• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Post Conception Opt-Out? Good Idea or Bad?

Should women be allowed to hold men hostage to their choice or should a man be able to legally opt o

  • Total voters
    37
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bodhisattva said:
You are not addressing the argument. Lame and indicative or being incapable of debating accurately or honestly.
Click to expand...
No, it makes plenty of logical sense.

Man/woman consent to sex knowing it may result in pregnancy.

Women has options/choices post-conception because her health/health of pregnancy is unknown at time of conception.

Man’s choice and consent remain from step 1 because nothing about man’s situation changes.


Is that simply explained enough yet?
 
BirdinHand said:
No, it makes plenty of logical sense.

Man/woman consent to sex knowing it may result in pregnancy.

Women has options/choices post-conception because her health/health of pregnancy is unknown at time of conception.

Man’s choice and consent remain from step 1 because nothing about man’s situation changes.


Is that simply explained enough yet?
Click to expand...
That needs to change
 
trouble13 said:
The law tracks those people down and threatens them with jail if they don't pay mommy support.

There is a legal consequence attached to what you are suggesting.
Click to expand...
No, it really doesn't. There is little effort put in, especially if you don't give the woman your real name.

"She heard it from this guy. Ken Adams." Joey:"Me, I'm Ken Adams."

Men do lie to women all the time about their names. It isn't even illegal.

There is no criminal consequence, and legally, you are very likely to avoid paying child support.
 
BirdinHand said:
No, it makes plenty of logical sense.

Man/woman consent to sex knowing it may result in pregnancy.

Women has options/choices post-conception because her health/health of pregnancy is unknown at time of conception.

Man’s choice and consent remain from step 1 because nothing about man’s situation changes.


Is that simply explained enough yet?
Click to expand...
My argument is too savvy for you... I have bypassed those issues with the way that I have framed it. Sorry that you don't understand it. *shrug*
 
roguenuke said:
No, it really doesn't. There is little effort put in, especially if you don't give the woman your real name.

"She heard it from this guy. Ken Adams." Joey:"Me, I'm Ken Adams."

Men do lie to women all the time about their names. It isn't even illegal.

There is no criminal consequence, and legally, you are very likely to avoid paying child support.
Click to expand...
Does not work if she knows who you are
 
Bodhisattva said:
My argument is too savvy for you... I have bypassed those issues with the way that I have framed it. Sorry that you don't understand it. *shrug*
Click to expand...
Yawn.

Boo, you’re a divorced dude bitching about child support.

There’s nothing savvy about that at all.
 
vegas giants said:
Does not work of she knows who you are
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should think about that beforehand, assess whether you are willing to take that risk. It is definitely an option she doesn't have, at least when it comes to being stuck being the only one of the two people who created the person being responsible for them financially.

If she aborts or has a miscarriage, no child, therefore, no financial responsibility from the man needed.

If she has the child, then gives it up for adoption, either lying or getting the man onboard to sign, or she simply doesnt know who he is, he again still has no financial obligation.

If she even just drops off the child at a safe haven, he again has no financial obligation, unless he chooses to take it on at that point, after.

So when it comes to being forced into financial obligation, when she decides to raise the child, it would be either he pays a certain portion, normally less than half (that is the average for child support, less than half the cost of raising a child) or he pays nothing because he ditched and she is raising the child alone (may get help from society, through welfare, depending on if she qualifies). There is no option here where he pays and she doesn't.

What that means is this is really about revenge or shirking responsibility, some men just want to live their lives without the consequences. In the case where some are in it for revenge, it is based on "well she can choose to abort my baby so I should be able to choose something completely different, really the opposite of what I'm complaining about her doing".
 
Last edited:
roguenuke said:
Perhaps you should think about that beforehand, assess whether you are willing to take that risk.
Click to expand...
Said the pro lifer to the pro choicer


You make all the arguments to outlaw abortion
 
roguenuke said:
No, you support men taking advantage of women.
Click to expand...

Well...it's manipulating women, emotionally, mentally. Trying to influence their decisions to keep or abort...by threatening to leave her if she doesnt have an abortion.

The woman's right to abortion is clear and supported by several Const amendments...there's no resort for men there...so they dont have much in the way of other options...so they have to try manipulation.

