Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

[Bodi]

She does if she chooses to keep it. Unfortunate biological outcome for the willing sperm donor.

Then it is her responsibility.

I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept.

 

[Gordy327]

I don't care. I am posting expert opinions


You have nothing

Opinion is just an opinion and nothing more. I've posted facts.

Why not?

More misogyny.

 

[Bodi]

Because she had to carry the baby and must raise it. Her call.

Right. She chose to carry the baby... maybe she should be responsible and not bring the baby into a world where the she can not care for it properly.

 

[vegas giants]

Opinion is just an opinion and nothing more. I've posted facts.

More misogyny.

No you haven't

 

[Bodi]

Don't want to be a parent? Then don't donate genetic material. Otherwise, parenthood becomes a possibility. As I said before, the man gets the same option if he gets pregnant. If you think it's unfair, then biology is to blame.

The argument that you are responding to has nothing to do with biology.

You and others keep ignoring this:

The argument is NOT about the right to have an abortion, post conception.

The argument is about the right to not be a parent, post conception.

Yeah, it kind of does. You complain about the guy not having a choice. Biology is responsible for that.

100% Wrong. The law is responsible for that. I stated to somebody yesterday that it is the Social Contract that forces him. In the State of Nature (Biology as you call it) he can just walk away... and more.

 

[Bodi]

She is not required to abort either.

Never said she was...

 

[Bodi]

With YOUR argument. Which is a big reason it sucks so bad .

Yet you can't point out how... but with YOUR argument, you support denying equal rights. Gee, that was easy.

 

[Lursa]

You and others keep ignoring this:

And I pointed out in post 8 that the state would not prevent the father from contacting the kid, having a role in his/her life, later. (Or prevent the kid from contacting the father). Because it's in the best interests of the child to have both parents involved in their lives. They even allow rapists visitation and joint custody in some states after they get out...so some deadbeat wont be prevented.

So there's nothing 'equal' regarding "parenthood" in your proposal at all, it's total BS. The deadbeat can still be a father if and when he chooses. When are you going to admit that this shows the hypocrisy and failure in your 'opt-out' proposal? Or at least attempt to challenge it?

 

[vegas giants]

And I pointed out in post 8 that the state would not prevent the father from contacting the kid, having a role in his/her life, later. (Or prevent the kid from contacting the father). Because it's in the best interests of the child to have both parents involved in their lives. They even allow rapists visitation and joint custody in some states after they get out...so some deadbeat wont be prevented.

So there's nothing 'equal' regarding "parenthood" here at all, it's total BS. The deadbeat can be a father if and when he chooses.

So what? Not relevant to this discussion

 

[Bodi]

I'll give it a try, the value seems limited:

Q: Do you think that if she had a child that she could not support that she is engaging in child endangerment?

That's certainly possible, but anyone can be stricken at any moment and find themselves unable to support their children. Even a billionaire can neglect a child.

That is different than knowingly bringing that child into an abusive, etc. situation. Very different.

Q: Why is paying a person money for being unemployed ok but not for having a child they can not afford?

Govt money, I presume? It's fine, and it happens all the time. That doesn't mean we should encourage people to be irresponsible.

Agreed...

Having thrown away their opportunity, they demand another? You can't conceive without discarding the opportunity NOT to conceive.




He wants to be able to walk away from the responsibilities that he brought upon himself, functionally neglecting the resulting child.

The government already allows for a parent or parents to walk away from their "responsibility"

 

[Gordy327]

No you haven't

Then refute them.

 

[vegas giants]

Then refute them.

Done

 

[Gordy327]

The argument that you are responding to has nothing to do with biology.

You and others keep ignoring this:


100% Wrong. The law is responsible for that. I stated to somebody yesterday that it is the Social Contract that forces him. In the State of Nature (Biology as you call it) he can just walk away... and more.

The law is responsible for child support from both parents. Biology is what makes them parents to begin with. A guy can walk away, but the state can pursue, kind of like a predator hunting prey.

 

[Gordy327]

Done

Ignoring them isn't refuting them. But I suppose that's the best you can manage at this point.

 

[vegas giants]

Ignoring them isn't refuting them. But I suppose that's the vest you can manage at this point.

It's my very vest. Lol

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

This discriminates against men and forces men to pay for a choice that the woman makes.

Your reasoning is flawed.

The woman didnt make that decision all by herself! The man did too.

So: FAIL.

 

[vegas giants]

Your reasoning is flawed.

The woman didnt make that decision all by herself! The man did too.

So: FAIL.

Actually only the woman can decide if a child is born. The man has no choice

 

[Bodi]

And you came up with that noronic assumption by reaching deep into your arse?

No. Basic psychology.

Those that feel unloved or betrayed often lash out in an attempt to belittle people so that they can feel better about themselves.

It is part of the pecking order... .

I don't really care why you feel inferior... but you should probably look into.

It might open doors so that somebody might care about you.

 

[Bodi]

Your reasoning is flawed.

The woman didnt make that decision all by herself! The man did too.

So: FAIL.

Nope. You are arguing that sex is the determining factor when this argument is about the law... a post conception opt-out of parenting.

Please... try again.

 

[craig]

A woman has total autonomy over her body that includes conceiving and bearing a child or terminating a pregnancy. The father has no legal interest or responsibility unless he has contracted with the mother to support the child.

 

[Bodi]

The law is responsible

You are one of the few to even admit this...

for child support from both parents. Biology is what makes them parents to begin with. A guy can walk away, but the state can pursue, kind of like a predator hunting prey.

Again though, we fall back to it all being about her having a second, post-conception, choice.

 

[Lursa]

A woman has total autonomy over her body that includes conceiving and bearing a child or terminating a pregnancy. The father has no legal interest or responsibility unless he has contracted with the mother to support the child.

See post 10.

 

[craig]

See post 10.

I read it, If the mother decides to have the child she is of course responsible for it. The father has no legal interest or responsibility for the child unless he contracted with mother before or after the birth.

 

[Lursa]

I read it, If the mother decides to have the child she is of course responsible for it. The father has no legal interest or responsibility for the child unless he contracted with mother before or after the birth.

Then I guess you didnt understand what you read. Because legally, you are completely wrong.

 

[Bodi]

I don't care. I am posting expert opinions


You have nothing

I face this often too... I post expert opinions and the other guy just says, 'that's stupid' or 'misogyny!!' without offering any facts in return.