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.
Originally posted by mayertuck
so you say women should have that right to just have sex regardless of the consequences? once again how is that equal?
edit on 17-9-2010 by mayertuck because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Hefficide
Originally posted by mayertuck
so you say women should have that right to just have sex regardless of the consequences? once again how is that equal?
edit on 17-9-2010 by mayertuck because: (no reason given)
I'm not even sure how to address this!
Women do have the right to have sex, regardless of the consequences. As do men.
I'm beginning to think that people in this thread think that having a baby, or an abortion, is about as complicated as changing shoes.
There are consequences and the woman should not be forced to deal with those consequences on her own.
Originally posted by Hefficide
Men already have reproductive rights.
They have the right to keep their pants zipped if they can't step up to the plate.
They also have the right to get the snot kicked out of them by other guys if they fail to exercise their first right.
edit on 9/16/10 by Hefficide because: missed a few words in all the excitement
Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by Jwbmore
So, in the name of "equality" you would want for a father to be allowed to make the decision that his child is too much of a financial burden and then to be legally allowed to either remove himself from support or to be able to force a mother to give her child up to the system for adoption?
Do I understand your point?
Originally posted by notsofast
reply to post by joechip
ECONOMICS
Does anyone for this idea of denying fatherhood realize what kind of burden, economically, deadbeat dads put on us? where does the money come from? think about it: food stamps, TANF, CHIP, medicaid, maybe housing. all those programs open to women with children who receive no support come from taxpayers. that's right, i have to pay for your child. (and don't give me that "no, it comes from the government" crap. where does the government get it? exactly.)
Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by MrWendal
Read back to all of my posts and you'll see that I am not disagreeing a bit with your points at all. In fact I paid child support for ten years without being allowed even phone contact with my son - as stated in a previous post in this thread.
Yes, BOTH parties have responsibilities. I fully agree, and have said so several times already.
But we aren't discussing family court, or custody issues, we are discussing whether or not a male has a right to refuse fatherhood in the same way that a woman can refuse motherhood by aborting a baby.
And I stand firmly by my position that if a man fathers a child he is responsible for that child. He can't just say "I don't want to be a dad" and get off scott free.
Originally posted by Jwbmore
reply to post by mayertuck
Exactly I get that I am offering one legal way we should look into but my question was for Hefficide on how we have the right to not deal with the consequences as men but I guess he meant women have a legal "Right" and men have a illegal "right".
Originally posted by mayertuck
reply to post by Hefficide
Again you are putting all the blame for that behavior on someone who has little control over the situation. How about sharing the blame with the other party.
Originally posted by mayertuck
In addition not all kids are fatherless because of the man. I would even venture to say not even the majority are. Yes it is portrayed that way, but just because something is portrayed that way doesnt make it so.