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

page: 86
55
<< 83  84  85    87  88  89 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I don't know how i missed the enormous thread but now that I see it, I'll just drop my opinion right here -

The only circumstance under which any man should be able to "decline fatherhood" is if he can prove BEYOND DOUBT that the woman intentionally caused the pregnancy in a deceitful manner. She would have to purposely damage or lie about birth control mechanisms or artificially insert the "magic ingredient" with the intent of "trapping" the man through pregnancy.

It would be very hard to prove that and it would suck if you got done like that and couldn't provide the proper evidence, but it is much to important to leave this issue to anything but the highest standards.

Even in this case, the disconnection should only be financial. In any case, the father should be noted and should be strongly urged to have some involvement in the child's life. The only thing a successful case should provide is protection from the woman demanding money for the next 18 years. The man should be urged to offer money as well, just not legally bound to do so. The woman should be ordered to see a shrink as well.

Guys, 99.99999% of the time (not a huge number of women artificially creating pregnancies) if you want the honey you have to be prepared to care for the hive.

We should not be creating laws that give a man a way out of fatherhood without extraordinary proof.

P.S. Don't trust her on this one, ever. "Yes, I took my pill" is not a guarantee! Condoms and other options that I can't find a polite way to describe are the guys responsibility. Be the one to prevent it and be respectful of the immense power of sex and you should be ok.

P.P.S. IMO we would not have so many issues with sex and broken relationships in our society if people in general would have more respect for human intimacy. It seems like it's become a game, a pass time, just something to do for fun.... It's the act of creation for goodness sakes!!! Not to mention the single most powerful and immediate emotional charge a human experience.




posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx

The only circumstance under which any man should be able to "decline fatherhood" is if he can prove BEYOND DOUBT that the woman intentionally caused the pregnancy in a deceitful manner. She would have to purposely damage or lie about birth control mechanisms or artificially insert the "magic ingredient" with the intent of "trapping" the man through pregnancy.


Why is that the only circumstance?

Why do you think a Man should be forced to pay support for 20 years under threat of jail for the result of a Woman's unilateral choice?


Originally posted by Fiberx
Guys, 99.99999% of the time (not a huge number of women artificially creating pregnancies) if you want the honey you have to be prepared to care for the hive.


Only the unilateral choice of a Woman can create a child.


Originally posted by Fiberx
P.P.S. IMO we would not have so many issues with sex and broken relationships in our society if people in general would have more respect for human intimacy. It seems like it's become a game, a pass time, just something to do for fun.... It's the act of creation for goodness sakes!!!


Legally speaking, the only thing that sex can create is a worthless lump of tissue that a Woman can throw in the trash for any reason.
edit on 8-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
The only circumstance under which any man should be able to "decline fatherhood" is if he can prove BEYOND DOUBT that the woman intentionally caused the pregnancy in a deceitful manner. She would have to purposely damage or lie about birth control mechanisms or artificially insert the "magic ingredient" with the intent of "trapping" the man through pregnancy.


A woman can ''decline motherhood'' by a simple decision, whereby she wants to terminate her son/daughter for any given reason.

It's not physically possible for a man to legally create a child.

Why should a man have to accept ''fatherhood' for a child that he had no control over it's creation and subsequent existence ?

This just doesn't logically make sense.


Originally posted by Fiberx
It would be very hard to prove that and it would suck if you got done like that and couldn't provide the proper evidence, but it is much to important to leave this issue to anything but the highest standards.


There's nothing to prove, and no evidence to provide.

I - as a man - cannot legally create a child; ergo, the existence of any child that results months later from my sexual dalliances, is beyond my control.

I have no legal responsibility towards this child.


Originally posted by Fiberx
Even in this case, the disconnection should only be financial. In any case, the father should be noted and should be strongly urged to have some involvement in the child's life. The only thing a successful case should provide is protection from the woman demanding money for the next 18 years. The man should be urged to offer money as well, just not legally bound to do so. The woman should be ordered to see a shrink as well.


I think that you'll find it is the financial aspect that gets men up in arms.

Why pay for a child who you are not responsibility for creating ?

It's as logical as saying that you have to financially support some child that is picked at random, by a lottery.



Originally posted by Fiberx
Guys, 99.99999% of the time (not a huge number of women artificially creating pregnancies) if you want the honey you have to be prepared to care for the hive.


Yes, I totally agree.

Girls, 99% of the time, if you want the honey, then you have to be prepared to take care of the hive.

Or does this simile only apply to one particular gender ?



Originally posted by Fiberx
We should not be creating laws that give a man a way out of fatherhood without extraordinary proof.


We should not have created laws that give a woman a cowardly and easy way out of motherhood.


