Sorry....but the man should have ZERO say in it. He is not the one that carries the fetus. This is a woman's choice and a woman's choice only.
If you want to make that argument then we can say that until women are physically stronger than men that men should be more dominant. We can choose equal treatment for both genders or unequal due to biological differences, but pick your side and stick with it.
So a woman can shirk responsibility via abortion, but a man can't?
Oh, you're one of those...
Nevermind.
That is a false argument for two reasons. The first is that there a female weight lifters and the like who are a lot stronger than your average guy. The second is that our society isn't based on strength, men don't get to dominate other men because they are stronger. It isn't physically possible for anyone other than women to carry children. If we develop some advanced biotechnology that puts a womb in a dude, the same standard would apply.
So a woman can shirk responsibility via abortion, but a man can't?
If a woman chooses to keep her pregnancy and have a child against the man's wishes and she chooses to not use her legal option of birth control and have an abortion, should the man have to pay child suport for her choice.Should the man have to pay Child Support if he does not want the child and the woman decides to not opt to have an abortion as a means of contraception?I think that he should not be legally liable if he does not want the child. The woman has all the choice and can not only keep the baby and make him pay, but she can keep the baby, not tell him about the baby and then hit him up 18 years later for back Child Support.This thread is not about a woman's right to choose. That is legal and fine and all that. This thread is about a woman's choice subjegating a man to the role of a wallet for 18 years due to the whim of a woman's choice to keep a child against his wishes. Before we hear the whole, he shoulda kept it in his pants and now he has no choice in the matter. That is understood. That is the law. The issue is, is the law fair? As far as I am aware, there is no case law that deals with him being forced due to her choice. There is law about her having a choice, but none about why he should have to pay for her choice. That being said, this thread is not about the law, but about what is right. This is also not about exceptions: ie, she found out 5 months into her pregnancy due to irregular cycles, etc. This is about the woman that gets pregnant when the man wants to leave the marriage, or the woman that pricks the condom when having sex with a guy that she just met so that she gets pregnant and wants nothing to do with him or the times that a one-nighter turns into an 18 year nightmare simply because she wanted the child more and the state backs her decision out of sexism.Are women not responsible? Can she not be held liable for her own decisions?If she wants the baby, that is fine. She should have the baby and the man should be able to be out of the picture, should he so choose. If she doesn not want to raise the child on her own with no support, then she should abort. Easy as that. That is her right. That is the law. Hopefull I have explained all of this well enough. Yes, this is about abortion and threads like this exist in the Abortion Forum, but this is also a poll. I would like to know what people think outside the abortion debating crowd.Be nice please and just stick to the poll. If tangents occur please make a thread in the Abortion Forum as would be appropriate.Thanks...
Um... yeah, I think he's on the hook. Though I don't know about half. The fact that he's not receiving any of the benefits of parenthood but none of the perks... I'm not sure about this one, honestly.
But the 18 years later thing... that's bull. Child support is about supporting the child, not paying back someone for past actions.
If you want to make that argument then we can say that until women are physically stronger than men that men should be more dominant. We can choose equal treatment for both genders or unequal due to biological differences, but pick your side and stick with it.
So a woman can shirk responsibility via abortion, but a man can't?
You have to realize that given the power, I'd force him to marry her and raise the child with her, but that's not feasible in our current system.
You have to realize that given the power, I'd force him to marry her and raise the child with her, but that's not feasible in our current system.
Why is an unhappy two parent household filled with strife and resentment better than a happy and stable one parent one? Maybe she'll meet someone better two years later, whom she'll marry and be happy with, who'll be a good father. If she had to marry the first guy, none of that would come to pass. Maybe that won't happen, but there's a lot of potential if one isn't limited.
You mean "force them to marry eachother" - marriage isn't a one-way street, you know.
Remember that in my mind a marriage is much more a business proposition than a relationship based on emotional attachment and "love".
*snort*
Trust me babe - there's no 'business' to it. Those who marry for financial and other reasons beyond love (or something of that nature) often end in divorce or worse. You must have something that keeps you together and gives you a reason to deal with each other's issues and troubles.
And put a child in the middle - wow - children in a relationship can be the most challenging aspect which can test even the closest of couples.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?