If you are pro-choice, do you think a man should have the choice not to pay alimony?

[LadyCaptain]

This is something I'll never understanding around current laws, in the US at least. If a mother doesn't want to become a parent she doesn't have to. She can kill a child and walk away with a clean slate.

Flip it around and it's a completely different story. If a man doesn't want to become a parent, tough luck. The woman can decide to keep the baby and the man is legally forced to pay alimony. That's a direct contradiction to pro-"choice". You're only letting the woman have a choice while completely ignoring the choice of a man.

It's also a violation of the "my body, my choice" argument. Forcing a man to pay alimony is dictating what he can and can't do with this body. That alimony would come from the effort of his labour. His hands flipping burgers. He'd likely have to take up more hours at work in order to be able to afford the alimony payments and maintain the same standard of living for himself. That's a violation of his bodily autonomy, is it not?

It's hard to deny that women get the better end of the deal when it comes to sex and parent planning. It really makes it impossible to swallow the whole "male privilege" myth.

What are your thoughts?

First of all, you don't understand US law. A woman doesn't have a right to kill her child and walk away. Happy to help with that.

On the topic of alimony - I personally never needed it as I am a worker and take pride in my job. Child support on the other hand was a godsend when my girl was little. Child care is expensive and the child support I got allowed me to work so that I didn't need alimony. When my ex-husband had hard times and fell into arrears, I waived the back support because he was a decent father who helped in a lot of other ways and paid more than the court mandated amount when he had it. Women will often do that when a man is a decent person and a caring father and helps with other things besides just monetarily. If a man wants to be a father so badly, he should look for a monogamous relationship with a partner who is ready for parenthood and welcomes it. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

 

[trouble13]

You've completed ignored my OP and even resorted to a terrible false equivalency.

A woman cannot claim control of a man's prostate because that man would've had the prostate with our without her. She's completely devoid of its existence.

A fetus is the product of both a man and a woman. A man had to give his body up for that fetus to be created. Stripping him of any bit of say in the matter doesn't make much sense.

Also, being coerced to pay child support for 18 years is forced parenthood. Sorry. A man has to sit by while a woman gets to kills his child yet he has no right to "my money, my choice"? Point me to the equality in that situation.

My opinion on the topic is that it is unreasonable for a woman to carry a man's child against her will but it is also equally unreasonable to demand the father to take responsibility in for a child that he had no say in if it was born or killed.

In my view the solution is to create a Male version of abortion for fathers by allowing them to legally opt out of all responsibilities before birth occurs. If the woman insists on having the child the Male does not want she should have to raise it without any assistance from the father.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Crusader13]

If a man wants to be a father so badly, he should look for a monogamous relationship with a partner who is ready for parenthood and welcomes it. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

If a woman doesn't want to be a mother so badly, she should have less sex. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

If a woman wants a man's money so badly, she should look for committed relationships with decent, honest men instead of cheap sexual exchanges. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

 

[trouble13]

You are transparent and it's obviously part of your victimization mind set.

Come on man, take some personal responsibility, it's not so bad. You'll be better off.

Same can be told to women.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Crusader13]

[]

My opinion on the topic is that it is unreasonable for a woman to carry a man's child against her will but it is also equally unreasonable to demand the father to take responsibility in for a child that he had no say in if it was born or killed.

In my view the solution is to create a Male version of abortion for fathers by allowing them to legally opt out of all responsibilities before birth occurs. If the woman insists on having the child the Male does not want she should have to raise it without any assistance from the father.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Now this is something I 100% agree with. I was hoping for more identical responses in this thread to be honest since it really seems like a no brainer. If a woman gets to opt out of parenting so should a man. It's a simple equation.

 

[trouble13]

[]



Now this is something I 100% agree with. I was hoping for more identical responses in this thread to be honest since it really seems like a no brainer. If a woman gets to opt out of parenting so should a man. It's a simple equation.

This is a topic where you are gonna find women dont believe in equality. They believe they are superior and are entitled to preferential treatment by the law.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[maquiscat]

Straight up trolling I see. I should have known.

Best way to respond to an ad hoc troll...BTW that is referencing the post, not the poster, unlike the post itself did.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[noonereal]

[]



Now this is something I 100% agree with. I was hoping for more identical responses in this thread to be honest since it really seems like a no brainer. If a woman gets to opt out of parenting so should a man. It's a simple equation.

Unbelievable.

At least you are honest in your want of never being responsible for your actions.

 

[maquiscat]

Just put of curiosity, in your scenerio of an (AW), if the woman decided she did not want the baby, but the father did, would the woman be held financial responsible for the child's care after it was born?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

There is a whole thread about this somewhere, but I can't recall off the top of my head if it's here or my other debate site. But yes, if she wants it removed and under the assumptions I gave, he now has choice to keep and raise the offspring. The scenario I made eliminates the need for termination for her to end the pregnancy. In fact my premise for that thread was that a woman doesn't have a right to an abortion per se, but that currently an abortion is the only way to exercise her actual right of ending the pregnancy of her body.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[noonereal]

Best way to respond to an ad hoc troll...BTW that is referencing the post, not the poster, unlike the post itself did.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

Trolling is an action. Learn this and stop it.