Originally posted by Fiberx
It's the act of creation for goodness sakes!!! Not to mention the single most powerful and immediate emotional charge a human experience.


The act of creation does not legally create.

The laws have by-passed millions of years of evolution and logic, in favour of a woman having an easy way out, and being able to cowardly abrogate the responsibilities and consequences of her actions.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I think the opportunity to prove that the woman intentionally violated the mans right to avoid creating the child is enough. It takes both of us to create a child. Nothing about procreation is unilateral. That's why I say that if a woman can be proven to have subverted the mans will to avoid creating the child, he should be legally entitled to freedom from that act. This is the only case in which she makes an act requiring the consent of both parties in to a unilateral decision.

In relative terms, this is the womans version of raping a man.

However, choosing to engage in sex and having no birth control or having birth control fail is not the fault of the woman exclusively. This is a case where both parties must take responsibility.

The woman can never avoid dealing with her own pregnancy, which is why women should have the exclusive right to make the final decision on keeping the pregnancy or not.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Let me add something here.

If you feel that leaving a woman to care for a child while you simply mail her a check as your replacement for physical involvement in the process of raising the child is screwing YOU..

I suggest asking the court to give you custody of the child and asking HER to just send you a check.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
It takes both of us to create a child. Nothing about procreation is unilateral. That's why I say that if a woman can be proven to have subverted the mans will to avoid creating the child, he should be legally entitled to freedom from that act. This is the only case in which she makes an act requiring the consent of both parties in to a unilateral decision.


Decision # 1 - Having sex (not unilateral).
Decision # 2 - Deciding to let a worthless lump of tissue become a child requiring 20 years of support, rather than throwing it in the garbage (unilateral).

Very simple.


Originally posted by Fiberx
However, choosing to engage in sex and having no birth control or having birth control fail is not the fault of the woman exclusively. This is a case where both parties must take responsibility.


Yes, they should both take responsibility... for creating a lump of tissue (not a child, which can only come about as the result of a Woman's unilateral choice).



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
Let me add something here.

If you feel that leaving a woman to care for a child while you simply mail her a check as your replacement for physical involvement in the process of raising the child is screwing YOU..

I suggest asking the court to give you custody of the child and asking HER to just send you a check.


Many Men beg for that and many would do it in a heartbeat even w/o getting a check.

However, when I make unilateral choices I don't expect anyone else to help me pay for the results.

edit on 8-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


It is so much more complicated than that. There are ethics and social pressures and emotions and physical changes that have an immense influence on a womans choice to keep a pregnancy or not. There are situations where women don't even realize they are pregnant until it's to late. There are physical risks involved in getting an abortion.

If you want to have sex, you will just have to accept your end of the risks. It's that simple to me.

I've been there, it's not nice. It's not nice for her either.

In my case I responded by freely accepting the responsibility and even took on a positive outlook on it. She decided to end the pregnancy without discussing it with me and I was the one left hold the bag. A year later we discussed it and I could tell that she was not proud or at ease with her decision. She did what she thought was best in a situation that seemed to be lose/lose for her. She was too young and had too many dreams and couldn't bring herself to accept the challenge.

Try seeing things from a realistic, womens point of view.

Most women are not out to get you. You have to do your part to cause a pregnancy and that means you are responsible, like it or not. She can't escape it.. even if she ends the pregnancy, she is deeply affected. You have the biological luxury or being able to walk away, but you should be ashamed of yourself if you do.

The only way out should be an intentional usurpation of your right to ATTEMPT to avoid the pregnancy. Every single time you have sex you risk creating another human. BOTH of you.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


It is so much more complicated than that. There are ethics and social pressures and emotions and physical changes that have an immense influence on a womans choice to keep a pregnancy or not.


I make very difficult decisions all the time, guess what? I still don't expect anyone else to pay for the results.



Originally posted by Fiberx
You have to do your part to cause a pregnancy and that means you are responsible, like it or not. She can't escape it.. even if she ends the pregnancy, she is deeply affected. You have the biological luxury or being able to walk away, but you should be ashamed of yourself if you do.


We are both responsible for a PREGNANCY. If you think I could ever feel guilty about NOT paying for the results of someone else's unilateral choices than you're mistaken.

I'm married with 3 kids and I happily support them, but it wasn't my choice to create those kids, it was my wife's unilateral decision.

Are you suggesting that Men who have their unborn offspring thrown in the trash aren't deeply affected?


Originally posted by Fiberx
The only way out should be an intentional usurpation of your right to ATTEMPT to avoid the pregnancy. Every single time you have sex you risk creating another human.


The law disagrees. The law says that only the unilateral choice of a Woman can do that.
edit on 8-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


i have no idea what your saying.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   
If a male does not want to bring someone into this world an dwants to make sure of that right, he should keep his zip up.

