Post Conception Opt-Out? Good Idea or Bad?

[Individual]

And you are against Free Speech as well... figures.

Why do you feel a need to keep making baseless accusations?

 

[Bodi]

Then you accept, since is not there yet a child, an opt-out of responsibility for a child is not available post conception?

I wish I could post a picture because I sat here for about 20 seconds with a "what is wrong with this person's comprehension skills" look on my face.

Of course they have that option, there is no law preventing a man from leaving the Woman to be a single parent.

A paying parent... since you need it explained for the 50th time.

And you AGAIN don't answer. You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child should they not find out they were pregnant after 6 weeks.

They made a choice.

Why do you feel a need to keep making baseless accusations?

It has a base. You just said it. You want somebody to monitor what can be said.

 

[Bodi]

Of course they have that option, there is no law preventing a man from leaving the Woman to be a single parent.

You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child should they not find out they were pregnant after 6 weeks.

They made a choice.

 

[Individual]

I wish I could post a picture because I sat here for about 20 seconds with a "what is wrong with this person's comprehension skills" look on my face.

A paying parent... since you need it explained for the 50th time.

Post conception, to adhere with your claim there is no child, the man has not yet been made a paying parent.

And you AGAIN don't answer. You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child should they not find out they were pregnant after 6 weeks.

They made a choice.

And if by law the Woman is compelled to bring forth a child, both she and the man have been made legally responsible for the child as the Woman did not exercise a choice when it was available.

It has a base. You just said it. You want somebody to monitor what can be said.

Eliminate the poll and say what you want, but if you create a poll, questions should not be made in a way that lead respondents to make choices desired by the poll maker.
1. You created a poll with the title asking a question "Post Conception Opt-Out? Good Idea or Bad?" A reasonably worded question, indicating reasonably worded choices.
2. When opening the thread one is faced with a totally different question "Should women be allowed to hold men hostage to their choice or should a man be able to legally opt o".
3. No "Good Idea" or "Bad Idea" response options found, but instead the choice options "Hold Man Hostage", "Man can Make a Choice", or "Other", making the 1st and 3rd choices available for those who would select "Bad Idea" and the 2nd and 3rd choices usable for those who might choose or lean toward "Good Idea".

Surprisingly, the poll results currently show:
Hold Man Hostage........................Votes: 14
Man can Make a Choice..............Votes: 8
Other...........................................Votes: 13

Though the "Other" votes leave no clear meaning in the poll, and if ignored would indicate the 1st choice, representing "Bad Idea" with 64% support and 2nd choice, representing "Good Idea" with 36% support.
Do you accept as fact that support for the OP does not exist?

 

[Individual]

No. You have not and neither did any other. You created Straw Mans and red Herrings. Repeatedly.

You always talked about a child that was not there yet, always skipping over the point of the argument.

At least just say, like some have, that they disagree with the argument... but to say that you answered it and refuted it just shows poorly on you.

Anyway... Since the three of you are on dishonest lie mode making fallacies that you don't even understand... welp. C-ya.

I agree with what you said earlier, "Laws can change", But you seem to recognize that the law relative to this thread is not a law that will, o should, be changed, and leaves you only to incessantly complain about it.
You need to accept as provable fact, there is no longer any equality in the choices brought to bear upon a man and a Woman post conception, and accept the fact that with or without Roe v Wade, any responsibilities brought to bear as a result of the Woman's choice are made beyond the point where the man had a Right to make a choice.

 

[Bodi]

And if by law the Woman is compelled to bring forth a child, both she and the man have been made legally responsible for the child as the Woman did not exercise a choice when it was available.

No no no... LOL. She did not know she was pregnant. She did not make a choice to no abort in a certain time frame.

You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child should they not find out they were pregnant after 6 weeks.

They made a choice the moment they had sex, because finding out within 6 weeks is rare. Based off of that:

You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child and be forced to care for it should they not find out they were pregnant within 6 weeks.

You support the forced financial burden placed on the woman, and the man, but this argument is about the woman... just because she chose to have sex.

Chose to have sex equals consent to parenthood?

 

[Bodi]

I agree with what you said earlier, "Laws can change", But you seem to recognize that the law relative to this thread is not a law that will, o should, be changed, and leaves you only to incessantly complain about it.
You need to accept as provable fact, there is no longer any equality in the choices brought to bear upon a man and a Woman post conception, and accept the fact that with or without Roe v Wade, any responsibilities brought to bear as a result of the Woman's choice are made beyond the point where the man had a Right to make a choice.

Chose to have sex equals consent to parenthood?

Right?

 

[Bodi]

Post conception, to adhere with your claim there is no child, the man has not yet been made a paying parent.


And if by law the Woman is compelled to bring forth a child, both she and the man have been made legally responsible for the child as the Woman did not exercise a choice when it was available.


Eliminate the poll and say what you want, but if you create a poll, questions should not be made in a way that lead respondents to make choices desired by the poll maker.
1. You created a poll with the title asking a question "Post Conception Opt-Out? Good Idea or Bad?" A reasonably worded question, indicating reasonably worded choices.
2. When opening the thread one is faced with a totally different question "Should women be allowed to hold men hostage to their choice or should a man be able to legally opt o".
3. No "Good Idea" or "Bad Idea" response options found, but instead the choice options "Hold Man Hostage", "Man can Make a Choice", or "Other", making the 1st and 3rd choices available for those who would select "Bad Idea" and the 2nd and 3rd choices usable for those who might choose or lean toward "Good Idea".

Surprisingly, the poll results currently show:
Hold Man Hostage........................Votes: 14
Man can Make a Choice..............Votes: 8
Other...........................................Votes: 13

Though the "Other" votes leave no clear meaning in the poll, and if ignored would indicate the 1st choice, representing "Bad Idea" with 64% support and 2nd choice, representing "Good Idea" with 36% support.
Do you accept as fact that support for the OP does not exist?

I don't care about the poll or what you think of the poll. I said this before... so of course you didn't understand it.

 

[Individual]

No no no... LOL. She did not know she was pregnant. She did not make a choice to no abort in a certain time frame.

You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child should they not find out they were pregnant after 6 weeks.

They made a choice the moment they had sex, because finding out within 6 weeks is rare. Based off of that:

You think that women in Texas made the choice to have a child and be forced to care for it should they not find out they were pregnant within 6 weeks.

You support the forced financial burden placed on the woman, and the man, but this argument is about the woman... just because she chose to have sex.

Chose to have sex equals consent to parenthood?

Responsibilities are frequently imposed without need of ones consent, and by law when made necessary.

 

[Bodi]

Responsibilities are frequently imposed without need of ones consent, and by law when made necessary.

Do you agree that a woman in Texas that had sex and did not find out she was pregnant until after 6 weeks chose to not be allowed an abortion and become a parent and have all the responsibilities associated with it?

 

[Individual]

Chose to have sex equals consent to parenthood?

Right?

Being held responsible for ones actions has no need of ones consent.

 

[Bodi]

@Lursa


Do you agree that a woman in Texas that had sex and did not find out she was pregnant until after 6 weeks chose to not be allowed an abortion and become a parent and have all the responsibilities associated with it?

 

[Bodi]

Chose to have sex equals consent to parenthood?

Right?

Being held responsible for ones actions has no need of ones consent.

You did not answer the question... like a coward.

 

[Bodi]

@ClaraD

Do you agree that a woman in Texas that had sex and did not find out she was pregnant until after 6 weeks chose to not be allowed an abortion and become a parent and have all the responsibilities associated with it?

 

[Individual]

I don't care about the poll or what you think of the poll. I said this before... so of course you didn't understand it.

Then you should have simply created a thread without a poll. Actually, it is your problem that some of us do and did understand it.

 

[Lursa]

@Lursa


Do you agree that a woman in Texas that had sex and did not find out she was pregnant until after 6 weeks chose to not be allowed an abortion and become a parent and have all the responsibilities associated with it?

Happy to answer. Just as soon as you answer these 2 in good faith with direct answers, as I've been asking them all along and you call them stupid in order to avoid them. Why should I answer yours first?

1) What happens if she ignores the "opt-out", and has the kid, you can't stop her...The child's rights would supersede any law that allowed a parent to walk away with no obligation. Such a law wouldnt pass anyway 'because' the state is obligated to protect the child's statutory rights but hey, with no societal benefits, please explain how your opt-out would take precedence over the child's rights?​

​

​

2) Nothing will keep the father from contacting the kid (or the kid from contacting the father) further down the line. So he can still be involved in the kid's life. No court will stop that...because all agree that it's best for the kid to have the father involved in their lives. (I do too). Some states even let rapists apply for custody when they're released...they're certainly not going to stop non-criminals from being in their kids' lives.​

​

Men will get out of all the financial responsibilities AND still get to be a father when they feel like it. How is this 'equal'? That's your paramount argument...so...how is this equal? It's not and that's just a fact.

​

I never said it was a good idea... I said that the law, currently, is unequal with regards to a post-conception opt out of parenthood. That is just a fact.

 

[Bodi]

Happy to answer. Just as soon as you answer these 2 in good faith with direct answers, as I've been asking them all along and you call them stupid in order to avoid them. Why should I answer yours first?

1) What happens if she ignores the "opt-out", and has the kid, you can't stop her...The child's rights would supersede any law that allowed a parent to walk away with no obligation. Such a law wouldnt pass anyway 'because' the state is obligated to protect the child's statutory rights but hey, with no societal benefits, please explain how your opt-out would take precedence over the child's rights?​

​

​

2) Nothing will keep the father from contacting the kid (or the kid from contacting the father) further down the line. So he can still be involved in the kid's life. No court will stop that...because all agree that it's best for the kid to have the father involved in their lives. (I do too). Some states even let rapists apply for custody when they're released...they're certainly not going to stop non-criminals from being in their kids' lives.​

​

Men will get out of all the financial responsibilities AND still get to be a father when they feel like it. How is this 'equal'? That's your paramount argument...so...how is this equal?​

​

You are not happy to answer... you have qualifications.

I will answer after you.. this is my thread and my questions.

 

[Lursa]

I will answer after you.. this is my thread and my questions.

Nope. I know you cant, and wont. You acted in bad faith throughout. Dont expect to be treated better than you treated others.

 

[Bodi]

Nope. I know you cant, and wont. You acted in bad faith throughout. Dont expect to be treated better than you treated others.

See? I aske a question. You ignore it and ask a question... then demand that I answer yours first and then say I am acting in bad faith? LOL

Classic lying trolling bullshit immature tactic from a person that lies and trolls and makes immature stupid arguments. LOL

 

[Lursa]

See? I aske a question. You ignore it and ask a question... then demand that I answer yours first and then say I am acting in bad faith? LOL

Classic lying trolling bullshit immature tactic from a person that lies and trolls and makes immature stupid arguments. LOL

Right back atcha. Seems you dont like being treated the way you treat others.

There's a lesson to be learned there, eh? And it afforded me another opportunity to reiterate where your OP fails.

 

[Bodi]

Right back atcha. Seems you dont like being treated the way you treat others.

There's a lesson to be learned there, eh? And it afforded me another opportunity to reiterate where your OP fails.

I wish you the best in life... take care.

 

[Lursa]

I wish you the best in life... take care.

I'll stick around and handle things, it's a discussion after all.

 

[Individual]

Happy to answer. Just as soon as you answer these 2 in good faith with direct answers, as I've been asking them all along and you call them stupid in order to avoid them. Why should I answer yours first?

1) What happens if she ignores the "opt-out", and has the kid, you can't stop her...The child's rights would supersede any law that allowed a parent to walk away with no obligation. Such a law wouldnt pass anyway 'because' the state is obligated to protect the child's statutory rights but hey, with no societal benefits, please explain how your opt-out would take precedence over the child's rights?​

​

​

2) Nothing will keep the father from contacting the kid (or the kid from contacting the father) further down the line. So he can still be involved in the kid's life. No court will stop that...because all agree that it's best for the kid to have the father involved in their lives. (I do too). Some states even let rapists apply for custody when they're released...they're certainly not going to stop non-criminals from being in their kids' lives.​

​

Men will get out of all the financial responsibilities AND still get to be a father when they feel like it. How is this 'equal'? That's your paramount argument...so...how is this equal? It's not and that's just a fact.

​

A man and a Woman agree to have sex, both the man and the Woman have are equally able to prevent conception from occurring,
If conception occurs they are equally responsible for the failure to prevent it and only the Woman has been left with the responsibility of HAVING to make a choice which ONLY she can make regarding the conception.
If the Woman chooses to have an abortion, any future responsibility has been eliminated, post abortion, for both of them.
If the Woman chooses NOT to have an abortion, both she and the man have taken on a responsibility once a child has been born.
Once a child has been born, government has the Right to hold both the man and the Woman accountable for a responsibility for the child which the creation of can be traced back conclusively to each of them.
Above is basically how it works now, and how it should always work.

The change suggested in the OP is purely nonsensical, and would be a Bad Idea, not only for a child but society as a whole.

"A government of laws, not men." John Adams

 

[vegas giants]

Doesn't matter

Opinion noted and dismissed

 

[ClaraD]

Of course they have that option, there is no law preventing a man from leaving the Woman to be a single parent.

Yep, which is what he is missing. The man isn't obligated to be a father. He is however obligated to provide part of the financial responsibility for the child. The mother who becomes a single parent is on the hook for 100% of the raising of the child as well as at least 70% of the financial obligations. If it were truly equal the three here screaming opt-out would really scream then, because half the responsibility and half the parenting would actually be equal.