Child Support

[Bodi]

So you're opposed to adoption? Should a biological mother have to pay child support to adoptive parents?

that has nothing to do with what I said. you can't force her to give up her baby.
the baby is her's and your's. you both have to agree to adoption.

if one party doesn't then you can't put the baby up for adoption.
my post however said nothing about adoption.

I said you don't get to dump your responsibility on the rest of society.
nice strawman argument though.

He said "should" she... now, answer his question. Yes or no?

 

[GhostlyJoe]

UMMM adoptive parents sign on to take legal and financial responsibility for the child so no.... eace

What about children who aren't adopted? How many courts have forced biological mothers to pay child support to foster parents? Why not?

You're giving everyone the legal right to consent to parenthood except biological fathers.

 

[Captain America]

Men need to be able to opt out of Child Support if they do not want to be a father (legally). The woman can use her legal Constitutiinal right to birth control if she does not want to or can not support the child on her own. (Of course there are some exceptions)

Discuss.

There is a double standard, indeed. If a woman is afforded the right to pick and choose whether she wants to go into parenthood, so should the man be afforded the same option.

The man has no say even if he wants to be a parent. The man could want the child, but the woman could abort anyways, and he can't stop her.

You want gender equality? How about we start there?

 

[Bodi]

actually it isn't, however you can't actually address the argument and have to just make stuff up..

I tried... all I can say is I gave it an honest effort and tried.

 

[Bodi]

I am so tired of the unequal treatment crap.

Any adult that gets pregnant will be treated equally.

Not post conception. Males are treated like indentured servants, fined and turned into wallets for 18 years...

 

[Bodi]

What about children who aren't adopted? How many courts have forced biological mothers to pay child support to foster parents? Why not?

You're giving everyone the legal right to consent to parenthood except biological fathers.

Thank you and I hope you dont mind that I am gonna use this argument in the future

 

[Bodi]

There is a double standard, indeed. If a woman is afforded the right to pick and choose whether she wants to go into parenthood, so should the man be afforded the same option.

The man has no say even if he wants to be a parent. The man could want the child, but the woman could abort anyways, and he can't stop her.

You want gender equality? How about we start there?

I am with you til the last line. What do you mean there?

 

[Captain America]

I am with you til the last line. What do you mean there?

You know. "Gender Equality" What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Truth is, I don't even know what the hell that means. But folks are clamoring for it. I don't see how it can possibility be achieved, considering the obvious physical, emotional, and inherited evolutionary traits, but I'm willing to give it a try. The idea of equality sounds like a good one.

Equal pay for equal work. No more opening of doors or buying of flowers. No more "lady's first" gentlemanly politeness. No more "You fix supper while I'll fix the flat tire." Allow both sexes to walk away from sexual responsibilities. Currently, only the female has that option in our legal system.

I think a world like that might suck. I kinda like holding the door for the lady's, myself.

 

[ludin]

No, you're saying that women can but men can't. I agree that he shouldn't be able to force her to give up the baby. She shouldn't be able to make him an indentured servant.

he isn't. He is supporting a child that he created. why should the rest of us have to support your kid?
do you have even a remotely logical argument as to why? so far bod can't come up with one.

right in order to put up adoption both parents have to agree. if one doesn't then adoption cannot happen.
this is law.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

he isn't. He is supporting a child that he created. why should the rest of us have to support your kid?
do you have even a remotely logical argument as to why? so far bod can't come up with one.

right in order to put up adoption both parents have to agree. if one doesn't then adoption cannot happen.
this is law.

The reason we as a society have allowed women to give up their babies to adoption or foster care is because of the human carnage: babies in Dumpsters, children in squalor. We aim to reduce the suffering of unwanted children. Do you think that biological mothers should pay child support to foster parents?

 

[ludin]

There is a double standard, indeed. If a woman is afforded the right to pick and choose whether she wants to go into parenthood, so should the man be afforded the same option.

he is he has the right to not make a baby to begin with.