I'm not sure women would be this weak anyway, I hope not, but I dont think it would work IRL.
 
Lursa said:
Well...it's manipulating women, emotionally, mentally. Trying to influence their decisions to keep or abort...by threatening to leave her if she doesnt have an abortion.

The woman's right to abortion is clear and supported by several Const amendments...there's no resort for men there...so they dont have much in the way of other options...so they have to try manipulation.

I'm not sure women would be this weak anyway, I hope not, but I dont think it would work IRL.
Click to expand...
Man you have a low opinion of women
 
Lycanthrope said:
And there it is - the common perception that a man can't be expected to take responsibility for his actions in relation to sex, and instead society relies on the woman to do it. But once the consequences of his actions unfold, a man suddenly deserves a say in how the woman responds.

Because "life happens."
Click to expand...

Exactly. Men are no longer entitled to sex without consequences...women never have been and still are not. That's now 'equal.' And that's what some posters here say they want, 'equality'. 🤷

Some men are so used to being entitled to sex without consequences that they cannot grasp the fact that now they need to be more responsible for their own best interests instead of being angry at women and blaming us when WE do what's in our best interests.

After millennia of male privilege and control, "When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality seems like oppression."
 
Lursa said:
Exactly. Men are no longer entitled to sex without consequences...women never have been and still are not. That's now 'equal.' And that's what some posters here say they want, 'equality'. 🤷

Some men are so used to being entitled to sex without consequences that they cannot grasp the fact that now they need to be more responsible for their own best interests instead of being angry at women and blaming us when WE do what's in our best interests.

After millennia of male privilege and control, "When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality seems like oppression."
Click to expand...
Men have never had sex without consequences
 
roguenuke said:
Because of biology, the unequal effects on their body, unequal risk they take to their body.
Click to expand...

And men. "Legal" men have the same right to abortion. So the law is equal. They need a new 'tune' to play to try and pretend there's some 'noble cause' here. Rather than men trying to avoid consequences that they knowingly risked.
 
trouble13 said:
I did not claim it was a good solution. Only that it was more fair to both parents.

If the child's best interests are your priority explain to me how killing it before it's born is in the child's best interest?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Because then there's no child. Holy crap how obtuse do you want to be?
 
Lursa said:
And men. "Legal" men have the same right to abortion. So the law is equal. They need a new 'tune' to play to try and pretend there's some 'noble cause' here. Rather than men trying to avoid consequences that they knowingly risked.
Click to expand...
No. The law is currently unfair
 
Lursa said:
And men. "Legal" men have the same right to abortion. So the law is equal. They need a new 'tune' to play to try and pretend there's some 'noble cause' here. Rather than men trying to avoid consequences that they knowingly risked.
Click to expand...
Yep. It really applies to anyone who is pregnant and compared to anyone who may be the other parent, providing the other info. One is always taking on a bigger risk than the other, so it is always going to be unequal in consequence.
 
BirdinHand said:
Men had the choice as to whether or not they wanted to potentially become a parent before they had penis in vagina sex with a woman.

Not sure why that’s so complicated to understand for anyone.
Click to expand...
who here doesn't understand that? qoute them

oh wait nobody just another called retarded strawman that has no imp[act on th e actual topic of equality LMAO
 
roguenuke said:
Yep. It really applies to anyone who is pregnant and compared to anyone who may be the other parent, providing the other info. One is always taking on a bigger risk than the other, so it is always going to be unequal in consequence.
Click to expand...
But it can be more equal
 
BirdinHand said:
No, it makes plenty of logical sense.

Man/woman consent to sex knowing it may result in pregnancy.

Women has options/choices post-conception because her health/health of pregnancy is unknown at time of conception.

Man’s choice and consent remain from step 1 because nothing about man’s situation changes.


Is that simply explained enough yet?
Click to expand...
yep it explains you have no clue what the topic is and you keep proving it over and over again LMAO
quick do it again! 😂🍿
 
roguenuke said:
No, I don't. I'm putting out my arguments on this topic with context. You trying to twist those, leave out context, doesn't make those arguments pro life arguments.
Click to expand...
Sorry. You want responsibility....just not for women
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom