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: 62
56
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 





Mothers are legally responsible for their infants, which is why it's illegal for mums to starve their babies, to leave them alone too long, to deny them medical attention or to put their babies in dumpsters, even if they decide they don't want to keep them.


The part I put in italics should make clear to any honest reader the inconsistency I am talking about. I believe you cannot honestly avoid this inconsistency, and therefore choose to talk around it. Our discussion began with the rights of the child to "know and be at least partially supported" by both parents, and if this is indeed a right it would not be subject to a woman's decision to the contrary. I've already decided I'm not going to debate with intellectually dishonest persons (on this or any other thread) as it's pointless and exhausting. I'm afraid we've reached that point, here. Good day.


edit on 20-9-2010 by joechip because: double word




edit on 20-9-2010 by joechip because: formatting




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Benevolent Heretic, I have never sided with you on any other thread that I know of since I have been here at ATS (we joined about the same time). I have argued with you repeatedly. You have made me mad, made me sad, made me want to bang my head on a wall, but after this thread I have grown a completely new respect for you. Even though we might not always agree (mostly never), I see a side of you I have never thought was there. It makes me see that in ways we are not so different.

In this thread, I pretty much have agreed with every word you posted. I am happy to see you say what you did in this post. I want to thank you for being open to seeing what “the other side” often faces; I never would have thought to see this post.

You could not have been more right when you posted this.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

"Men! Beware! Don't have sex with women unless you are ready, willing and able to support any decision she may make, because you have NO reproductive rights once you give her your sperm. NONE! Don't believe anything she tells you and don't take anything for granted. Protect yourselves!"

That is why both sides should view sex like driving. Never depend on the other person to do the right thing and think of your personal well-being. Even the safest driver can get into an accident because of another’s poor driving skills. Anyone can end up being a parent because of another’s lack of responsibility when it comes to sex.

Sex should never be taken as lightly as it is most of the time in today’s society.

Raist



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Joe --

Intellectually dishonest about the concept of Rights?

Why, yes you are. Or you simply do not understand rights. Which is far more likely.

Even more likely than that, is that you have tendencies to not see other human beings as important as yourself and therefore don't give a flyin' rat's ass about anything remotely like rights unless it happens to be about you personally.

Intellectually dishonest. Emotionally dishonest. And somewhat Inhuman. Oh, and manipulative at that.


edit on 2010/9/20 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


This is the ONE response you will get from me so listen closely:
I have already stated clearly that my ONLY agenda in this discussion is equality in rights and law. You can make assumptions about me personally, but I know, as does my ex-wife, and my daughter, that I am both a responsible and loving father. The only people who will respond favorably to your attempt at stereotyping and character assassination are those using such tactics themselves. As such, good luck in the larger discussion, where we are attempting to honestly debate issues.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
www.koat.com...

here is a link i found from new mexico talking about birth control options and pay close attention to some of the parents responses they seem to not want there kids to use protection or see them being taught about protection as equivalent of endorsing them having sex
so it seems the protection is a good option has some holes in it not that it wouldnt help stop unwanted pregnancy but that it wont be allowed to be used by kids because of there parents wishes now focusing on this and only this that i brought up can it not be see that condoms and birth control arent options to every one or wont be encouraged enough equaly kinda plays a factor in who has unwanted pregnacy there for it can be seen allbeit at a stretch that a man who was not educated or had stigma attached to useing birth control(works for females too) would want to have another option incase of said accidental pregnacy

well lets see what response this gets ill be back in a bit



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
I agree with the guy's point of view, OP. But I'm still waiting for the childrens' rights.
What rights do they have again?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


This is a very important post with a very important link I think should be viewed again.

www.glennsacks.com...


For example, the National Scruples and Lies Survey 2004 polled 5,000 women in the United Kingdom for That’s Life! magazine. According to that survey, 42% of women claim they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partners.
Jo Checkley, the editor of That’s Life!, is correct when she says “to deliberately get pregnant when your partner doesn’t want a baby is playing Russian roulette with other people’s lives."



That article links another.
health.usnews.com...

There are women who seem to think men are Viagra-toting Neanderthals who have little commitment or tolerance for the intricacies of contraception.


I would love to be able to read the blog post on Feministing this article links but it seems that blog is down at this time. However, according to the article it “heaps scorn” on another form of male birth control

Raist



edit on 9/20/10 by Raist because: adding a link



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by joechip
 


Oh, more manipulation. What you are not is discussing equal rights - though your attempt to frame it as if you are is fascinating to watch. Then you paint YOURSELF as a victim of someone catching you doing it.

Which I was going to add at the end of the last post, because I knew that was your next card, but figured it would be so much more satisfying to watch you spin spin spin.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
i would as a male be willing to take and or be a guine pig for the male birthcontrol pill if it ever comes out i think it would be a great idea and something i would definately be able to get behind males commenting in this forum would you be for or against this measure i for one as allready stated am behind it any other takers?any possiblitys of this on the horizon? what would be required something that would make you temporarily sterile(as an alternative to vasectomy's)any one knowledgeable on reproductive science on here?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Thanks for bringing up this controversial topic OP! S/F!

