It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dave Chappell said "if women can kill their babies, then men can abandon them"

page: 11
64
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If the mother can't afford to feed, house, clothe and provide medical care to the child, society has to. Why should society have to pay for a dead beat dad's responsibility?

And the mother that can't afford all those things isn't dead beat because...?




posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Ummm. The first deadbeat dad that I know of personally would be my own grandfather, pre WW2.. my dad didnt personally know him, not did I.. it wasn't till after my father died that we found out the guy just lived blocks away from son throughout his childhood.
Then theres the lawyer who lived next door to my grandmother with the six or so kids who ran off with his sexitary while his wife was pregnant with their next bundle of joy. I dont know if he ever paid any child support or how much time he spent with the kids afterwards. I just rank him in with the deadbeat because he had so many kids with his wife before he opted for a newer and younger version, i just think she deserved a full time husband at home, being a full time partner in the parenting. Those two, and there are more I could bring up from my childhood, were before the current craziness. Then there are the many moms I have known who were my neighbors who's kids played with mine in the eighties and nineties.
Most were separated or divorced.

And. I dont think the courts value the men less, they value them differently. They tend to think that the men have devouted the bulk of their time earning the money and financially supporting the family while the women have devouted most of hers doing the domestic tasks. And, many judges, much like society are kind of biased on this point. To them, this is the natural order of things and they should do what they can to preserve it. And, maybe I am wrong, but i kind of think it is a pretty accurate description of most families. Even I families where both work, a priority will be placed on the mans job and the need to preserve it. And, when the family breaks up, whoever does get custody, will find employment more challenging.
So, if they end up in front of the judge, who might be biased to begin with, with a couple who may have been placing a priority on the mans career because he has a higher earning potential and is earning a considerable amount more than his wife....
Hes gonna preserve the mans ability to earn that money...



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Because she is having to pay an insane amount into childcare
Because the kid isnt the healthiest kid and she has to leave work often when the school calls for her to pick them up
Because that sick kids disrupts her sleep often resulting in her being a zombie at work
Because, even if the mother doesnt have problems like these, the employer expects them and will conclude there is a reason to think her work wont be as valuable as a father or a childless women..



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If the mother can't afford to feed, house, clothe and provide medical care to the child, society has to. Why should society have to pay for a dead beat dad's responsibility?

And the mother that can't afford all those things isn't dead beat because...?


She's Catholic?



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

I have no idea what any of this means so I can't tell you if you have it right.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Like men haven't been abandoning their kids and families since forever.

No not all men but they sure don't need an excuse like this to do it.

And the kids they abandon, those mothers decided not to get abortions.

When you assault the nuclear family and the idea it takes 2 parents to raise a child and say it only takes one don't be surprised when this happens.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Like men haven't been abandoning their kids and families since forever.

No not all men but they sure don't need an excuse like this to do it.

And the kids they abandon, those mothers decided not to get abortions.

Really?!?!
Wow and here I thought all men were upstanding father's.

Like usual you have added nothing of substance to this thread. While managing to ignore the true problem. Intersectional feminism has a double standard when it comes to pregnancy. We got women aborting children who have a father willing to raise and care for them. Men have very little say in what goes on after conception.

I know from personal experience what it's like to go through this and I'll tell you it's impossible not to see it as anything other than murder...



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Interesting OP. I remember nearly sleeping with this woman awhile ago who had alot of one night stands. Which, i don't think is bad. If it's okay for a guy to be a slut, then it should be okay for a girl.

Anyway, 3-4 monthes later i see her and she is pregnant. Is the random one-night-stand joe who got her pregnant now liable to pay child support for that baby?

I say no.. A woman knows that she's not using birth control and may have even secretly wanted a baby. I don't think the guy should now have to pay childcare for 18 years because of some casual sex one night.

Well.. dodged a bullet on that one.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It has been happening since the beginning of time. Lol.. according to the bible, it was the reason god allowed men to divorce their wives. Before he did that, the women were pretty much tied to their husbands with little opportunity to be able to live independently. And while the man could marry again. As long as the women he married wasn't married already. And so, the men would marry a girl, maybe have a few kids and then get bored or whatever and run off in search for another wife leaving his wife and little ones pretty much out in the cold in a society that said her only role within it was as a wife and mother.
So, god accepted that maybe there should be divorce after all and told them that they had to at least free there wives so they could find another provider for the family he deserted.
A few years ago an Israeli man was thrown into jail for not giving his wife a divorce when the court ordered him to. God never did give the women the right to divorce their husband I guess, or at least he didnt let the Jewish people know he did.
But even within a structure that pretty much forced women into that nuclear family, historical records seem to indicate that that men deserting their families was a significant problem.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

Well, first there has to be proof that one night Joe is the daddy, and if he isnt shes gonna have to keep guessing till she gets the right one... incurring the cost of each DNA test that failed to prove parentage I think... since the only time the cost falls on the man is when it proves hes the daddy.
But ya, if the daddy is found, hes probably gonna have to pay.. but I have also known women to just naming names and deliberately forgetting the father and thus, the father is never found. In order to get govt assistance she has to name some names, but I imagine the good one " I do not recall" would work just as well for the intoxicated slut as it does for the upstanding, dependable political hack holding a government position.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

Sounds fair to me. If women can evade responsibility then men should be able to do the same without repercussion. It's either real equality or smoke being blown up people's asses in the name of favoritism for strong women...who aren't so strong when times get tough. We all know it's been the latter for years and years. The big elephant in the room that people are either too much of a coward to point out, or they think women are going to give them (something) for supporting them, hence male feminists (the absolute dumbest men in the world). Women have had favoritism on their side for a long, long time now. They essentially piss on our backs and try to convince us that it's raining.
edit on 1-9-2019 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies

Legally the responsibility begins at Childbirth.

A woman can not demand the biological father pay for abortion or prenatal care or even delivery.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: The2Billies


I have been saying this for YEARS.

Why is it only the woman's choice? If the man decides he doesn't want the responsibility, then he should be free to do so.

After all, her body HER choice. Right ladies?

you can't have it both ways for much longer.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Well yea, if a lady could get a guy to take a dna test and prove it then legally he would have to pay.

I was arguing more on a philosophical level. If a lady is sleeping around, and you just happen to be the guy that gets her knocked up, then i don't think you should be morally required to pay.

You entered into a casual sex scenario thinking it was just that. If a woman is having lots of protection-free sex then she knows she is going to have a kid sooner or later. It's not right (in my subjective opinion) to trap that one unlucky guy with childcare.
edit on 1-9-2019 by blueman12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   
At the very least I think a parentage test should be standard, or at the extreme least change extend the window a guy has to challenge paternity, to often they dont get notified at all until the law tracks them down and that's long after the legally allowed window to challenge has closed.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If the mother can't afford to feed, house, clothe and provide medical care to the child, society has to. Why should society have to pay for a dead beat dad's responsibility?

And the mother that can't afford all those things isn't dead beat because...?


True.

What the other XX (I am XX) are saying is:

Today, where a uterus owner has the choice and legal right to abort the fetal tissue,

and it is a major if not THE feminist issue of the progressive feminist.

That when the uterus owner CHOOSES to allow the fetal tissue to fully form and breathe

IF she can not afford to support the fully formed and breathing fetal tissue

She can demand a man take financial care of her and take financial care of HER choice (and hers alone) for 18 years

That an XX can not survive the choice she made, without a man caring for her financially.

So feminist of them.

What they can't see is the irony

of today's new morality that encourages all of this behavior.





edit on 9/1/19 by The2Billies because: formatting



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Just like there's no "good argument" for women to kill off their child or children.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: The2Billies

Legally the responsibility begins at Childbirth.

A woman can not demand the biological father pay for abortion or prenatal care or even delivery.



True but XX can choose, and it is XX's choice alone, to abort if "she" (forgive the sexist pronoun) can afford to raise a child.

XX gets to decide before the fetal tissue is allowed to take it's first breath.

Legally XY has no input before fetal tissue expulsion - but XX CAN CHOOSE to allow the fetal tissue to breathe when XX is unable to financially care for it

If it is XX choice and XX alone, then why make XY pay for XX making a choice she is unable to pay for

As long as XY is given no choice and XX is. XX then makes the decision to allow the fetal tissue to breathe when she can not pay for the care of the fetal tissue - that is XX's " bad "decision - according to today's new popular morality.

Why should XY be forced to pay for 18 years for someone else's bad decision, when XY had no power to make any decisions before "fetal breathe"

If XX had no choice and could not legally expel the fetal tissue before "childbirth" and throw it away,
then XX and XY would be equally responsible at conception.


However, this is not how our world operates these days.
(forgive my sexist language to come, I hope it isn't too disturbing to young progressives)
The woman has a choice
and then says it is her right to force a man to financially care for her choice
and she can not survive without a man taking care of her and her choice

This is the most UN-feminist, un-progressive, il-liberal, view I have heard, and it reeks of gender inequality.




edit on 9/1/19 by The2Billies because: grammar formatting



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Because she is having to pay an insane amount into childcare
Because the kid isnt the healthiest kid and she has to leave work often when the school calls for her to pick them up
Because that sick kids disrupts her sleep often resulting in her being a zombie at work
Because, even if the mother doesnt have problems like these, the employer expects them and will conclude there is a reason to think her work wont be as valuable as a father or a childless women..


Is it the sperm donors fault
that the egg donor
made the independent and legally only her choice
not to abort
in this day and age
when the egg donor is unable to afford childcare
is unable to hold a job and care for her choice?

Once abortion became legal and it was deemed illegal
for the sperm donor to have input
that only the egg donor could make the choice
the choice became that of the egg donor
making the result of the choice
her responsibility and only her responsibility.
Unless, you think that if a egg donor makes
a choice to keep the fetal tissue when she can
not afford to care for it.
Then the woman must have a man to take care of her
and her decision financially - that she can not survive
without the financial support of a male.



posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Classical first wave feminism was and still is a beautiful thing. Almost everything that came after is brain cancer.

I am so grateful I did my child havin' and child reerin' decades ago when there was a lot less nonsense going on, TBPH.




However, this is how our world operates these days. (forgive my sexist language to come, I hope it isn't too disturbing to young progressives) The woman has a choice and then says it is her right to force a man to financially care for her choice and she can not survive without a man taking care of her and her choice This is the most UN-feminist, un-progressive, il-liberal, view I have heard, and it reeks of gender inequality.


Modern intersectional feminism is terrible for women, women of color and non-straight people because it conditions them to believe that they are (and will always be) "victims" of a white male overclass. They've redefined the words "racism" and "sexual assault / harrassment" to such a degree that the words themselves have lost almost all meaning. Fortunately, most grown women in my experience think intersectional feminism is nonsense and the ones that don't are easy enough to spot and avoid like active herpes.




top topics



 
64
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join