The man has no say even if he wants to be a parent. The man could want the child, but the woman could abort anyways, and he can't stop her.

Are you implying that men are forced to get women pregnant? I would argue 100% that you are wrong.

You want gender equality? How about we start there?

there is gender equality you have completely control over your reproduction just as much as she does.

 

[ludin]

The reason we as a society have allowed women to give up their babies to adoption or foster care is because of the human carnage: babies in Dumpsters, children in squalor. We aim to reduce the suffering of unwanted children. Do you think that biological mothers should pay child support to foster parents?

that has nothing to do with anything. so you can either address the argument or you can't.
adoption is a transference of responsibility.

as long as the kid is your ie (both of you) then both people have a responsibility to support the child.

 

[soylentgreen]

Allow me to clarify my post. Setting aside all morality and social obligation, biologically a woman is physically connected to a fetus until birth. Setting aside maternal instinct and the ingrained desire to nurture and raise offspring, a woman can physically abandon a child without consequence after birth that but not before. There is no such physical attachment for a man. He can impregnate a woman and walk away without biological consequence.
.

I do not understand how you are using the word consequence. Abandoning a child has the consequence of having others take care of it. That is the same consequence when either parent abandon the child. Are your suggesting that because an illegal action such as simply dumping the baby in a trash can and walking away can be performed then that is somehow connected to a biological imperative rather than a selfish concern for one's own needs. Your example neglects the fact that if you bring a third party such as a baby into the picture, which you did, then it is a consequence.
Women using contraceptive drugs are dealing with birth before it happens with the only consequence being that conception is unlikely. Where as abandoning a baby has a great deal of consequence whether done legally or illegally.

When someone says "her body, her choice," that's a social argument based on biological factors.

No it is not. Just by the simple fact that the same rule applies to men, or do you think men do not deserve autonomy of their own body? Biology is nothing more than a way of confirming differences not the basis of being able to have the right to decide for yourself what you do with your body. The basis for that is clearly an ethical one not biological.

A woman should be able to do with her body what she wants in a free society and shouldn't be made to serve a father or a fetus. I'm arguing that, in a free society, men should have the same rights.

Apart from the double entendre, The right you seem to be suggesting here is that if neither party feel any sense of responsibility then they have the right to abandon a child? As well you still have the inherent contradiction of asking for equality. Which is, that you have stated it is her decision.
This is the part you seem not to agree with, You are denying the fact that the male still is accountable for his own actions regardless of what the woman does or does not do.

They shouldn't be made subject to a woman's desires to be a mother. He can't force her to carry to term, and she can't force him to serve her economic needs. Right now, we have a system -- entirely artificial -- where she has full control over reproduction. He can't compel her to give birth. He can't compel her to abort. But she can compel him to labor for her economic needs.

Nor should she have to force the male to take responsibility for his own actions. This is just another attempt to shift the burden of responsibility away from the man under the guise of a right that favours only men. And not in any way that could really be called credible.
" Entirely artificial," You mean there is such a thing as a natural legal system?

 

[soylentgreen]

Let's follow this further. The argument is that a child has been brought into the world, therefore the biological father should support the child. The child's needs come first. And yet we have a adoption.
We allow a woman to give birth and then surrender her parental rights and responsibilities, making the child a ward of another family or the state. Why does a man not have that option? There is clear inequality under the law in our current system.

What about adoption? Adoption would normally be put up as an option that might satisfy both parties. Are you suggesting instead that after having exercised her right to decide the male can walk over that right and insist his right to have an adoption must happen. You did say you agree a woman has the right to make decisions.

As far as consent, again, there is clear inequality. Under our current system, the act of sex is consent to fatherhood for a man. If she gets pregnant and chooses to give birth and chooses to keep the child, he has no choice but to provide support.

Basically your argument is if he makes a mistake he should be given a free pass. If he drives a car while drunk and kills some one it was an accident he obviously did not mean it so not his fault. Gets drunk and fathers a child, not his fault, he did not mean it.

And if some woman wants to make him pay for his mistake, well that is just a clear violation of every american males right to do stupid ****.

Equality and fairness are nothing more than a couple of buzz words to you to use when you think it sounds cool.

There are two ways to create equality under the law (a constitutional right in the United States): outlaw abortion and force pregnant women to carry to term or allow men a legal means to terminate parental responsibilities. Our current system is unjust

Where as the alternatives presented are ridiculous.

Outlaw abortion and once again you have thrown the idea of a women right to autonomy out the window. Or continue the misogynist philosophy that men need take no responsibility for the consequences of there actions.

 

[notquiteright]

Since you are ignoring the actual argument about equal post conception rights regarding a say in parenthood i will simply point out that I didn't talk about child support because I responded to your post which never mentioned it in the first place.

And I responded to that fail of an argument- you attempt to jump in at a rather arbitrary point in the situation. like the drunk claiming he shouldn't get charged with DUI if days later he can blow clean... :doh

No judge looks at so tiny a portion of the event to declare some 'unequal' right.

So you paying child support??? eace

 

[notquiteright]

What about children who aren't adopted? How many courts have forced biological mothers to pay child support to foster parents? Why not? You're giving everyone the legal right to consent to parenthood except biological fathers.

Any parent, doesn't matter if a penis is attached, can be garnished to pay for a child in the foster program. Key feature is the ability to pay and many dead beat dads go to GREAT lengths to appear unable to pay for what they helped create.

Simple fact of YOUR failed argument is you are clueless about who has to support a child so you just fling poo and hope some sticks... eace

 

[GhostlyJoe]

What about adoption? Adoption would normally be put up as an option that might satisfy both parties. Are you suggesting instead that after having exercised her right to decide the male can walk over that right and insist his right to have an adoption must happen. You did say you agree a woman has the right to make decisions.

Basically your argument is if he makes a mistake he should be given a free pass. If he drives a car while drunk and kills some one it was an accident he obviously did not mean it so not his fault. Gets drunk and fathers a child, not his fault, he did not mean it.

And if some woman wants to make him pay for his mistake, well that is just a clear violation of every american males right to do stupid ****.

Equality and fairness are nothing more than a couple of buzz words to you to use when you think it sounds cool.

Where as the alternatives presented are ridiculous.

Outlaw abortion and once again you have thrown the idea of a women right to autonomy out the window. Or continue the misogynist philosophy that men need take no responsibility for the consequences of there actions.

I appreciate the time you've taken to address my argument line by line. I don't have that kind of time right now. I outlined my argument as best I could in my first post. Let me just say that I favor allowing women to choose abortion, to choose adoption, and to continue foster care for children now legally abandoned by their mothers. Outlawing those things would have the effect of increasing human suffering. But reproductive rights need to be extended to fathers. That's where our law is lacking. As it is now, a woman can choose to terminate legal responsibility for her children. Men are not afforded that option.

 

[notquiteright]

A say in being a parent that will 1.[support the kid]. She obviously has a say and that is right. She can abort no matter what against his wishes or she can keep the baby against his wishes. She has 100% procreation power. The argument that scares so many into becoming lying Straw Man filled cry babies is this. 2.[He should be able to refuse being a support giving parent] just like she can. As long as there are no complications or strange circumstances... she notifies she is pregnant and he makes a decision within an accepted time frame. Before 10 weeks for example. She then can make her choice to abort or to keep the kid and raise it herself. The counter arguments as i have seen have been stupid. Guys will run around impregnating women willy nilly... the poor women. Well i give women more respect than these people. Use protection. Sleep with guys you know. Etc. Guys should too...Another is... he made his choice once he came. That does not address the inequality of post conception choice. Also... a counter argument that is logical is she made her choice to have the baby once she slept with him... but we know only pro.lifers use that and yhe same people arguing that it is fair for him but not for her are hypocrites and often feminist raving sexists. Anyway... thats the basic version.

Here is your 'explanation' of your POV. TWICE you refer to support for the offspring... :roll:

So ya did bring up child support and then ducked away to some 'post birth inequality' which centers on supporting the child.

You'd like to ignore all events prior to after birth court dates but the simple fact is many events the man had control over occurred. ignoring a bus's brakes and then claiming the accident was unavoidable isn't a good defense, neither works before a judge... eace

Oh i am nooooo prolifer, i believe in legal abortions but as the woman's right to choose. ya don't want kids- keep it wrapped. Why is that concept so difficult to understand??

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Any parent, doesn't matter if a penis is attached, can be garnished to pay for a child in the foster program. Key feature is the ability to pay and many dead beat dads go to GREAT lengths to appear unable to pay for what they helped create.

Simple fact of YOUR failed argument is you are clueless about who has to support a child so you just fling poo and hope some sticks... eace

That's not true. Look up Safe Haven laws. You're talking about situation in which authorities have removed children from the home and placed the children in foster care. Also, don't tray to claim that your arguments are gender neutral and then throw around terms like "deadbeat dad."

 

[soylentgreen]

I appreciate the time you've taken to address my argument line by line. I don't have that kind of time right now. I outlined my argument as best I could in my first post. Let me just say that I favor allowing women to choose abortion, to choose adoption, and to continue foster care for children now legally abandoned by their mothers. Outlawing those things would have the effect of increasing human suffering. But reproductive rights need to be extended to fathers. That's where our law is lacking. As it is now, a woman can choose to terminate legal responsibility for her children. Men are not afforded that option.

By extending reproductive rights to fathers i assume you mean that men will be able to get pregnant. Which if so, then that option to a right will immediately and without any debate by male politicians be passed into law. Or is this just another example of wanting the right just because another has a right rather than the right reflects a need.

 

[year2late]

If you want to base law on biological differences between men and women, then you're not for equality. I understand why you're getting frustrated. Because you know, rationally, that your argument is flawed. The cognitive dissonance hurts now, but you seem like a reasonable person. You'll come around.

It is not based on equality. It is based on reality.

 

[year2late]

Not post conception. Males are treated like indentured servants, fined and turned into wallets for 18 years...

Did you get woman pregnant accidentally?

Did you have options prior to conception?

Again, you are whining since a woman takes 100 percent of the physiological risk of pregnancy and childbirth.

And as a single mother I can say my wallet was open 24/7 365 days a year.

 

[Bodi]

And I responded to that fail of an argument- you attempt to jump in at a rather arbitrary point in the situation. like the drunk claiming he shouldn't get charged with DUI if days later he can blow clean... :doh

No judge looks at so tiny a portion of the event to declare some 'unequal' right.

So you paying child support??? eace

You compare me to a drunk and then ask a personal question?

How about you?

 

[Bodi]

Did you get woman pregnant accidentally?

Did you have options prior to conception?

Again, you are whining since a woman takes 100 percent of the physiological risk of pregnancy and childbirth.

And as a single mother I can say my wallet was open 24/7 365 days a year.

When i see deflection of valid questions as "whiney" i literally see stupidity and one that lost the debate hands down.

 

[Bodi]

Here is your 'explanation' of your POV. TWICE you refer to support for the offspring... :roll:

So ya did bring up child support and then ducked away to some 'post birth inequality' which centers on supporting the child.

You'd like to ignore all events prior to after birth court dates but the simple fact is many events the man had control over occurred. ignoring a bus's brakes and then claiming the accident was unavoidable isn't a good defense, neither works before a judge... eace

Oh i am nooooo prolifer, i believe in legal abortions but as the woman's right to choose. ya don't want kids- keep it wrapped. Why is that concept so difficult to understand??

Address the argument of post conception rights as they pertain to child support or else I wont be answering your trolloing.