How can you have it any other way.

If your afraid of bringing kids into the world as a male, do not have sex, or get sterialised.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Ok lets start with sex ed.

Women want it
Men want it

I have a part that well a baseball bat
she has a catchers mit

If we use them together we play baseball

Her choice is to play the same as mine or else that is rape.
the outcome of the game

The courts/ dirty ump.

the women I dont want to have this kid ump....SAFE
the man I dont want to have this kid
too bad what does she want ump....PAY OUT

the women I want to give it away ump....SAFE
the man I want to give it away
too bad what does sh want ump....PAY OUT

the women I want your paycheck ump.....SAFE
the men I want to not give you paycheck
TOO BAD WHAT DOES SHE WANT ump....PAY OUT

the women I am going to have this baby ump....SAFE
I am going to file for custody ump....PAY OUT

this could go on and on and on. AND THERE ARE WOMEN CONDOMS TOO.
edit on 8-11-2010 by rushunt because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-11-2010 by rushunt because: More information



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiberx
It takes both of us to create a child.


No it doesn't.

It takes a woman's personal decision to create a child; ergo, a father shouldn't have any legal obligation towards a child that can only be created by the mother.


Originally posted by Fiberx
Nothing about procreation is unilateral. That's why I say that if a woman can be proven to have subverted the mans will to avoid creating the child, he should be legally entitled to freedom from that act. This is the only case in which she makes an act requiring the consent of both parties in to a unilateral decision.


The child is created by a woman's thought process.

How can a man be reasonably and legally be responsible for that ?!


Originally posted by Fiberx
In relative terms, this is the womans version of raping a man.


No, in relative terms, this is the chance for a woman to ''rape'' a man emotionally or financially.

Let's not dress it up as anything different.


Originally posted by Fiberx
However, choosing to engage in sex and having no birth control or having birth control fail is not the fault of the woman exclusively. This is a case where both parties must take responsibility.


No, you've got to get this idea out of your head that a child is created at conception.

A child is legally created at the whim of the mother; ergo, a man cannot be responsible for it's creation.


Originally posted by Fiberx
The woman can never avoid dealing with her own pregnancy, which is why women should have the exclusive right to make the final decision on keeping the pregnancy or not.


A woman can avoid dealing with her pregnancy by not having sex. Let's not play a ''victim card'' cheat, here.

Now, I'm no puritan, and I enjoy casual sex ( so I'm not a hypocrite ), but any woman that consents to sex is obviously and logically responsible for any child that may come about from this sexual interaction.

The man is demonstrably not responsible for any child that may occur from any sexual relations...



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
If a male does not want to bring someone into this world an dwants to make sure of that right, he should keep his zip up.

How can you have it any other way.

If your afraid of bringing kids into the world as a male, do not have sex, or get sterialised.


Your argument and logic is sound, from a rational perspective.

But doesn't this argument and logic also apply to women, as well ?



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
To Sherlock

No it doesnt apply to women,

Because they know that the "system" is on their side and they will win that is the only reason that it doesnt apply.
edit on 8-11-2010 by rushunt because: grammer
edit on 8-11-2010 by rushunt because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by sliceNodice
 


Before you rant about abortion being wrong...
Did you stop to consider rape victims, should they be aloud to abort? Should a child be raised by parents who are forced to raise it even tho their cicumstances may be such that they are unable to care for that child how it should be cared for. What if the parents were using drugs and it is likely the baby will suffer repricutions in the future.
I am trying hard to bite my tongue so I do not degrade you with insulting comments..
just open your mind a little and see that not every pregnancy has the right circumstances to support it.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Fiberx
 


How do you propose men prove it? There is no way short of secretly recording every sex you have, and being willing to show that to some judge that I can think of. Perhaps we can keep some presexual contract agreements in our wallets maybe lol. Both sign saying they are just looking for a fun night, not have kids.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Fiberx
 



The woman can never avoid dealing with her own pregnancy


Abortion.

Adoption.

She was "Man" enough to make the decision to spread her legs, and have the Sex.

And then she just Walks away from the responsibility SCOTT FREE.


Q.E.D. You are WRONG.

-Edrick (Dead Babies)



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   
I am doubting that you guys have any objective experience with the issue.

You think abortion or giving up a child for adoption are walking away scott free? Ignorance of staggering levels.

Just to simplify it for you, what about carrying the child, even for a month? What about the hormonal changes, physical changes and psychological effects of pregnancy?

All I can say beyond what I have said is, please do not ever have a child.



posted on Nov, 8 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
If you cannot raise a kid without childsupport, why did you have a kid in the first place?


And for many men they did not want the child or had no choice. SHE chose to have it, did she not?





new topics
 
55
<< 83  84  85    87  88  89 >>

log in

join