Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

[Bodi]

How can law be the only issue. We are talking about comparing abortion opt out vs something that gives men the same equality of opt out. It can't be done. When the woman opts out there is no longer a pregnancy and nobody is responsible. A law that lets a man off of child support doesn't eliminate anyone's responsibility except his. The woman, the family, the state, are all still responsible. Demanding a legal opt out isn't equal to abortion it's just gaming the law.

This is it in a nutshell

Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

This argument is not about biology. This argument is about the law. The issue is currently unequal under the law. This discriminates against men and forces men to pay for a choice that the woman makes.

Women currently have a post conception opt out of having and paying for a child that they do not want.
Men currently do not have a post conception opt out of having and paying for a child that they do not want.

Right now, women have all of the power over their pregnancy, and that is how it should be. They can have the child or not have the child. That is how it should be.

Women should be able to have sex, get pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want (abort the child) if they want to, and they have this right.
Men should be able to have sex, get a woman pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want if they want to, but they have not this right.

Currently men are bound to whatever choice a woman makes post conception. She can walk away, and he cannot walk away. This is unequal.

What many have proposed is essentially the following:

Man and woman have sex.
Woman gets pregnant.
Woman has options:

Woman never informs man of pregnancy and aborts
Woman never informs man of pregnancy and has child but never gets financial help from him
Woman informs man of pregnancy and wants no financial support as they have some sort of joint custody
Woman informs many of pregnancy and wants financials support from the man

At this point the man has options:

Man agrees to pay and has some sort of custody
Man agrees to pay and has no role in the child’s life
Man does not agree to pay for anything and wants nothing to do with her or the child

If he chooses option 3 then the woman has options again:

Woman has an abortion
Woman gives the baby up for adoption
Woman has the child and pays for it herself

It is pretty simple.

As always, we will see posts from people that make the claim that if the man has options that the woman is being controlled. That is not the case. She has all the power over her body and pregnancy. At no time does the man have any power to have her abort or to not abort.

We might see people conflate the argument… insisting that biology and law can not be separated. That is utterly ridiculous. This is about post conception. She is already pregnant.

We might see the worst type of debate… the man has to pay and gave up all his rights once he came even though she did not give up her rights.

Anyway… thoughts?

 

[Parrish]

Wear a condom or get a vasectomy?

Or just take responsibility for sowing your seeds of your loins.

 

[aociswundumho]

Women should be able to have sex, get pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want (abort the child) if they want to, and they have this right.
Men should be able to have sex, get a woman pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want if they want to, but they have not this right.

I agree but the reason the law is wrong is because of the welfare state. If the guy opts out, then the taxpayer is on the hook for the kid, and that's not fair to the taxpayer. The law is morally wrong but politically correct.

 

[Bodi]

Wear a condom or get a vasectomy?

Or just take responsibility for sowing your seeds of your loins.

A woman who does not like the idea of post-conception equality... surprising. Why is that? No longer have control over others paying for your choice?

 

[Bodi]

I agree but the reason the law is wrong is because of the welfare state. If the guy opts out, then the taxpayer is on the hook for the kid, and that's not fair to the taxpayer. The law is morally wrong but politically correct.

Or it can be like a credit card... she chooses to have a kid that she can not afford, the people (taxpayers pay for her irresponsible choice) and her wages are garnished after the child turns 18 until she pays off her debt. I bet that only happens a few times and the other women start to not have kids that they can not afford.

 

[Individual]

Wear a condom or get a vasectomy?

Or just take responsibility for sowing your seeds of your loins.

Make it a felony for the woman to not identify the Father of a born child, and hold the Father responsible for supporting the child, with an 18 year prison term if they do not or cease repaying government the costs of supporting the child to adulthood.

 

[Individual]

Should government allow a Woman to raise a child she has no foreseeable means of raising without government assistance?

 

[Lursa]

This is it in a nutshell

Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

This argument is not about biology. This argument is about the law. The issue is currently unequal under the law. This discriminates against men and forces men to pay for a choice that the woman makes.

