Abortion

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

RE: Abortion

zap · texaschickeee translator

entre new wrote:

zap wrote: Reality however is that just because a particular instance of something bad, or good, happened....does not taint the whole issue. It's hard not to use particular instances because they're a big part of what forms our opinions.

I know.... That is why these type of debates normally turn nasty. Not too many people can logically look at the issues without using emotion to argue with. Especially from an intended morally correct position.

To be honest with this...you must discount ALL of your emotion based on your experiences and look at the issue separate from them. Then compare the two and realize that they are actually two separate issues. One, the morrally correct position that you define...the second is how you personally feel about it and possibly try and justify any descepancy.

SB · ohh, canada

So to get this straight, what I am hearing is that men are to have no decision over they half of the DNA pool.

And if they part take in sex with a woman, then they must do so knowing that they may end up pay child support for 18+ years? (Because in many cases the support goes on through post secondary education)

So what I am hearing is that men have no rights, but as a species we can't exisit with them. Just curious how that is fair and just?

Should there "sex" contracts then?

And should the man be able to petition the courts to have custody of the baby and then be able to adopt it out?

(dads make up 15% of single parents)

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

SB wrote:

So to get this straight, what I am hearing is that men are to have no decision over they half of the DNA pool.
They do when they decide whether to get their dicks out. The woman takes equal responsibility when she accepts said dick.

A man should be able to petition for half custody.

zap · texaschickeee translator

well half custody is not a realistic option either, just like petition for custody and giving the child up for adoption is not.

I think it was Kat that said a woman shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If you go along with the "MY BODY" argument...then you accept ALL the responsibility for what happens with YOUR body.

My issue is that the woman has superior legal rights to make all of the decisions. If she alone decides to keep the baby....maybe a change of position from her promise to the guy pre-sex....he is legally obligated to pay with no option. She has no risk other than that of childbirth.

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

zap wrote:

well half custody is not a realistic option either, just like petition for custody and giving the child up for adoption is not. I think it was Kat that said a woman shouldn't be able to have it both ways. If you go along with the "MY BODY" argument...then you accept ALL the responsibility for what happens with YOUR body. My issue is that the woman has superior legal rights to make all of the decisions. If she alone decides to keep the baby....maybe a change of position from her promise to the guy pre-sex....he is legally obligated to pay with no option. She has no risk other than that of childbirth.
Zap, she has the risk of financial hardship for life as does the guy. Look at my bank account and see.

I don't go along with the "my body" argument. It's not an issue of "my body" but of "OUR baby".

What you suggest could only work if we signed contracts before sex. Maybe that would be a good idea.

Plush · Make believe Slutty Zombie/Official TOP Drama Queen

Hijackers

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

I thought of something else. I'm always hearing how minority babies are not readily adopted and spend much of their life in foster homes. What if the mother decides to have the baby and want to keep it, but the father with his 50% right of choice chooses adoption. Does he have the right to choose that kind of life for the child?

zap · texaschickeee translator

entre new wrote:

I thought of something else. I'm always hearing how minority babies are not readily adopted and spend much of their life in foster homes. What if the mother decides to have the baby and want to keep it, but the father with his 50% right of choice chooses adoption. Does he have the right to choose that kind of life for the child?

Ok...that highlights my point. That position comes from the viewpoint that the woman has superior rights.

To make it clearer....why should the woman have the right to choose differently?

This does belong in the other thread....plush is right....

proudcowife · T.O.P. PIMP

ok personally i feel if the father doesnt want to be a father yet the mother wants the baby then the father should sign over parental rights becasue he would no longer be responsible. Now say my hubby and I split up and he didnt want to pay support he wanted to adopt her out id be like fuk you ... because when we were together he loved being a daddy and made that choice to do so therefore he is responsible for his child. He should have thought about that 2 yrs ago instead of being a part of her life then and not wanting to now.

zap · texaschickeee translator

I think you are absolutely right PCW....... changing your mind in the middle is not like stating your opinion at the onset and sticking to it.

Besides....lets not forget at that point...the KIDS NEED TO BE CONSIDERED!

SB · ohh, canada

entre new wrote:

What if the mother decides to have the baby and want to keep it, but the father with his 50% right of choice chooses adoption. Does he have the right to choose that kind of life for the child?

Why does she? As it stands now the male half has no rights until the baby is born.

So, what if the male was allowed to adopt out "half" or his parental rights? Could the man then enlist an adoption agency to find someone that only wants to parent on a part-time basis and is willing to pay the "support" payments.

At this point with societies failure to be responsible for one's self the only solutions apears to be contracts.

My personal opinion, and I am little more socialistic being a Canadian, is that the childs needs must come first! However that being said, if a guy can some how express his desire to have the pregnancy terminated before a predetermined date and the woman refuses to terminate, he then should have drastically reduce child support.

Side note:

Now PCW, I'm only talking about men's rights with regards to abortion and child support. If your ex left after being a father, then what I'd would say about that, would even test Photo's liberal language restrictions and get I booted off the board.

There is no quiting on your kids.

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

zap wrote:

entre new wrote: I thought of something else. I'm always hearing how minority babies are not readily adopted and spend much of their life in foster homes. What if the mother decides to have the baby and want to keep it, but the father with his 50% right of choice chooses adoption. Does he have the right to choose that kind of life for the child? Ok...that highlights my point. That position comes from the viewpoint that the woman has superior rights. To make it clearer....why should the woman have the right to choose differently? This does belong in the other thread....plush is right....

Huh, how does this support your point? I'm saying that if the mother wants to keep the baby, and the father wants it to be put up for adoption, and it can't be adopted because of its race, how is that right? Granted, the father only had half say in the decision, but if the woman can't keep the baby without child support he actually has the ability to make 100% of the decision. The father effectively absolved himself of responsibility by condeming the child to a life of foster homes.

I'll post any further comments in the other thread, but I did want to ask you to clarify this.

-- Edited by entre new at 22:17, 2006-03-21

eltsacon · I have seen USofA's big balls

Boy, I am going to leave this one soooooo alone!!!

eltsacon · I have seen USofA's big balls

Though, I am glad to see you back in action zap. Missed your,,,,,,,,, whatever it was.

SlowDownThere · usda prime

entre new wrote:

SDT, if you look at further posts, I also say I believe we should take care of each other. I was just trying to point out to USofA that if we refuse to help single women support their children because we disagree with their morality, how can we then support gay men who become disabled from AIDS? If we don't think we should help them, because they used poor planning in sex, it should go both ways.

I do think same sex people should be able to marry in civil marriages, and I sympathize with what you're describing. But I think you took my quote out of context. Unplanned pregnancies and STDs can only be 100% percent ended if we stop having sex outside of marriage, and how many people are willing to do that?

Entre New:

Sounds like we are on the same page then. Thanks for the reply.

SDT

SlowDownThere · usda prime

I'm all for men's rights and all. I'm for men having a decision in all child rearing decisions. But this debate about child support misses the point somewhat.

It's not just about what is fair of the man. It's also about whats fair for the child.
Why should the child suffer jusut because his mother, lied, tricked, duped the man.

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

SlowDownThere wrote:

It's not just about what is fair of the man. It's also about whats fair for the child.
I agree.

cd3kd · Yummy

I feel that the responsibility rests with both sides. If you don't want kids but are fucking stupid that you don't use birth control then be ready to pay for your stupidity for the rest of your life. The child had no choice in the matter and should not be discarded like an old chew toy.

Now here's a question for you all...what if the woman want's to have an abortion but the man wants the baby? Should the woman then be forced to have the child.

entre new · Et tu, Brute?

I already expressed my opinion on that, so I'll shut up for once.

SB · ohh, canada

cd3kd wrote:

I feel that the responsibility rests with both sides. If you don't want kids but are fucking stupid that you don't use birth control then be ready to pay for your stupidity for the rest of your life. The child had no choice in the matter and should not be discarded like an old chew toy. Now here's a question for you all...what if the woman want's to have an abortion but the man wants the baby? Should the woman then be forced to have the child.

I think it comes back to the "It's my body" arguement. And if the woman was determined how would you prevent it? Jail her? We can't even do that to addicts!

cd3kd · Yummy

SB wrote:

I think it comes back to the "It's my body" arguement. And if the woman was determined how would you prevent it? Jail her? We can't even do that to addicts!

Yeah it was more of a philosophical question.