Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

[Bodi]

Sorry, nope. Roe v Wade is gone, so if the woman is stuck with it, so are you. No excuses.

In that reality I agree...

 

[Bodi]

This thread is about males whining that women can end responsibility for a child by getting abortions and they can't.

Wrong. This thread is about equality and if women are legally denied their Post-Conception Opt-Out then so is the man's Opt-Out'

Pretty simple. See the equality? No need to make it about whining and other shit because

 

[Lursa]

Wrong. This thread is about equality and if women are legally denied their Post-Conception Opt-Out then so is the man's Opt-Out'

Pretty simple. See the equality? No need to make it about whining and other shit because

Because why?

What inequality? If there's a pregnancy, neither can opt out of consequences. That's equal. You cannot equalize 'biology' so you telling us to ignore it for the convenience of your argument is meaningless. The physical consequences dont go away if you snap your fingers. She's held accountable for her decision to have sex. Avoiding financial consequences doesnt make all her physical consequences "equal."

The opt-out cannot prevent the baby from being born and it cannot remove the legal responsibility of the non-custodial parent for child support. Right? Yes or no? If yes, then what's the point of the opt-out?​

​

If no, please explain further. You are welcome to give more details on it...you dont generally continue to this point for anyone to ask.​

Here's the truth...you've seen that it truly is not equal...it favors men.

 

[Jagged]

Sure I did. I have continually said that in this scenario she can choose to do whatever she wants to do.

Of course she can. It's her body. When men can get pregnant, they can legally make that same choice.

 

[jmotivator]

The Male opt out exists preconception.
Post ejaculation the choice has been given to the Woman to make.
Actions can have consequences. The same is true for inaction.

Cool, the woman's opt-out exists preconception, too. There, all nice and equal.

 

[Individual]

Cool, the woman's opt-out exists preconception, too. There, all nice and equal.

That's as equal as it gets, considering that post conception he has forced the Woman into a position of having to make a choice that only She has a Right to make.

 

[Lursa]

Cool, the woman's opt-out exists preconception, too. There, all nice and equal.

It absolutely does. And if she gets pregnant, then she faces the consequences. Women cannot even escape consequences, whereas men can in many cases. That's his entire idea...allowing men to avoid their consequences.

So it is equal. The consequences are different, they're determined by biology, but they're inescapable. But in order to invent some kind of "equality" here, the OP refuses to recognize "biology" as a legitimate part of the debate.

If a woman gets pregnant, she cant escape consequences.

--she has a kid​

--she has a miscarriage​

--she has an abortion​

--she dies during pregnancy/childbirth​

Every one of those is costly and painful and she doesnt really even get a choice for a couple of them. But he proposes that men just get to avoid being held accountable for their decisions...when they get out of them in 3 out of those 4 anyway. He's just mad that men have no control over her choices....

 

[Jagged]

Cool, the woman's opt-out exists preconception, too. There, all nice and equal.

Are upset women have more options for birth control than men due to biology?

 

[Bodi]

Of course she can. It's her body. When men can get pregnant, they can legally make that same choice.

Here is where you are missing the point... the issue I presented in the OP is a LEGAL one... it has nothing to do with biology.

She HAS a legal opt-out, post-conception
He DOES NOT have an legal opt-out, post-conception

Do you understand the difference or are you going to insist on some idiotic argument about men getting pregnant?

 

[Lursa]

Here is where you are missing the point... the issue I presented in the OP is a LEGAL one... it has nothing to do with biology.

She HAS a legal opt-out, post-conception
He DOES NOT have an legal opt-out, post-conception

Do you understand the difference or are you going to insist on some idiotic argument about men getting pregnant?

Do you want "legal" or "equal" because they arent the same thing. You cannot erase biology from the equation and ever have "equal."

If you want "legal" you need to present reasons why there should be such an opt-out for men when it harms kids, taxypayers, and society overall. Why would society give men a walk away free card for a decision that they knowingly risked?

And as I just posted, you cant make biological/physical consequences "equal" by eliminating financial consequences.

 

[Jagged]

Here is where you are missing the point... the issue I presented in the OP is a LEGAL one... it has nothing to do with biology.

She HAS a legal opt-out, post-conception
He DOES NOT have an legal opt-out, post-conception

Do you understand the difference or are you going to insist on some idiotic argument about men getting pregnant?

Some laws are based on biology.

 

[Bodi]

Some laws are based on biology.

My OP is not based on biology.

She HAS a legal opt-out, post-conception
He DOES NOT have an legal opt-out, post-conception

You are apparently afraid to answer it honestly. *shrug*


.

 

[Jagged]

My OP is not based on biology.

She HAS a legal opt-out, post-conception
He DOES NOT have an legal opt-out, post-conception

You are apparently afraid to answer it honestly. *shrug*

Of course it is. You're complaining about the inequities of laws between men and women, where the only difference between the two is biological.

You're trying, but failing, to remove biology from the laws. That's like complaining about abortion laws apply to women, but not to men.

 

[Bodi]

Of course it is. You're complaining about the inequities of laws between men and women, where the only difference between the two is biological.

Nope. It is a legal issue. I can see that you refuse to look at this issue from a non-biased perspective though.

You're trying, but failing, to remove biology from the laws.

Can she legally (where legal) opt-out of becoming a parent post-conception? Yes or No.
Can he legally opt-out of becoming a parent post-conception? Yes or No.

That's like complaining about abortion laws apply to women, but not to men.

Wrong. Men can not get abortions because they do not get pregnant.



.

 

[Jagged]

Nope. It is a legal issue. I can see that you refuse to look at this issue from a non-biased perspective though.



Can she legally (where legal) opt-out of becoming a parent post-conception? Yes or No.
Can he legally opt-out of becoming a parent post-conception? Yes or No.



Wrong. Men can not get abortions because they do not get pregnant.

Which is exactly why the law differentiates between men and women, because of the biological differences. Women can get an abortion. Men can't. Therefore, the law treats them differently.

 

[Bodi]

Which is exactly why the law differentiates between men and women, because of the biological differences. Women can get an abortion. Men can't. Therefore, the law treats them differently.

Is that your way of saying that the man receives unequal treatment under the law?

 

[Lursa]

Is that your way of saying that the man receives unequal treatment under the law?

You can deny this all you want but your opt-out scheme has been sorely undermined by current laws.

--women can no longer get elective abortions in some states.
--some "legal" men can and do get pregnant. And can and do get abortions. So the law applies equally to to men.

These are facts, yes or no?

You keep saying that this is a legal issue, so dont cherry pick where you want the law applied and where you dont. That would be hypocritical.

 

[Bodi]

Which is exactly why the law differentiates between men and women, because of the biological differences. Women can get an abortion. Men can't. Therefore, the law treats them differently.

Is that your way of saying that the man receives unequal treatment under the law?

Apparently so...



.

 

[Bodi]

You can deny this all you want but your opt-out scheme has been sorely undermined by current laws.

--women can no longer get elective abortions in some states.

I was very clear that this is in places where abortion is legal.

--some "legal" men can and do get pregnant. And can and do get abortions. So the law applies equally to to men.

Stupid Red Herring... males can not get pregnant.

These are facts, yes or no?

Nope.

 

[Lursa]

Apparently so...

Or he can read my post 367 and see that men do receive equal treatment under the law

I was very clear that this is in places where abortion is legal.

Yes and that's why I phrased it to indicate that. Read better.

Stupid Red Herring... males can not get pregnant.

This is a lie, no matter how many times you write it and it, again, just shows that it requires hypocrisy to sign on to your opt-out scheme.

You've screamed "legal only" a million times here...until the law doesnt work out the way you want it to.

Nope.

Yup.

 

[Bodi]

Or he can read my post 367 and see that men do receive equal treatment under the law



Yes and that's why I phrased it to indicate that. Read better.

But you didn't

This is a lie, no matter how many times you write it and it, again, just shows that it requires hypocrisy to sign on to your opt-out scheme.

Biological males can get pregnant?

You've screamed "legal only" a million times here...until the law doesnt work out the way you want it to.

Wrong. As usual... Legal regarding post-conception opt-out... not that some chick can now legally call themselves a dude due to some weird law.

Yup.

LIE!!!

 

[Lursa]

But you didn't

Sure I did...and you were unable to refute it.

Biological males can get pregnant?

YOU CANT BRING UP BIOLOGY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS ARGUMENT IS NOT ABOUT BIOLOGY!!!!!!! WE ARE DISCUSSING ONLY LEGAL ARGUMENTS!!!!

(Channeling you as you have been screaming on this for 10 years.)

Wrong. As usual... Legal regarding post-conception opt-out... not that some chick can now legally call themselves a dude due to some weird law.

Yeah...cherry picking only where you want legal aspects discussed and then when you want biology to matter. You did note my use of the word "hypocrisy" earlier, right?

LIE!!!

Well, as usual, I'll ask you to quote the lie and as you've been doing for years...you'll fail to do so OTOH, I can easily post where you've demanded the discussion completely ignore biology for all these years. Some examples are right here in this thread.

 

[Bodi]

Sure I did...and you were unable to refute it.



YOU CANT BRING UP BIOLOGY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS ARGUMENT IS NOT ABOUT BIOLOGY!!!!!!! WE ARE DISCUSSING ONLY LEGAL ARGUMENTS!!!!

(Channeling you as you have been screaming on this for 10 years.)



Yeah...cherry picking only where you want legal aspects discussed and then when you want biology to matter. You did note my use of the word "hypocrisy" earlier, right?



Well, as usual, I'll ask you to quote the lie and as you've been doing for years...you'll fail to do so OTOH, I can easily post where you've demanded the discussion completely ignore biology for all these years. Some examples are right here in this thread.

After all these years and you still can't even grasp the argument... LOL


.

 

[Lursa]

After all these years and you still can't even grasp the argument... LOL.

The argument is clear. The fact that you cant even support it honestly is also clear.

It's been disputed on many levels and all you do is scream "liar! or "it's not about that!" (see: biology). And then when biology negates it... you cry foul. I showed you the man could opt-out and still choose to be a father again anytime he chose...you cry foul.

Just admit this has zero to do with equality. On any terms. Biological, financial, moral, social, legal.

It's about men being able to have sex with no consequences , which women never have been able to and still cannot.

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.

And you've never explained what "right" this is either. All you do is crap all over the concept of equality with a selfish proposal to let men walk away from risks they knowingly took, a proposal that harms kids, taxpayers, and society.

 

[Bodi]

The argument is clear. The fact that you cant even support it honestly is also clear.

It's been disputed on many levels and all you do is scream "liar! or "it's not about that!" (see: biology). And then when biology negates it... you cry foul. I showed you the man could opt-out and still choose to be a father again anytime he chose...you cry foul.

Just admit this has zero to do with equality. On any terms. Biological, financial, moral, social, legal.

It's about men being able to have sex with no consequences , which women never have been able to and still cannot.



And you've never explained what "right" this is either. All you do is crap all over the concept of equality with a selfish proposal to let men walk away from risks they knowingly took, a proposal that harms kids, taxpayers, and society.

You have misunderstood or misrepresented the argument from the get go... Misandry? Probably.