I believe the laws should present equality first and foremost. Most of these laws were set in place when men were the main provider for the family. Times have changed now. Women wanted equal rights and they got more than they bargained for. Its very obvious that the courts show a bias towards women and men are not as equally represented. While I respect a woman's body as hers, the introduction of a child into the scenario puts equal responsibility on both parties. The two people should try to come to a consensus and if not, then the male should have the right to leave the situation. I would hope the females would realize its not good to bring a child into this world with a broken family. The whole "now or never" mentality is rather short-sighted and illogical IMO.

The times have changed, women hold jobs now and are much more independent of men. I say we take off the training wheels and introduce some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

for those interested in this topic, I have been following www.glennsacks.com... for sometime now. Just subscribe to his newletter. "Glenn Sacks is the Executive Director of Fathers & Families, the nation's largest family court reform organization. " Lots of good info!



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   
this i belive was BH's idea so i take no credit for thinking it up my self just think it could due with some reposting

i propose the following compermise and wish to see if people think this would be fair for bolth parties

if a man gets a woman pregnant he would have 3 months or some arbirary(let the law figure it out) time period to inform the woman he didnt want to be a part of the childs life(hes not ready dosent have money it was an accident take your pick)and thus surrender all rights(visitation seeing the kid birthdays paying for college etc)the woman would then get the option to do one of the following 1.have an abortion 2.give it up for adoption 3 keep it as a single mother and get no fiancial aid from the father.conversly the womans rights would be the following 1.no woman can be forced to have an abortion OR bear some ones child she does not want to 2.if the woman wants to abort the baby that is solely her call as its her body 3.if she wants to give it up for adoption she can carry the baby to term and do so.4 if she wants to have the baby but dosent want to be fiancialy responsible for it she can take the baby to term and then give it to the male that wants said child who will then be SOLELY responsible for its care

does this seem fair and again i belive this was BH's idea so all credit is given thats due to her



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Correct me if I'm wrong but people are commenting as if the safe haven laws are only allowed to be used by the mother? If a single father determines that he does not want his child anymore isn't he allowed to drop the baby off at the police station, hospital, door step etc... just like a single mother can?
As for adoption the father has choice also. If he wants to step up to the plate and take custody of a child he can. People please don't have sex or use birth control if you are not ready to have children.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
Joe --

Intellectually dishonest about the concept of Rights?

Why, yes you are. Or you simply do not understand rights. Which is far more likely.

Even more likely than that, is that you have tendencies to not see other human beings as important as yourself and therefore don't give a flyin' rat's ass about anything remotely like rights unless it happens to be about you personally.

Intellectually dishonest. Emotionally dishonest. And somewhat Inhuman. Oh, and manipulative at that.


edit on 2010/9/20 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



I think you missed the point. He is arguing for male rights. You see, EVERYONE has rights. And it is very illogical to think that we can just put everyone under one umbrella when it comes to this. It is logical however, for people to argue for their own rights. No ones going to do it better than yourself. That's our job as citizens who want to improve our country. you're arguing for the status quo and we have a broken system incase you haven't noticed.

"Intellectually dishonest. Emotionally dishonest. And somewhat Inhuman. Oh, and manipulative at that. "
We need a "pot meets kettle" emoticon.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Why cant anyone just say it, women are evil scheming liars who often stop taking birth control without telling the partners or never did.

In high school I knew 40 or more guys that were all of a sudden dads because there idiot girlfriends thought 18 was the perfect time to have a baby even though in many circumstances they had no intention of staying with the father and then complain because he's not taking care of the child she shouldn't be having.

This could of happened to me twice - luckily I caught both evil schemers before anything went down one of the girls did get pregnant with some guy quickly thereafter and he's been paying what little the army gives him in child support and the other girl I dont know but shes probably a single mother struggling on a star bucks pay check like so many others.

Women have no right to jeopardize another human being by birthing them knowingly into single parent poverty and neglect.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by KilrathiLG
if a man gets a woman pregnant he would have 3 months or some arbirary(let the law figure it out) time period to inform the woman he didnt want to be a part of the childs life(hes not ready dosent have money it was an accident take your pick)and thus surrender all rights(visitation seeing the kid birthdays paying for college etc)the woman would then get the option to do one of the following 1.have an abortion 2.give it up for adoption 3 keep it as a single mother and get no fiancial aid from the father.conversly the womans rights would be the following 1.no woman can be forced to have an abortion OR bear some ones child she does not want to 2.if the woman wants to abort the baby that is solely her call as its her body 3.if she wants to give it up for adoption she can carry the baby to term and do so.4 if she wants to have the baby but dosent want to be fiancialy responsible for it she can take the baby to term and then give it to the male that wants said child who will then be SOLELY responsible for its care

It doesn't work, because abortions are really hard to get after three months, and with this the decision would be even later than that because first the woman has to find out she's pregnant. Sometimes it's months before she knows or before the pregnancy test shows positive. It's really hard to find a doctor who'll do an abortion after 4 months because it's much more dangerous then and really traumatic for the mother.