Women currently have a post conception opt out of having and paying for a child that they do not want.
Men currently do not have a post conception opt out of having and paying for a child that they do not want.

Right now, women have all of the power over their pregnancy, and that is how it should be. They can have the child or not have the child. That is how it should be.

Women should be able to have sex, get pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want (abort the child) if they want to, and they have this right.
Men should be able to have sex, get a woman pregnant and walk away from parenthood and from paying for a child they do not want if they want to, but they have not this right.

Currently men are bound to whatever choice a woman makes post conception. She can walk away, and he cannot walk away. This is unequal.

What many have proposed is essentially the following:



Anyway… thoughts?

Heh heh heh, nice try. I'll fish out my old posts in OneNote from before...you have been crushed on this many times.

You 'will see' plenty of debate that shreds your desperate and selfish and irresponsible 'proposal.'

And btw, you can claim it all you want but biology does play a huge role in this...because it's inescapable for women and it drives the actual real life facts.

Biology does determine what options both genders have and when they can make their decisions. It really just comes down to the fact that men still believe that they are entitled to sex without consequences...and they no longer are. Women never have been and still arent. Technology, law, DNA testing level the playing field so that now, it really IS equal.

The fact is, both know the risks before having sex and if they dont want the consequences, then they shouldnt take the risk. Men know the law, men know that the woman has ALL the choices if there is a pregnancy...so then why do they take the risk if they dont want to be a father? Are you claiming that men arent capable of making a good decision in their own best interests? Yes or no?

If the answer is yes...then why should their be an 'opt-out?' Women cant opt out of consequences, why should men?

If there's a pregnancy, women cannot escape consequences, there's no way out, women will:
--have a kid
--have a miscarriage
--have an abortion
--die during pregnancy/childbirth

There's no avoiding those and women can even die in the first 3, altho it's less common. Men escape consequences in all but one of those. And yet, it seems they feel that it's not fair that, even with their own free will deciding to risk that consequence, they should be allowed to run away from it...50% financial support (unless they choose more involvement, which would be great)

What pisses them off is that women have the opportunity to choose a consequence that's not convenient for the man. Awwww. Gee whiz. It infuriates them that now, after they decided to risk having sex....the woman now has what they perceive as 'power' over them.

Hey...if you didnt want to 'give that power' to a woman...why did you relinquish it to her when you chose to sleep with her?

 

[Bodi]

Heh heh heh, nice try. I'll fish out my old posts in OneNote from before...you have been crushed on this many times.

I will stop there since inevitably, as per your posting history, you will be posting lies...

 

[Bodi]

Make it a felony for the woman to not identify the Father of a born child, and hold the Father responsible for supporting the child, with an 18 year prison term if they do not or cease repaying government the costs of supporting the child to adulthood.

Make it a felony for the woman to hold the Father responsible for her choice to having a child that she can not responsibly care for... Make it 18 year prison term if the woman does not repay the government the costs of supporting the child to adulthood after she willingly decided to have a child that she knew ahead of time that she could not support, passing that burden, willingly, onto the tax payers.

 

[Lursa]

Food for thought: Every single state and jurisdiction found it necessary to mandate child support from (originally) men, (now by law it applies equally to both genders)...because men would father kids and run off, leaving women and kids unsupported and dependent on the state.

That has not changed today...if a woman (or father) applies for public assistance to support a kid or kids, the state requires the non-custodial parent to pay their share in child support. This is in the best interests of the child/children and the tax payer. Why should the tax payers pay for a decision that 2 people knowingly took? Why shouldnt they be held accountable for their decision?

And why would the state 'now' decide to end this program which protects kids and tax payers?

 

[Lursa]

I will stop there since inevitably, as per your posting history, you will be posting lies...

Point out a single lie I posted. I'll wait.

Er, it's a fact that this program you propose has been destroyed on every point any time you've posted it. I cant wait to pull stuff out of OneNote...verbatim. We can discuss how you want men to use this to manipulate women into having abortions

 

[Lursa]

Make it a felony for the woman to not identify the Father of a born child, and hold the Father responsible for supporting the child, with an 18 year prison term if they do not or cease repaying government the costs of supporting the child to adulthood.

