• 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!

[W:1721] [W:2837] Post Conception Opt-Out FOR MEN

Hold Man Hostage?

  • Total voters
    31
Bodi said:
Courts have said that this is irrelevant and still ruled against the man...
Click to expand...
Post conception is too late. You, or any male, doesn't want a child or to pay, then don't have sex. After that, too bad on both. That's the risk.

or get a vasectomy.
 
lwf said:
I have refuted the "post conception inequality argument." I have proven that there is no post conception inequality when it comes to abortion and "opting out" of financial responsibility. These are entirely separate things, and they apply to both the mother and the father exactly equally.
Click to expand...
What a joke. LOL. No. Not even slightly have your refuted it.
lwf said:
The reason we cannot debate further is because you don't have a logical rebuttal.
Click to expand...
Post Conception... can a woman opt-out of financial responsibility for supporting the child should she choose?

Post Conception... can a man opt-out of financial responsibility for supporting the child should she choose to keep the child?
 
ALiberalModerate said:
So taxpayers should foot the bill for deadbeat dads?
Click to expand...
I love it when people show how much they hate men.

A man that does not want to have or support a kid is a dead beat.

A woman that does not want to have or support a kid is a responsible mother for killing it.

LOL
 
Bodi said:
Post Conception... can a woman opt-out of financial responsibility for supporting the child should she choose?
Click to expand...
No.

Bodi said:
Post Conception... can a man opt-out of financial responsibility for supporting the child should she choose to keep the child?
Click to expand...
No.
 
holbritter said:
Post conception is too late. You, or any male, doesn't want a child or to pay, then don't have sex. After that, too bad on both. That's the risk.

or get a vasectomy.
Click to expand...
It is not too late biologically... it is only too late legally. That is my argument and that is why you will not address it.
 
Bodi said:
No? I see you are playing games... lying is weak.
Click to expand...

How is he lying? You sure play fast and loose with that accusation. And it's unfounded as usual. Seems like he's not the one lying.
 
jpevans said:
Anyone can see that your argument is to get women to have abortions, so the male can have no responsibility. It's about making women 2nd class citizens.
Click to expand...
I am not suggesting anything of the sort. I am showing that there is inequality and that most people are not only fine with it, but embrace it to the point of man-hating misandry. It is engrained in people and it is sad.
 
Bodi said:
No? I see you are playing games... lying is weak.
Click to expand...
It is reality. Women cannot opt out of financial responsibility for their own children any more than men can. Both men and women have the right to bodily autonomy and can remove whatever they want to from their bodies.

You think that this is a contradiction. I have shown you that logically it isn't.
 
lwf said:
It is reality. Women cannot opt out of financial responsibility for their own children any more than men can. Both men and women have the right to bodily autonomy and can remove whatever they want to from their bodies.

You think that this is a contradiction. I have shown you that logically it isn't.
Click to expand...
No. All you did was just lie. Lying is a sign of defeat. Go back and answer honestly.

Post-Conception, can a woman opt-out of financially supporting a child by aborting it before it is born.?
 
Bodi said:
Nope. Just the ones that hail women and that insult men.
Click to expand...

You're the one that continually posts about men being incapable of making decisions in their own best interests, and should be allowed to escape accountability for decisions they made, and are victims. Your posts make men seem stupid and weak.

And when I post, I disagree with those things, I think men are much more capable and stronger than you do.
 
jpevans said:
Anyone can see that your argument is to get women to have abortions, so the male can have no responsibility. It's about making women 2nd class citizens.
Click to expand...
Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy or child birth... isn't that the woman's line to Pro-Lifers?
 
Bodi said:
No. All you did was just lie. Lying is a sign of defeat. Go back and answer honestly.

Post-Conception, can a woman opt-out of financially supporting a child by aborting it before it is born.?
Click to expand...
A fetus is not a child until it is born. A woman cannot opt out of supporting a child. A man cannot opt out of supporting a child. Both women AND men have the authority to remove another human being from inside of their own body. They cannot remove a human being from inside another person's body without that person's consent.

Where is the contradiction?
 
lwf said:
A fetus is not a child until it is born. A woman cannot opt out of supporting a child. A man cannot opt out of supporting a child. Both women AND men have the authority to remove another human being from inside of their own body. They cannot remove a human being from inside another person's body without that person's consent.

Where is the contradiction?
Click to expand...
Thanks for playing... you lost because you did not read well enough.
 
lwf said:
How convenient for you.
Click to expand...

That's ok. I dismantled his "opt-out", as in the past, with post 237. He likes to pretend that sourced information doesnt exist...as well as the reality of the men still having the option to be fathers later anyway.
 
lwf said:
Incorrect. The man is paying for a choice that he made.
Click to expand...
Hmmm....

You mean that the choice to have sex is solely that of the male, and therefore this male is solely responsible for the outcome of that choice?

I don't believe that is precisely how that is suppose to work.

Now, granted, the female involved has the issue of carrying the child to term, but that is her decision.

What you need to acknowledge is that the system works as it does based on the needs of society and has NOTHING to do with either the individual male's or the female's needs in this matter. Society doesn't want to be responsible for the decisions of these two individuals. What this is actually about is the idea that if this kid comes to term someone is going to have to PAY for it, and rightly or wrongly in this modern age that is STILL thought of as being the male's responsibility. So paying for maintaining that child is going to be, at least in part if not the largest part of it, placed upon the man [and it doesn't have to be the actual biological father... it can be some clod who walked in the way of that bullet and now its on him].

If we were a truly liberated, fair, society some other way of working this out would be arrived at, but we aren't. We hold on to some notions that are well past their sell by date. This being one of those.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
Hmmm....

You mean that the choice to have sex is solely that of the male, and therefore this male is solely responsible for the outcome of that choice?

I don't believe that is precisely how that is suppose to work.

Now, granted, the female involved has the issue of carrying the child to term, but that is her decision.

What you need to acknowledge is that the system works as it does based on the needs of society and has NOTHING to do with either the individual male's or the female's needs in this matter. Society doesn't want to be responsible for the decisions of these two individuals. What this is actually about is the idea that if this kid comes to term someone is going to have to PAY for it, and rightly or wrongly in this modern age that is STILL thought of as being the male's responsibility. So paying for maintaining that child is going to be, at least in part if not the largest part of it, placed upon the man [and it doesn't have to be the actual biological father... it can be some clod who walked in the way of that bullet and now its on him].

If we were a truly liberated, fair, society some other way of working this out would be arrived at, but we aren't. We hold on to some notions that are well past their sell by date. This being one of those.
Click to expand...
No, that is not accurate. Sex is the choice of both the male and the female and if they have a child, then it is the responsibility of both to support the child. There is nothing unfair about this.
 
lwf said:
No, that is not accurate. Sex is the choice of both the male and the female and if they have a child, then it is the responsibility of both to support the child. There is nothing unfair about this.
Click to expand...

Lets get truly liberated, both from the female and male perspective and answer this question.

It is the decision of both the man and the woman to have sex. Certainly if a child comes into being they are both responsible for its care and maintenance.

The issue is: Why though is it only the choice of the woman as to whether a child is the end result of that coupling? Sure, she is the one whose body it resides in until it comes to term, but why is that fact the sole issue in deciding whether a child come to term or not? Why does the donator of 1/2 its DNA not have some say in the matter?

The reason is as I stated. It is because it has nothing to do with either the man or the woman. It has to do with society and whether it is an individual ultimately responsible or society.

This was decided a long time ago, using a value system that may not be relevant today.

The question is: When two people equally decide to have sex that results in conception, and they disagree about whether it should be brought to term or not, why does one party who is only one half of the DNA involved have greater rights to decide the outcome than the other whose other 21 chromosomes are involved? Why is the decision that impacts each equally left only to one of the two involved to decide?

Why is that the case in a society that is truly liberated? [MY answer is that we aren't, and that it wouldn't matter if we were because the decision has nothing to do with the liberation of either men or women, but who pays... an individual or society?]
 
lwf said:
How convenient for you.
Click to expand...
Not really. It would have been better to have a conversation with somebody being honest.
 
lwf said:
Incorrect. The man is paying for a choice that he made.
Click to expand...
Consent to sex is not consent to being a parent... that is the Pro-Choice mantra... but only for women, it seems.
 
holbritter said:
Post conception is too late. You, or any male, doesn't want a child or to pay, then don't have sex. After that, too bad on both. That's the risk.

or get a vasectomy.
Click to expand...
Agree it should be preconception.. Then there is informed consent
 
lwf said:
No, that is not accurate. Sex is the choice of both the male and the female and if they have a child, then it is the responsibility of both to support the child. There is nothing unfair about this.
Click to expand...
But it is not the responsibility of both if she gets a abortion


She gets an extra post conception choice
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom