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.

 

Men's-rights activists seek right to decline fatherhood in event of unplanned pregnancy

page: 22
56
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


She can sure kill it without the consent of the father though!




posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I figure it like this, a mother can straight out DENY a father his right to see his child. Well, let the guys have one and let them DENY responsibility.

I'm a father of a beautiful daughter myself, so I couldn't think of a reason why a father wouldn't want to take part in their child's life, but many women will gladly deny that towards their child's father.

So I don't really see what the problem is here. Women have been getting too much when it comes with who decides what for the child, and often it's not a good idea. Take my ex for example, I'm fighting a SUPER HARD custody battle over our child because she's abusive towards her. The kicker is that it's harder for me to get custody because I'm a guy.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by teamnick
Furthermore, many girls poke holes in the condoms, or will lie about being on birth control. I truly hope some form of male birth control gets developed, so the playing field can be evened. Right now, there's nothing stopping girls from lying and then holding a man hostage for the money, using the child that they then neglect as a pawn to extort money out of the man. Please, man-hating feminists who have been crapping up this thread, tell me how this is morally right, and yet the idea of the man being able to opt out of this is wrong?


Men know about these possibilities, and yet they continue to have sex with women without knowing them as well as they should.

None of those things are morally right, yet you assume that the man NEVER says "Oh, I'm infertile" or "Yeah, I put on a condom," or "I'll just put it in for a little bit," or "I promise I'll stop in time," or...

On a different track, how about "I love you" when he just wants to get laid? Or "I promise I'll divorce my wife, and we'll get married," or...

A guy who does any one of those things and got a woman pregnant would get a free ticket out of responsibility, yet I notice you somehow didn't think of that side of the equation, because in your mind only women are the scheming ones.

Funny that you complain about "man-hating feminists," then you make a misogynistic post that avoids any possibility that the man could be the party participating "in bad faith."

Typical misogynistic drivel masked as "equal rights."



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I see that some women don't want this because it will strip their power away when it comes to financially ruining someone. What's the big deal? Women had to fight for their rights back in the day and I turned out that they were given more rights than a man. Now that power to hold a child over a mans head is fading and people are upset. I don't think a child needs both parents to be a successful person in life. I also don't think it's right to have some woman with five different kids from five different dudes, and be collecting child support from all of them. That is wrong In my opinion. Abortion isn't a issue here. It's legal so get over it. This is a good thing that is happening. I've seen too many good people be reduced to nothing because of some gold digging whore. Of course some will be against this. But if you think about it what are equal rights when it comes to the power of a woman vs. the power of a man? They damned sure aren't equal right now.

MOTF!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 




Wow, I do not know a single mother who had her baby to financially ruin someone.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


She can sure kill it without the consent of the father though!
Why is the consent of the father needed? The female's consent to the procedure is all that is needed.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Hedera Helix
 


You do realize the unedited post also contains the words "tongue in cheek"?

I am helping an already ridiculous arguement further along the ridiculous path.

You have your fun, I have mine
.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


She can sure kill it without the consent of the father though!
Why is the consent of the father needed? The female's consent to the procedure is all that is needed.


Why is the consent of the father needed for an Adoption to take place then? The mother should just be able to sign the child away by that reasoning.

You're right a woman always knows when to kill her baby. Because we as a majority condone it.... That must make it right. The father had nothing to do with making the baby right? We all know that female homo sapiens reproduce asexually.



edit on 17-9-2010 by DaMod because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You are making some brash assumptions.

What if the man did not deposit willingly? Ie: condomn breakage.

Then, under legal terms the woman would have "stolen" his semen and sperm.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Frontkjemper
 


It is a very hard road that you have ahead of you. I too had to fight for custody of my daughter. Being a man, we usually have absolutely no say in anything that has to do with the rights of the child. I dis get custody and I didn't seek child support because I know that it dosent take 700 dollars a month to raise a child. It is rediculus what some people have to pay just to get every other weekend with their kids. Go you.

MOTF!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frontkjemper
I figure it like this, a mother can straight out DENY a father his right to see his child. Well, let the guys have one and let them DENY responsibility.


No, she can't. Even if he's not paying his child support, he has a legal right to see his kid - it's right there in the court orders for custody and visitation. Unless, of course, there is adequate cause to keep the man away from the kid - abuse, neglect, etc.


I'm a father of a beautiful daughter myself, so I couldn't think of a reason why a father wouldn't want to take part in their child's life, but many women will gladly deny that towards their child's father.


Just to be mean, right? There can be no other options, of course, because they're just man-haters. And the possibility that the man just may be a jerk who refuses to be responsible isn't really worthy of consideration.


So I don't really see what the problem is here. Women have been getting too much when it comes with who decides what for the child, and often it's not a good idea. Take my ex for example, I'm fighting a SUPER HARD custody battle over our child because she's abusive towards her. The kicker is that it's harder for me to get custody because I'm a guy.


That is wrong, and I hope you prevail. In a case like that, equal protection definitely applies.

However, a female friend of mine is fighting in court to keep her kids as her ex is trying to take full custody despite him being abusive and neglectful to the extent that she carried a baby to term that did not develop a functional brain. She chose not to abort, and carried the brain-dead fetus to term, and he was never around to support her. But there's a strong possibility that he'll get custody of their other two kids, even though he's a terrible human being.

Hell, I know another woman whose ex not only managed to get custody of their child, but also the child she had BEFORE SHE MET HIM. It goes both ways.

It ain't black and white. Men and women can both be unjust.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Wow. I do.

MOTF!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 

Da mod;
I have a nephew who is in the same boat. His father left, divorced my sister, and to date has never had contact with him. He had contact with his grandmother who acts like its all his (nephew's) fault and an uncle who moved not too far from my mother's house where the nephew was raised. He visited once or twice, but felt all efforts were not made for the right reasons. Since then, he's gone on to be an electrician with 3 kids whose lives he is deeply involved in. You can't pry him away from his kids.
But there is no connection with that side of the family except one Christmas when his father actually called and spoke with my mother. He said he knew his son hated him but he had more so that's all he cared for. My mother told him never to call again.
I also have a friend who got pregnant and the guy claimed he didn't want to be bothered and left town. She got a good job, a place to live and had her baby. His mother came to visit her claiming she wanted to meet her grand baby then left. The father then returned saying his mother agrees its his kid and he should be responsible. It was a trap though, see he was a crack head by then and the mother just wanted dumping grounds.
Moral of these stories - I am seeing all of these "men do this" "women do that" mess on here and the truth is this: If you have a story to tell, tell it and stop trying to make everyone look bad just because you were hurt once - MALES AND FEMALES ALIKE!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I've spent the last hour or so going over this thread and for the first 10 pages or so it was only reminding me why I call myself a misogynist. All the while I was hoping for a reasonable woman to make an intelligent argument, so I wouldn't have to, because I really don't like this issue at all and wish (oh so idealistically) that people could just exercise more sense and self control.

Thank you, Benevolent Heretic. I tend to get really uptight about these 'sexism-related' issues, and we have disagreed before. In fact, I never expected I would want to star one of your posts, but I have starred almost all of them in this thread. I've become (somewhat rabidly) anti-feminist, because most of them do not seem to believe in equality at all and I think it's counter-productive in generating the kind of mutual respect I wish were possible.

I think true equality is a vague ideal considering physical truths (absent transhumanistic 'evolution'), but it's refreshing to read the views of a self-labeled 'feminist' who isn't motivated simply by resentment for the opposite sex. I think you present the sort of policy that may be as close to equality as we can come to, and it seems mutually respectful at least.

Just posting to say, as a woman/mother/wife, I appreciate your voice of reason in this thread. A feminist who seems to love and respect a man? Unheard of!


(Editing to add: I am not "pro-choice". I do not support or encourage abortion at all. I do not consider a fetus a parasite. I just approve of BH's argument considering the current legal/social situation in our system/society.)

(Editing again to add: On second thought, I guess I am pro-choice. A woman who wants to have an abortion should, it's better than being a negligent mother and making the whole of society have one more messed up person to deal with.)


edit on 9/17/2010 by eMachine because: clarifying views




edit on 9/17/2010 by eMachine because: changing mind



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by MessOnTheFED!
 




Wow, I do not know a single mother who had her baby to financially ruin someone.


If you don't know anyone who has, then it must have been YOU that did!

Just kidding. This thread needed some levity.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You are making some brash assumptions.

What if the man did not deposit willingly? Ie: condomn breakage.

Then, under legal terms the woman would have "stolen" his semen and sperm.


There is no such thing as a galactic prophylactic. Condoms have breaking points.
So a question for you: You (man) decide to put Vaseline on the condom, it breaks,
Do you get full custody? You were the one who broke it, right?
Oh, and how do you feel about a vasectomy? Your sperm/semen can't get stolen then, could it?


edit on 17-9-2010 by DaWhiz because: added the Oh comment on vasectomy



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You don't seem to get it.

A man has NO rights concerning a child.

When the child is born a woman can put the father (or whomever she wants) name on the birth certificate...or not. She can legally leave it blank if she wishes.

If the man wants his name on the birth certificate, he will be required to get a court order ALLOWING a DNA test. If the DNA test is positive, he will REQUIRE another court ored to get his name on the birth certificate.

Average cost in Canada $20,000, give or take a couple of grand. And there is NO option for having the mother shoulder some of the financial responsibilities of this.

And this applies if a women puts your name on if you aren't the father as well.

As for the the other...well, in my daughters papers, it literally stated "Immaculate Conception".

So, like I said, whatever bs, I don't think the authorities check anyways.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DaWhiz
 


So then, no matter what the man does he must be responsible?

In my opinion, if woman can control abortion, why can't a man prove he took "reasonable" precautions against pregnancy. They should have the same legal rights to avoid parenting.

That's what "equality" is all about isn't it?

Edit to add:

As I am now done with procreation, I beat you to the vasecotmy by about 2 years. Unlike some people, I knew then and know now how to control my procreation.


edit on 17-9-2010 by peck420 because: Vasectomy



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by Hedera Helix
 


You do realize the unedited post also contains the words "tongue in cheek"?

I am helping an already ridiculous arguement further along the ridiculous path.

You have your fun, I have mine
.


Okey dokey!



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp
Its not extreme nor is it irrelevant when you're trying to argue what is alive and what isnt. Especially when we're talking about justified killings.


I'm several pages late, but this is my first chance to respond fully. I was not arguing what is alive and what is not. Thus your post was indeed an extreme take on what I said and completely irrelevant to the topic.


I'm not putting words in your mouth, you just dont seem to like the points I'm making. Miscarriages have nothing to do with the issue of abortion. Lets stay on track here ok?


You have several times actually. I mentioned miscarriages while explaining why I think the way I do about abortion. Apparently you are the only one permitted to explain the thought process behind their opinion.


SO just because its not detectable means it doesnt exist? Or is this just putting words in your mouth?


That's not what I said, so yes it is putting words in my mouth.


YOU are the one putting words in MY mouth by saying I would prefer abortion rather than the alternative.


On the contrary, I never said you preferred anything. I said if you knew how many children are left to rot in foster care you wouldn't be advocating it as a viable alternative.


We arent arguing this, so THIS point means absolutely nothing


Of course it doesn't. Nothing I post means anything according to you, so I wonder why you keep responding...


If a doctor observes indications a child is being abused by his examination in the office, he may contact the authorities. Why should a pregnancy be any different?


A blood test on the mother to check her health and her hormone levels during pregnancy is not even close to being the same thing as observing child abuse. What you are suggesting is taking those blood tests and using them for a purpose other than to check the mothers health in order to hand out punishments based on the results. Completely different things.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join