I am done with you.

 

[holbritter]

If a woman doesn't want to be a mother so badly, she should have less sex. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

If a woman wants a man's money so badly, she should look for committed relationships with decent, honest men instead of cheap sexual exchanges. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

If a man doesn't want to be a father, he should have less sex. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

 

[holbritter]

This is a topic where you are gonna find women dont believe in equality. They believe they are superior and are entitled to preferential treatment by the law.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Disagree.

I happen to think that if the woman wants to keep the child and the man does not, he should have the option of relinquishing all rights and obligations to the child.

 

[noonereal]

If a man doesn't want to be a father, he should have less sex. This can be done by working on yourself and becoming a better person.

God forbid a man take responsibility for his actions.

Trumpets, you can't live with them, you can't get rid of them.

What a dilemma.

 

[sangha]

Following this logic then we can end gay marriage because gay men have just as much right to marry a woman as a straight man and vice versa for gay women. And a man is forced into parenthood by the woman even if he doesnt want to be a father. He will be forced to support the child. Thats a fact.

That would be true if it were not for the fact that govt cannot discriminate on the basis of sex or gender.

And no man is forced to be a father. It has never happened in the history of humankind.

 

[sangha]

I think that this statement lack the context that the OP provides, albeit not explicitly. I take from your statement that a man does have to become a parent against his choice by making the choice not to have sex to start with. Or by removing the testicles altogether. Those are the only two 100% methods of not having offspring. Ok one more, having sex with a woman who has had a hysterectomy of some degree (I think ovary removal is considered partial hysterectomy. Willing to be corrected). But no man has the choice, currently, to not become a parent, biologically speaking, once conception has occurred.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

Nor do they have the choice to not be a parent once the child is born.

Our choices have consequences, and sometimes, different people face different consequences. Equal rights does not mean equal outcomes.

When a man has sex with a women, aside from the situations you have described, pregnancy and parenthood are a potential consequence. We all know that.

 

[holbritter]

God forbid a man take responsibility for his actions.

Trumpets, you can't live with them, you can't get rid of them.

What a dilemma.

You didn't follow the dialogue.

 

[noonereal]

And no man is forced to be a father. It has never happened in the history of humankind.

Of course it has.

 

[sangha]

Its not false. A gay man has the same exact right to marry a woman as I do. Does he not?

Yes, and he has the same right to marry a man as a woman does.

 

[holbritter]

Of course it has.

When?

 

[maquiscat]

guess you only support false premises you agree with.

And where exactly have I done that?

A man should have just as much right to abort their child as the female...

He does, under the same exact same conditions. When the offspring is inside his body. When it is in his body, then she has no right to tell him whether or not it will remain there until birth. Of course you do realize that she does not have a right to abort the child after birth, right? That would be the point where neither of their bodily autonomy is in play.

and according to you sex is not supposed to enter our law, except when you need it to fit your argument.

Pray tell, when have I advocated for a law to be sex or gender specific?

Which of your premises is false they both cant be true.

And exactly what two premises do you believe I am putting forth?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[noonereal]

When?

You think in the history of the world a man has never been raped?

 

[AlphaOmega]

That would be true if it were not for the fact that govt cannot discriminate on the basis of sex or gender.

And no man is forced to be a father. It has never happened in the history of humankind.

Men are routinely forced to be fathers when they dont want to be because they dont have the same right to abort their child. Thats a fact. Careful, fact deniers meet my 0 tolerance rules.

 

[sangha]

You've completed ignored my OP and even resorted to a terrible false equivalency.

A woman cannot claim control of a man's prostate because that man would've had the prostate with our without her. She's completely devoid of its existence.

A fetus is the product of both a man and a woman. A man had to give his body up for that fetus to be created. Stripping him of any bit of say in the matter doesn't make much sense.

Also, being coerced to pay child support for 18 years is forced parenthood. Sorry. A man has to sit by while a woman gets to kills his child yet he has no right to "my money, my choice"? Point me to the equality in that situation.

I ignored nothing. I posted the relevant facts and legal theory behind the law.

And a man does not give his body up. He gives his semen, and does so knowingly and deliberately. Choices have consequences.

Also, parenthood involves a lot more than a monetary contribution. It is pitiful that some people have such an impoverished view of parenthood.

And as far as the equality of that situation, both the mother and the father are responsible for the child. Once born, neither get to shirk their responsibilities to the child

 

[AlphaOmega]

And where exactly have I done that?



He does, under the same exact same conditions. When the offspring is inside his body. When it is in his body, then she has no right to tell him whether or not it will remain there until birth. Of course you do realize that she does not have a right to abort the child after birth, right? That would be the point where neither of their bodily autonomy is in play.



Pray tell, when have I advocated for a law to be sex or gender specific?



And exactly what two premises do you believe I am putting forth?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

By your logic a man can marry a man when he grows a vagina.

 

[maquiscat]

She's not being forced into anything if she decides to keep the baby.

And I explained in my OP that forcing child support out of a man is a violation of his bodily autonomy. That money comes from his labour. That's the product of his body.

So by your logic, if a woman maintains the pregnancy to term, but gives the child up to the father, her bodily autonomy is violated if she has to pay him child support?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk