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

reply to post by StarrGazer25

So you really are going to say that as a women you (and all) sacrifice everyting for the child? If that is the case why the need for abortions, why are we having this discussion? Your over reaching generalization carries no weight at all.

reply to post by Annee

I am sorry I did not see this earleier, I can whole heartedly agree.mandatory paternity test at birth. The only problem with that scenario is what if the mother does not know the father or wish to disclose who the real father is?

takes 2 to tango women have the right to a abortion if the women makes the decision to raise a child or give birth to a child it is her responsibility. so do men have the right to refuse an abortion i dont know but if they dont they pay for it.

reply to post by stephanies-chase


yes all people need to be responsible for their actions, problem is the law gives women a way out of those responsibilities while not giving the man an option

reply to post by Hefficide


Your logic is far from sound. All you have displayed so far is an innate dislike of men and bias in favour of women when it comes to social issues. Fair enough, but don't claim to be using logic when making these claims.

Would I be innocent of DUI because the bartender offered me beer? "But he entrapped me with offers of beery goodness your honor." It just doesn't fly. Personal responsibility is personal responsibility. Period.

Poor analogy. You are talking about Driving Under the Influence, which is against the law and out-of-wedlock sex leading to pregnancy which is not against the law. The patron would be buying the drink, the man would not be buying sex with the woman unless she is a prostitute.

Speaking of Personal Responsibility, should a woman be opening her legs if she cannot afford to raise a child?

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Your logic is far from sound. All you have displayed so far is an innate dislike of men and bias in favour of women when it comes to social issues. Fair enough, but don't claim to be using logic when making these claims.

When it comes to social issues I am all for equality. But the prospect of pregnancy is unique in that there is a biological difference that cannot be overcome by rhetoric or rationale. There is a natural bias in the process that demands social restrictions upon the male for the benefit of the species and society as a whole.

This in no way suggests that I have a dislike of men. I stand by my logic and my defense of it.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Poor analogy. You are talking about Driving Under the Influence, which is against the law and out-of-wedlock sex leading to pregnancy which is not against the law. The patron would be buying the drink, the man would not be buying sex with the woman unless she is a prostitute. How could an analogy with so many holes get those stars?

I agree that the analogy is left wanting. Unfortunately there is no analogy I can think of that matches the situation exactly.

The bottom line is that men have an obligation to provide for their progeny. Morally, legally,and even spiritually. If a bias does exist, it exists in all facets of human understanding and development and is not a contrivance of my own imagination.

Edit to address OPs edit:

Originally posted by Dark Ghost

Speaking of Personal Responsibility, should a woman be opening her legs if she cannot afford to raise a child?

No more so than the male involved should.

reply to post by Hefficide


You keep saying that nature makes this so and we must follow that order but if we lived this way then only the strongest would make decisions women would have no say in anything that required forcing a man to do something due to lack of natural strength.everything you said can be said for any situation where nature makes someone weaker yet make exceptions for others.Pretty much you want us to respect a women natural right to her body but you don't want men to fallow their natural instincts of dominance this world would be messed up if we allow nature to separate and oppress others.

Originally posted by Jwbmore
reply to post by Hefficide

 

You keep saying that nature makes this so and we must follow that order but if we lived this way then only the strongest would make decisions women would have no say in anything that required forcing a man to do something due to lack of natural strength.everything you said can be said for any situation where nature makes someone weaker yet make exceptions for others.Pretty much you want us to respect a women natural right to her body but you don't want men to fallow their natural instincts of dominance this world would be messed up if we allow nature to separate and oppress others.

I've never suggested that women are weak or are weaker. They play a different role in the biological imperative than men do. No other situation in all of human experience differentiates genders in this manner.

Originally posted by Hefficide
When it comes to social issues I am all for equality. But the prospect of pregnancy is unique in that there is a biological difference that cannot be overcome by rhetoric or rationale. There is a natural bias in the process that demands social restrictions upon the male for the benefit of the species and society as a whole.

You are not for equality. You are for supporting equality on issues where women are set to benefit and not supporting it in issues they are not set to benefit in. This is the Hallmark of Modern Feminism.

If something is natural, it shouldn't need any forms of restrictions to be enforced. Saying that it is good for society when social restrictions are placed on men is discrimination, not equality. That there are provisions made to limit the rights of one sex (males) to compensate for a weakness in another sex (females) is not equality.

The bottom line is that men have an obligation to provide for their progeny. Morally, legally,and even spiritually. If a bias does exist, it exists in all facets of human understanding and development and is not a contrivance of my own imagination.

The bottom line is that you are expecting men to take full responsibility for their actions, and allowing women to be free of these obligations. According to your logic, a man that infects a woman with HIV cannot be held responsible because the woman should have made him get a test before sexual activity. Are you willing to stand by your guns in this argument? Personally responsibility.

reply to post by Hefficide


You see where your missing a point if you agree then both parties are responsible and both are taking the same risk then both should have the same rights and outs one is not more to blame then the other and thus if one can decide so shall the other this is nothing but equality but you are trying to argue women have a out a man does not simply because of them having a womb they are allowed to exercise rights over us as men we are not allowed to over them.It is black and white in the end one can get away with something the other can not and nature does not make it right.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost

The bottom line is that you are expecting men to take full responsibility for their actions, and allowing women to be free of these obligations. According to your logic, a man that infects a woman with HIV cannot be held responsible because the woman should have made him get a test before sexual activity. Are you willing to stand by your guns in this argument? Personally responsibility.

That analogy is no better than my bartender one. HIV is not a gender specific disease. It kills men equally as it does women. There is no difference in the results of the disease. Pregnancy on the other hand is a very different circumstance for males and females.

If I person gives somebody else an STD then they are to blame. But so is the person who consensually had the sexual encounter which led to infection. Both people are responsible for being or becoming infected.

To argue who is more to blame is semantic.

reply to post by Hefficide


So you are saying the average women is as physical strong as the average man hm so why all the exceptions in the military and sports and separation in the Olympics.Just as darkghost stated something natural does not need to be enforced what does is the laws prohibiting men from beating and taking women as they see fit see men have to deal with testosterone women do not naturally were different and that's why we reserve that right to dominate women

Originally posted by Dark Ghost

You are not for equality. You are for supporting equality on issues where women are set to benefit and not supporting it in issues they are not set to benefit in. This is the Hallmark of Modern Feminism.

You entirely miss the reality that pregnancy is not an equal situation. Women get pregnant, men do not. There is no equity in the situation at all.

Originally posted by Jwbmore
reply to post by Hefficide

 

So you are saying the average women is as physical strong as the average man hm so why all the exceptions in the military and sports and separation in the Olympics.

If you keep repeating the same red herring it does not become more true over time.

What does the number of push ups a woman can or cannot do have to do with paternal responsibility?

reply to post by Hefficide


You just have to look at one of my examples using your logic men deal with advanced anger and stress because of testosterone women do not thus we as men reserve the natural right to act on these emotions as we see fit no laws to stop us or tell us that our natural urges are wrong its only natural and we know form your logic natural differences cant be denied.
You seem to not get the point we as a society make accommodation for women because they cant do as many push ups but we don't make accommodations for men who don't have as many ovaries as women

If a Man has Sex, and a child is produced, he is legally (And Socially) bound to take care of it, Regardless...


If a Woman has Sex, and a Child is produced... She can Kill it.



Anyone else still having problems understanding the double standard?

-Edrick

reply to post by Hefficide


Oh right. Men have no stress or obligations while the woman is pregnant. They don't have to make any sacrifices to their lives so that they can help women cope through the pregnancy. They don't have to hide their biological urges and physiological urges to make a woman happy for 9 months. They don't have to put up with the moods and emotional abuse hurled at them while the woman has all these changes going on in her body. And after pregnancy, they don't have to commit to 18 years of child support.

Well, if all of the above is true then I would agree with you.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Oh right. Men have no stress or obligations while the woman is pregnant. They don't have to make any sacrifices to their lives so that they can help women cope through the pregnancy. They don't have to hide their biological urges and physiological urges to make a woman happy for 9 months. They don't have to put up with the moods and emotional abuse hurled at them while the woman has all these changes going on in her body. And after pregnancy, they don't have to commit to 18 years of child support.

Well, if all of the above is true then I would agree with you.

If fatherhood has been a negative experience for you, then you have my sympathies. But the unpleasant truths of life do not release us from our responsibilities or from reason.

reply to post by Hefficide


Unless you are female of course...correct?

Originally posted by Edrick
If a Man has Sex, and a child is produced, he is legally (And Socially) bound to take care of it, Regardless...


If a Woman has Sex, and a Child is produced... She can Kill it.



Anyone else still having problems understanding the double standard?

-Edrick

There is no double standard. There is a biological difference.

Women have breasts and I'm a big fan of breasts. I have no giant breasts of my own. Should I start a thread talking about how unfair this travesty of genetic justice is?