Abortions aren't like opening the oven to take the bun out.

Besides, any child has a right to be supported by both parents, and this would mean that right was taken away from them. Aren't the child's rights important to?
Do you think it would have been right for your father to totally deny you and refuse to give any support to your mother?

Not all women can have an abortion. Some of us care too much about our babies to do that.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


first off it was an arbitary time limit ie one i pulled out of my butt the law would set the time frame not me some random guy on a blog

2nd perhaps i didnt make it clear i said under no circumstances cant a female be either forced to carry a child to term she dose not want or be forced to make an abortion the abortion would be HER not any one elses CHOICE not a forced thing an OPTION you say some women would not want to get an abortion or be uncapible of it well either way it would be there CHOICE not a forced thing belive me i dont think it should be any ones first option but its not my body or my place to tell them what they can or cant get done or do to themselves

3rd off and ill quote it for ease of making sense "Besides, any child has a right to be supported by both parents, and this would mean that right was taken away from them. Aren't the child's rights important to?
Do you think it would have been right for your father to totally deny you and refuse to give any support to your mother?" the supreme court recently ruled as pertaining to gay marrage that a child has neither the right to a mother or a father IE if mommy and mommy wanna raise the child they can same for father and father.HOW I took that to mean that it dosent matter who or how many as long as some one does the best job possible

4th and most personal for me and pertains to the above quote i was adopted at 1ish(from what i know) my birth mother was 16 my father was 33(i said it earlyer but let that one sink in they each screwed up and had sex and were unprepaired for the consequences and i was produced)i have never seen the face of my birth mother other then when i was being born i assume my loveing careing maternal instict having mother didnt want a baby and at the time im not sure if abortion was illegal or not(im 25) she decided to ignore the baby growing in her belly and do drugs when i was born she had a syringe of heroine in her arm and had jsut smoked a bowl of meth to give it one last chance to kill me it failed,because of all of this i was taken from her and my curent parents started the adoption process half way through this she sobered up and tryed to fight for custody of me and get child support from my illegal immigrant father and again failed,i then payed 10grand as an 18 year old(grandma left me money) to find my mother who then promptly shot her self in the face with a 12 gauge when the pi against my wishes told her i was looking for her> so on one side you say we deserve two parents i say you deserve two parents that bolth want to raise a child not one who had a baby and didnt plan on it or in my case a father who i have no idea if hes alive or even what his name is i say it again i would want two parents(like i was blessed with) who bolth wanted to take care of the child not one being forced to pay for a child he dosent want or a mother who resents what the child did to her or (take whatever excuse u wanna throw out there ) raising a child

i dont mean this to sound like a sob story i made my peace with this years ago its just my story

in all sense of the term i hit the adoption lottery i went from crack whore mother and carrier criminal to ceo of the largest nonprofit buisness in california(dad) and head nurse of kaiser permanete santa clara so i made it out fine dispite having two parents that wanted nothing to do with me least the biological ones

i ask people to re read my original presintation of BH's wonderfull idea and read it like i intended it to be read as a hypotetical situation and again to reiterate i dont think a woman should be forced or coerced to have an abortion she would make that choice either way the only reason i even put abortion as an option is because its currently legal wasent trying to say forced procedures would happen im sorry if this is scatterbrained but i dont want the meaning of what i was trying to say to be inadvertantly twisted or missunderstood



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 

I'm glad things have turned out well for you.

However I still believe it's not right for either the mother to leave all the responsibility to the father or for the father to leave all the responsibility to the mother.
It's quite different when a gay couple have a baby and it's all planned out beforehand. That way, the child still gets two parents.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa
It doesn't work, because abortions are really hard to get after three months, and with this the decision would be even later than that because first the woman has to find out she's pregnant. Sometimes it's months before she knows or before the pregnancy test shows positive. It's really hard to find a doctor who'll do an abortion after 4 months because it's much more dangerous then and really traumatic for the mother.


Abortion, at any time during the 9 months is safer than giving birth. Source So, saying that it's dangerous is meaningless. She faces more danger if she carries it to term.



Besides, any child has a right to be supported by both parents,


Yes, the way the law is now, they do. We're talking about changing the law. You don't have to keep repeating the way the law is now. I think we're all well aware of that.



Not all women can have an abortion. Some of us care too much about our babies to do that.


If a woman can get pregnant, she can get an abortion. She can, however CHOOSE not to. That's what pro-choice is all about.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Getting the laws changed? The guy in the OP tried and lost that already, supreme court level, years ago.

What is the angle that is going to change the law? And to what?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Getting the laws changed? The guy in the OP tried and lost that already, supreme court level, years ago.

What is the angle that is going to change the law? And to what?


What we really need is a Male contraceptive pill.

Wouldn't that be much simpler?


Male birth control pill soon a reality
Implants, patches and creams also on the way

www.msnbc.msn.com...






edit on 20-9-2010 by Annee because: link



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join