Today it's pretty easy to identify the fathers...that's the 'problem'...and women are coerced pretty heavily by their jurisdiction to identify the father...they threaten to withhold assistance if she doesnt.

 

[Lursa]

I will stop there since inevitably, as per your posting history, you will be posting lies...

I notice you couldnt answer my questions in my post...why not? Isnt your 'proposal' out there for debate?

Tip: the questions have question marks--?--after them.

 

[Bodi]

I notice you couldnt answer my questions in my post...why not? Isnt your 'proposal' out there for debate?

Did not answer does not mean could not answer... such is the failing of your ability to debate and hence why you will get a minimal response from me

 

[Lursa]

Did not answer does not mean could not answer... such is the failing of your ability to debate and hence why you will get a minimal response from me

So then you accept your failure already? Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted.

 

[Bodi]

So then you accept your failure already? Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted.

Good luck trolling others...

 

[Lursa]

Good luck trolling others...

The questions are completely relevant and honest. They are for debate regarding your proposal.

So then you accept your failure already? Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?​

​

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted. ​

 

[Bodi]

The questions are completely relevant and honest. They are for debate regarding your proposal.

So then you accept your failure already? Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?​

​

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted. ​

You did not address the argument in the past and replied with gleeful lies, just for the the new readers, but I certainly don't care what the deficiency is.

 

[Lursa]

I defeated you repeatedly in the past and you reply with lies.. . not sure which for the new readers, but I certainly don't care what the deficiency is.

You never did. Feel free to post quotes or posts where you did. (I will be posting yours...where you didnt.)

Or...respond to my questions and debate here. Let's see you point out lies. Where have I posted any so far?

Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?​

​

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted. ​

 

[Bodi]

You never did. Feel free to post quotes or posts where you did. (I will be.)

Or...respond to my questions and debate here. Let's see you point out lies. Where have I posted any so far?

Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?​

​

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted. ​

View attachment 67349657

I am ready for bed... it is too late to deal with your lies... and in the morning it will be too early to deal with you lies... and then when I am hungry it will not be time for your lies and when I need to shit I will not have time for your lies... basically your lies have defined you and I will do something more positive with my time like enjoy staring at road kill and being sad about the needless death of yet another rabbit.

 

[Lursa]

I am ready for bed... it is too late to deal with your lies... and in the morning it will be too early to deal with you lies... and then when I am hungry it will not be time for your lies and when I need to shit I will not have time for your lies... basically your lies have defined you and I will do something more positive with my time like enjoy staring at road kill and being sad about the needless death of yet another rabbit.

Why did you post if you dont want debate? Are you admitting defeat in the face of valid arguments already?

You've never quoted a single lie from my posts. Or...let's see?

If you cant answer the questions, they stand unrefuted.

 

[vegas giants]

Wear a condom or get a vasectomy?

Or just take responsibility for sowing your seeds of your loins.

This is the

Keep you legs closed honey


Argument used to deny women abortions

 

[vegas giants]

Food for thought: Every single state and jurisdiction found it necessary to mandate child support from (originally) men, (now by law it applies equally to both genders)...because men would father kids and run off, leaving women and kids unsupported and dependent on the state.

That has not changed today...if a woman (or father) applies for public assistance to support a kid or kids, the state requires the non-custodial parent to pay their share in child support. This is in the best interests of the child/children and the tax payer. Why should the tax payers pay for a decision that 2 people knowingly took? Why shouldnt they be held accountable for their decision?

And why would the state 'now' decide to end this program which protects kids and tax payers?

This is the argument to deny all welfare benefits to children. Why should I pay for your kids? In fact if I dont have kids why am I funding schools?

 

[Lursa]

This is the

Keep you legs closed honey


Argument used to deny women abortions

Not at all. The same applies to women...if they dont want the consequences of a pregnancy, dont have sex.

But, women's consequences from pregnancy are different than men's. (listed in post 8) This is one reason that Bodh's 'denial' of biology as an integral part of the issue fails so badly.