and you are asking for trouble. So in my eyes don't cry when you get it. Put up and shut up.

When did I say the guy was not absolutely and completly AS responsible as the mother should be? I have news for you plush...or bad..... GUYS CAN SAY NO ALSO.

BUT, just because a pregnancy happens...accidental or otherwise...BOTH are completely and EQUALLY responsible. Therefore, they should share EQUAL rights in the decisions.

The only crying and whining I hear is when a pregnancy happens and the gal wants to call all the shots, have all the rights, and make the guy pay for everything...and blame it all on him too.

KatScratch · Bad kitty....in the best possible way

Until you get to the "financial responsibility" part.....I think guys are paying WAY too much in support these days. I have a lot of guy friends and I have heard the numbers...it's bullshit! The guys are getting raked over the coals by women and the courts. I spoke up at a child support hearing I was at and explained I didn't need the grossly exaggerated sum they were deeming neccessary for child support....they were dumb founded! I did my research ahead of time and got them to reduce it to the state minimum. The court refused to disreguard the child support order all together, but they did reduce it to the state minimum which is $25 a week verses $125 he was supposed to pay! I am one of the few women out there who believe that the child support system is seriously screwed up! I don't know how it can be fixed, but it needs fixed. Guys SHOULD NOT be paying hundreds of dollars a week per child.....it should be considered a crime! Definately not a "woman's right".....

zap · texaschickeee translator

KAT....

I think you are right on target. I agree with your position.

(wow...how did that happen? )

KatScratch · Bad kitty....in the best possible way

Opinions...everyone has one.....sometimes peeps agree with one????

*note to self......Zap agreed with one of my opinions.....who knew?????*

zap · texaschickeee translator

KatScratch wrote:

Until you get to the "financial responsibility" part.....I think guys are paying WAY too much in support these days. I have a lot of guy friends and I have heard the numbers...it's bullshit! The guys are getting raked over the coals by women and the courts. I spoke up at a child support hearing I was at and explained I didn't need the grossly exaggerated sum they were deeming neccessary for child support....they were dumb founded! I did my research ahead of time and got them to reduce it to the state minimum. The court refused to disreguard the child support order all together, but they did reduce it to the state minimum which is $25 a week verses $125 he was supposed to pay! I am one of the few women out there who believe that the child support system is seriously screwed up! I don't know how it can be fixed, but it needs fixed. Guys SHOULD NOT be paying hundreds of dollars a week per child.....it should be considered a crime! Definately not a "woman's right".....

Let me tell you about two instances I am aware of...both I prolly should not have knowledge of....but I do.

1) Divorce attorney just says goodby to a brand new female client who wants to divorce her husband. As soon as she walks out the door...he looks at me and say...so, now I have to figure out how much I have to leave him. I looked at him stunned. He said I have to let him keep one vehicle...no matter how beat up it is...and I have to leave him a bed...and something to buy groceries with. The rest is fair game.

2) Conference between judge and attorneys in a divorce. Temporary orders are that he pays support for the child that is his and they each pay their own living expenses. Her attorney tells the judge that she has been complaining wanting the husband to start paying for some of the bills at the residence where she, his son, and two of her children from a previous marriage reside (and now a live-in girlfriend of one of her kids too) mind you...she was getting support for the other kids too.

Judge asked her attorney..."Is she working?" Her attorney says "No judge". "Why not?" says the judge.... "Because she has 4 kids and doesnt want to your honor" says her attorney.

-- Edited by zap at 12:07, 2006-03-10

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

I agree kat. The child support system is screwed. That's one of the main reasons I don't mess with it. I have friends who get it and they base it on the guys income. That is not the issue that is at the top of this board. The issue is allowing a man say so in if a woman should abort, carry or give up the baby. And I think that is a big mistake.

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

zap wrote:

KatScratch wrote:

Judge asked her attorney..."Is she working?" Her attorney says "No judge". "Why not?" says the judge.... "Because she has 4 kids and doesnt want to your honor" says her attorney.-- Edited by zap at 12:07, 2006-03-10

I think that can be taken any way. I don't work cause I don't want to. I don't want to give up what I would be making for childcare. Quality childcare is expensive. I would rather stay home and raise my kids. I am sorry, but raising 4 kids is one hell of a job.

-- Edited by Badmofo at 12:11, 2006-03-10

zap · texaschickeee translator

no...not exatly.

The original issue really is about fathers having equal rights.

If the father of the child wants nothing to do with it, and the mother says "NO...my body!" Why should he have to pay support....

when if the other way around and HE WANTS the baby and she doesn't...she doesn't even have to notify him that she is going to have an abortion.

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

zap wrote:

no...not exatly.
The original issue really is about fathers having equal rights.

If the father of the child wants nothing to do with it, and the mother says "NO...my body!" Why should he have to pay support....
when if the other way around and HE WANTS the baby and she doesn't...she doesn't even have to notify him that she is going to have an abortion.

And once again it comes down to a case by case basis which would cause some other bullshit controversy. That's why in MY OPINION, leave it alone.

KatScratch · Bad kitty....in the best possible way

In response to Zap's "lawyer" example - That's what I'm talkin about! I know too many women sitting on their butts at home, refusing to work, but collecting outrageous amounts of support instead. It's wrong! There are sitters to watch children while you work, kids eventually go to school all day.....why won't the judge make them work? They make the man find a job to pay support! Why not make her get a job? It's just one of the many "things" that needs fixed!

-- Edited by KatScratch at 12:17, 2006-03-10

zap · texaschickeee translator

Badmofo wrote:

I think that can be taken any way. I don't work cause I don't want to. I don't want to give up what I would be making for childcare. Quality childcare is expensive. I would rather stay home and raise my kids. I am sorry, but raising 4 kids is one hell of a job.-- Edited by Badmofo at 12:11, 2006-03-10

I absolutely agree with doing that. If you can swing it...I think it is the ethically superior position as well. And I insisted that my ex stayed home at least until our son was old enough to intellegently articulate what happened when we were not with him.

But, for sake of argument...what if the father says..no...I will take care of my child...YOU go work. Would your position be the same?

What about the situation when a guy is paying support and looses his job through no fault of his own.... he is told either find another job and pay the support or go to jail. Forget going back to school and retraining for a new carreer...I KNOW of a similar situation and the guy was told by the child support people that "If you are paying support you have no right to go to school. You must work and pay the support"

(btw...not just wanting to piss in your cornflakes)

-- Edited by zap at 12:17, 2006-03-10